Astral vs Ethereal Projection

[Craxiette]

Just before I dash out the door I want to ask you what exactly has Shoemaker said that contradicts science or has been conclusively disproved by scientific study.

I think this discussion has turned out to be about a lot more than poor Shoemaker need take credit for . But my initial disappointment was that he suggested we should test our ability to astral travel by having a friend at a remote location choose an object that we are supposed to describe (or something like that). I was just disappointed that he did not add even a small disclaimer that any such results will most likely be of no other than personal relevance, that we are very likely to interpret false positives and that during controlled laboratory conditions noone has actually yet been able to produce any evidence for it. He could have said "do play around with it if you find it meaningful, but don't put too much objective validity into it". Maybe he says this elsewhere...I don't know, this was my spontaneous reaction and I wanted to see if it could trigger an interesting discussion here -which I think it did!

 

[Aeon418]

It's been a while since I listened to that particular poscast, but I can't recall anything that I found objectionable. If Shoemaker had simply said, "take my word for it", I probably would have been annoyed. But he didn't. In fact his approach was the same one he has employed since he started the podcast. He has consistently encouraged personal experimentation, gaining first hand experience rather than relying on hear-say or the second hand experiences of others. I can't fault that approach.

While typing the above I was reminded of a new age-y style pub meet-up I used to attend on a semi-regular basis. On one occasion there was a woman at our table who was talking about her experiences with a ritual that sounded similar to the Middle Pillar. (I can't remember what she called it. It sounded oriental.) She was going on about how intense the "energies" had become when a guy butted in and demanded to know what "energies" she was talking about, were they real and could they be measured? And if they couldn't it was all delusion. Things got a little snarky after that until I asked him what he thought these "energies" were. He said he didn't know. Further questioning revealed that he hadn't even done any practices himself apart from a handful of banishing rituals with no results. How he could dismiss someone else's experience based on that is mystery to me.

 

[Craxiette]

It's been a while since I listened to that particular poscast, but I can't recall anything that I found objectionable. If Shoemaker had simply said, "take my word for it", I probably would have been annoyed. But he didn't. In fact his approach was the same one he has employed since he started the podcast. He has consistently encouraged personal experimentation, gaining first hand experience rather than relying on hear-say or the second hand experiences of others. I can't fault that approach.

While typing the above I was reminded of a new age-y style pub meet-up I used to attend on a semi-regular basis. On one occasion there was a woman at our table who was talking about her experiences with a ritual that sounded similar to the Middle Pillar. (I can't remember what she called it. It sounded oriental.) She was going on about how intense the "energies" had become when a guy butted in and demanded to know what "energies" she was talking about, were they real and could they be measured? And if they couldn't it was all delusion. Things got a little snarky after that until I asked him what he thought these "energies" were. He said he didn't know. Further questioning revealed that he hadn't even done any practices himself apart from a handful of banishing rituals with no results. How he could dismiss someone else's experience based on that is mystery to me.

Soo... he was a bit of a jerk and she was ill equipped to explain herself to a sceptic. Seems that little dust-up was probably a good opportunity for them both to practice their communication skills; For him to ask more open-ended and humble questions, for her to reflect on what message she wants to send out by what words she uses. Sounds great, no?

I wish more new age-y get togethers had such elements in them, ususally it's just the chorus of "ooh, aah, how wonderfully spiritual we are" ...how anyone can find that stimulating is a mystery to me!

 

[Aeon418]

Soo... he was a bit of a jerk and she was ill equipped to explain herself to a sceptic. Seems that little dust-up was probably a good opportunity for them both to practice their communication skills; For him to ask more open-ended and humble questions, for her to reflect on what message she wants to send out by what words she uses. Sounds great, no?

Personally I didn't mind how she used the word "energy" to describe what she was feeling. In fact I use that particular "metaphor" all the time because I find it's the most convenient way to descibe it. It forms part of my conceptual framework, but is it technically correct? Probably not. But I could use other "labels" that convey less if that makes people happy. Which label do you prefer?

I wish more new age-y get togethers had such elements in them, ususally it's just the chorus of "ooh, aah, how wonderfully spiritual we are" ...how anyone can find that stimulating is a mystery to me!

Some can be like that, some aren't. It all depends on the people involved. Not everyone who attends these things is a ditzy air head full of sweetness and light. Some are very sincere people who's approach is just a little less intellectual and more emotional/feelings driven. For all I know their approach may be exactly the thing that enables them to make their own next step, even if it might be a small one in some cases.

Actually some of the least stimulating meet-ups I've attended were dominated by the "darker-than-thou" brigade. You have no idea how tedious it is listening to someone drone on and on about the qliphoth and demons. In between trips to the bar to get another beer I just switch into my "nod and smile auto-pilot" mode of consciousness.

 

[Craxiette]

Personally I didn't mind how she used the word "energy" to describe what she was feeling. In fact I use that particular "metaphor" all the time because I find it's the most convenient way to descibe it. It forms part of my conceptual framework, but is it technically correct? Probably not. But I could use other "labels" that convey less if that makes people happy. Which label do you prefer?

Come on! Whatever label you wish to use is fine with me...I use that metaphore myself as well for sake convenience. By using it however I know that I am not being "technically correct" and that others are correct to point that out. If they do, there is an opening for a potentially interesting discussion on the nature of energy which I would welcome provided the person asking is not just trying to be a smartass...well probably I would welcome the discussion either way, that's just the way I am
My point is, if I was not in the mood of opening up to any possible sceptic remarks, I would use a more subtle language, describing instead the emotional and psychological effects the ritual is having on me. There will always be snarky besserwissers out there, as well as genuinly interested sceptics, instead of changing oneself to please THEM, one can choose what language to use depending on what responses one wishes to provoke or avoid for one's own convenience.

Some can be like that, some aren't. It all depends on the people involved. Not everyone who attends these things is a ditzy air head full of sweetness and light. Some are very sincere people who's approach is just a little less intellectual and more emotional/feelings driven. For all I know their approach may be exactly the thing that enables them to make their own next step, even if it might be a small one in some cases.

Of course they aren't. It's more of a group phenomenon, where the total taboo against any "negativity" or controversy tends to bring out the worst in people. Many group cultures have this tendency, the new agey and 'postmodern' types tend to have it more often I think, but of course this is just my personal observation.

Actually some of the least stimulating meet-ups I've attended were dominated by the "darker-than-thou" brigade. You have no idea how tedious it is listening to someone drone on and on about the qliphoth and demons. In between trips to the bar to get another beer I just switch into my "nod and smile auto-pilot" mode of consciousness.

Lol! I can imagine that...you must be a very brave man, Aeon!

 

[Aeon418]

Of course they aren't. It's more of a group phenomenon, where the total taboo against any "negativity" or controversy tends to bring out the worst in people. Many group cultures have this tendency, the new agey and 'postmodern' types tend to have it more often I think, but of course this is just my personal observation.

Oh, you mean the kind of New Age egalitarianist nonsense that says all opinions have equal merit..... even blatantly crap opinions.

 

[Always Wondering]

Lol...I will have to give it a try then, when my humongous reading list allows it...
I'm sorry if I'm confusing you with alien concepts: I'm a hopeless dabbler and I have cherry picked all sorts of stuff from here and there to the point that I have lost all sense of what is 'common knowledge'. The pre/trans rationality is best described by Ken Wilber, for instance here:
http://www.praetrans.com/en/ptf.html

It's okay. I do my best learning when confused. It shakes me up good.

I'm not sure what you mean by this, or why thelemites would be any different. Can it be somebodies Will to stay ignorant about the nature of one's beliefs? In that case, yes, they would be expressions of two different wills. Still, one of them can be said to will for higher states of development than the other in this particular matter. -If it is my will to only workout once a month, I am still an inferior bodybuilder than the guy who goes twice per day, regardless if my level is right for me.
But the quote from duty seems to suggest that enquiry is of the nature of Will, in that case, by some means or another it should be done.

I was agreeing with you again. I was trying to point out that the process you described early was working on me.

Which I find much more interesting than Shoemaker. Or for that matter astral projection. But I went and learned the difference between astral projection and other work on the body of light. This has been a very helpful conversation for me.

AW

 

[Craxiette]

Oh, you mean the kind of New Age egalitarianist nonsense that says all opinions have equal merit..... even blatantly crap opinions.

Yes! Exactly THAT!
I truly believe that science and all forms of scepticism (if derived from curiosity and not from cynicism or a desire to control others) are not threats to anyones true Will, nor to the pluralism of individual perspectives. On the contrary, how are we to tell the real 'gods' from our delusions, if not by "killing" them through enquiry and see what of it resurrects...oops, old aeon lingo ...I mean what of it remains immortal?

 

[Craxiette]

It's okay. I do my best learning when confused. It shakes me up good.

Excellent!

I was agreeing with you again. I was trying to point out that the process you described early was working on me.

Oh..! I suppose I'm even better at confusing myself! Wait, what process...I'll have to scroll back. Can't keep up with myself these days!

Which I find much more interesting than Shoemaker. Or for that matter astral projection. But I went and learned the difference between astral projection and other work on the body of light. This has been a very helpful conversation for me.

AW

Wow! I don't think anyone has ever told me I am more interesting than astral projection! I'm finding this very helpful as well, by explaining my views and discussing them with you it clarifies many things for me as well -even if there is a lot of confusion in the mix as well! All a part of the game!

 

[Always Wondering]

Excellent!



Oh..! I suppose I'm even better at confusing myself! Wait, what process...I'll have to scroll back. Can't keep up with myself these days!

But take a simple example...a group of people all calling themselves "Christian" are gathered in a room. They shake hands are happy to see that they are all believing in the same religion. But close the doors and make them to discuss the contents of their faith in depth. Very soon they will realize that they did not infact agree as much as they thought they did...there might be some loud disagreement, insults, people wanting to storm out of the room...but after a week of tireless discussion, they come to the conclusion that while they might disagree on many points, their core beliefs, those things that really matter, are more or less the same. It turns out the disagreements were largely due to misunderstandings and how they use words differently to describe things. They shake hands again, happy to be among people of the same faith.
Now...for someone who did not participate in the discussions, it may on a quick glance seem as if they ended up exactly where they started. But this is only due to ignorance on the part of the outsider. If the outsider had made deep interviews with the participants before and after the discussions, it would be clear, even for the outsider, that something has indeed profoundly changed. The Fool has become the Universe.

I have a personal and off topic issue with a loved one's mental and physical health. Thus I had a fairly strong internal reaction to your first comment on Dr. Shoemaker. It wasn't until you posted this that I realized what was going on with me.

I think there is a fine line between denial and letting go which, I think, in a way you have been writing about. I certianly don't think this loved one's issue is good, I'd personally like to rain down the power of Babylon on them, or thier disease and alter this experience for both of us. Part of this is my Cancer Rising, I think, my nature to mother, especially my family. To deal with this on an upfront and emotional level instead of keeping quite and finding some kind of acceptance level that would make me more useful, if not more peaceful.

I had gotten pretty comfortable with letting go of this issue until I realized that there was a flare up (for lack of a better word), and at about the same time of hearing your views on Dr.s and mental health and who's responsibility is what. I wasn't trying to convince you, I was trying to convince myself.

Like it or not I am powerless over this issue. This experience with you has helped me see that I still have issues with feeling powerless.

So in the first half of this conversation I was unaware and that confused my responses. In the second half of this conversation I was trying to explain without really explaning. I am famous for taking discussions off topic and getting personal and am trying to get a grip on that.

I'd like to say I am usually more clear and less conflicted. But I would lying.

AW