Jirh

@Inliytened1 💯

Exactly 💯 I don't take electrons literally. I think they're a great scientific metaphor.

Maybe. But it's not like you're a neurosurgeon. Nobody's gonna die in social interactions if you drop the weight and be authentic.

The paranormal is not only possible. It's happening right here in front of you. You are using it right now to interact with minds without time or space limitations.

Psychic abilities are not what you think. The materialist paradigm has a better chance at proving psychic phenomenon than any other paradigm. It's just not what you think, and most people won't like it, especially those spiritually-minded. Telepathy is achieved by communication technologies; the entire infrastructure. Precognition and clairvoyance are achieved through gathering and analysis of tremendous amounts of data, for example weather casts. That's all magic. And if you can't see it, it's your failure.

They're not anything near what I would call "experiences". That's already a huge leap of faith. What they really are is beliefs and misinterpretations that remind me of conspiracy theories. You have to establish the validity of the logic that connects experience A with event B before making hypotheses about the nature of connection. And you have no solid argument for why experience A is related to event B, except for: "what are the odds?! 😅". The answer is simply that the odds are low, but still statistically existent. So you're just like that, huh? Pure and egoless, like an innocent newborn seeing the world with clear eyes, right? I could swear it's almost never about the truth, but about ego. If psychic abilities were normal everyday life, you would likely not have any interest in them. Notice how here I am pointing to the magic of technology, and you never even acknowledged it. You jokingly wrote me off as a nerd. I say you'd likely treat psychic abilities at that point as you treat causality, as an illusion that cannot be proven. It's not about which paradigm is fundamentally true. No paradigm is fundamentally true. It's about what actually works. You still didn't provide any arguments for the connection between experience A and event B. Give an example.

I think responsibility and burden are two different things, though. A master is responsible but is never burdened. We actually need insane amounts of responsibility to achieve mastery. Still, that doesn't make it burdensome. I think burden comes from lack of authenticity.

No goals, no game. Spain prefers control over open spaces. They don't let you breathe, but they don't score a lot either. The most boring recipe for sports. Very mechanical.

That's just called lack of mastery. When you are a master, everything feels effortless. You don't feel a burden.

It's over. Spain won. I only checked the score every 30 minutes. I knew it was gonna be a boring game.

That's putting the cart before the horse. You don't take on what you like doing, you just like doing it. Is anyone forcing me to write out this comment? No. I simply wrote it out because I wanted to. It's that simple. Authenticity.

It's not a burden if you authentically like doing it.

The stats are absurd!

You are open-minded. That is good. But I would presume that the order I'm assuming is the correct order. You want psychic phenomenon to be true, and so you collect whatever crumbs of "evidence" you can. It doesn't really add anything, and it does subtract. Instead of appreciating what's right here, i.e. the majesty of this miracle of technology, we are distracted looking for alternative and more primal means of communication. Why? Because it feels more magical that way. But maybe the problem is our sensitivity to the magic of right here and now. Besides, if psychic phenomenon was real, everyone would know it by now.

You want to have them Well, that's irrelevant. You sure?

@Carl-Richard @Sugarcoat @Natasha Tori Maru Alright, guys. I'll preface this by saying that I'd been on the opposite side for almost a decade. Specifically, I used to believe in telepathy, never experienced the belief in precognition, and near the end was almost convinced I'd achieved clairvoyance. My current position is that these are all false beliefs based on faulty logic. One point that comes to mind is the fallacy of base rate neglect and selection bias, where the data is filtered to fit a desired narrative. You believe in precognition, so you stay alert for it. You watch every thought that passes your mind, while awake or in your dreams. Then when something remotely close happens, your reaction is: "Ha! I knew it!", even though it usually includes multiple patches and leaps of faith to draw together the loose ends. But in doing so, you ignore the fact that you think probably hundreds if not even thousands of different thoughts per day. But you conveniently select the ones that fit your narrative, even if loosely. And then you assume a special connection between that thought and the event that happened. You feel special. Like you are the data center of the universe. The rarity of such coincidences makes them feel even more special. It's part curiosity and part arrogance. You don't just want it to be true, you also want it to be yours. You want to be the one with psychic abilities. There's also the law of truly large numbers, which states that with a large enough sample size, even highly improbable events become almost certain to occur. Coincidences or "outrages" are therefore statistically expected rather than extraordinary. If you blindfoldedly throw a basketball enough times, you will score eventually. Lastly, there's the reduction of magic into mundaneness. Life is fundamentally magical. There's infinitely more magic in technology and how we are able to communicate now than there is magic in simple direct telepathy. But because we take everything we have in abundance for granted, the grass looks greener on the other side. If you take a look at what's necessary and what happens for a simple web page to load, you'd be astounded by the magic, your jaws would drop.

@Schizophonia Respect is acknowledgement. But perhaps that's not very helpful, so I will suggest that it's best understood in contrast with disrespect. You should be able to spot disrespect easily. Respect is simply the lack of that. Someone who respects you will not disrespect you (consciously or willingly), as stupidly funny as that sounds 😅

@Someone here Spain can easily score 5+ goals, but they won't anyway, because they are boring and annoying. It's going to be a boring game. I wish they could both lose. England vs. France was fire!

Spain for sure. Argentina doesn't stand a chance.

@Carl-Richard I'm happy to discuss this further in a new thread.

I think of respect as a prerequisite for love. You can't truly love something or someone without respecting them. Respect + Care = Love Absence of respect turns love into utility, or even worse, an addiction. And absence of care turns the relationship mechanical. Personally, I could accept the lack of care temporarily if my partner is going through difficulties, because I can take care of myself and of her too. But I could never tolerance disrespect. If respect isn't there, I'm not there either. Simply. Disrespect is the worst experience a man can have. However, to your question, what I want to hear romantically is love. Respect is not a word I want to hear. It's a tangible behavior I want to see.

@Natasha Tori Maru

@Natasha Tori Maru Alright, but I forgot this is Leo's thread. We can take this discussion somewhere else if you like.

Yes.

I agree. I think in a similar way. What you're describing is not feeling. It's thinking about feeling, or like you said: interpretation. Feeling is the pure sensation of something happening. Anxiety or excitement are interpretations.