62 replies to this topic

[fairy]

You can function normally with poor visualization skills as you can read (thank you Godof Smallthings, Hallucinations is still my favorite though) in the last chapter of The Mind's Eye, where the author describes a person in OP's situation. Conversely, can your developed visualization capabilities help you in memory retrieval? 

 

I'm starting again my bedtime exercises. I try to picture something in my mind's eye as vividly as possible. Today is the third day and I had a lucid dream. I'm not new to them and OBEs but it interrupted a dry spell. When I got out of bed at night (pitch black & eyes closed) I could outline my body and my hands in a wavy eigengrau.

I don't know why but once I got back to bed It was easy to force localized colorful hypnagogic patterns, but nothing exceptional. The whole thing requires commitment but you can engage all your senses. Last year I became fascinated by auditory hallucinations, like the possibility to hear music or voices. 

 

The coolest thing I can think now of would be to OBE at will, within seconds, during your daily routine. You can do a lot of things when your're inside your head since you have much greater capabilities. I see it as a starting point for cooler ideas.

[VerdeGo]

When I was reading Oliver Fox's and Sylvan Muldoon's books on astral projection and out-of-body travel, I learned quite a few techniques. From what I understand, however, is that an OBE involves one of your spirit bodies actually leaving your physical body, and everything you encounter (your room, the world around you) is real. You can't feel temperature like you can with AP. And you can observe your own body with the astral cord attached. Theoretically, you can travel thousands of miles away and recall in vivid detail what a particular place looks like, who was there, and so on. That's the basic difference in OBE and AP from what I understand it. Please correct me if I'm wrong, because this is a fascinating topic.

 

Everytime I tried to induce OBE from a lucid dream (aren't lucid dreams just a type of astral projection?), I'd end up in a secondary dream in which I thought was reality, and with each subsequent dream I'd lose lucidity or I'd wake up in fear. Any tips on how to completely abandon a lucid dream and turn it into a true out-of-body experience?

 

Speaking of substances, I've heard of ZMA's (zinc, magnesium, b6) ability to increase lucid, vivid dreaming. I'm also hearing of reports of California poppy (an anxiolytic and serotonin antagonist) causing very vivid, lucid dreaming in individuals who take it before bed. I read at least one report of a person using it in high doses (100 drops of the alcohol tincture/extract) to induce CEVs right on the spot. 

 

I also can't stress enough how a dream journal will make you increasingly aware of your dreams until you become lucid on a regular basis, without the use of meditation or substances. Everyone has their own avenue, though. 

[OneScrewLoose]

I'm gonna give a more in-depth response to the rest of this, but I just need to shout to the whole world, every opportunity I get, how big of a scam ZMA was. All it is is B6, Zinc and Magnesium. That's the same shit you'd find in any multi. But they successfully made millions marketing it as a test booster. How? They had 'evidence'. And by 'evidence', I mean a single, doctored study. Zinc is necessary in the production of testosterone, so all they did was find a group of people deficient in Zinc, give them ZMA, and then BAM! Increased test. One of the biggest supplement scams ever. That's why I say in one of my videos, that the supplement industry is no better than the pharmaceutical industry.

If ZMA helps you with dreaming, it's likely the magnesium. Take a good dose of a magnesium chelate, preferably on an empty stomach before bed. I think you'll be happy with the results.

Edited by OneScrewLoose, 14 May 2015 - 03:15 AM.

[VerdeGo]

I happen to have magnesium glycinate chelate, though I haven't tried it yet. And I agree about ZMA, though I've never tried it. One could probably procure the individual ingredients cheaper than the actual supplement, but I'm not sure as I don't plan on using it. California poppy, however, has me curious. I'm just hesitant to use it for other reasons (serotonin antagonist and vague information regarding its overall effect). Will let you know regarding the magnesium, and I'm interested to hear your response to the other stuff. 

[fairy]

Astral projection (or astral travel) is an interpretation of an out-of-body experience (OBE) that assumes the existence of an "astral body" separate from the physical body and capable of travelling outside it. wiki/astral_projection goo.gl/uQnXa7
 
I'm not a prolific LD-er nor I have familiarity with the literature, but in my opinion OBEs belong to the subset of LDs. Anecdotal evidence aside there is no scientific proof that APs are well defined, that you are wandering in the same reality you fall asleep.

[DonManley]

OBE is just another term used to describe the feeling of getting outside your own body. There is no such thing as an astral projection. You're always just wandering inside your own mind. And there is zero evidence to believe otherwise. If somebody can really wander around the real world, then it can be tested using a simple scientific experiment. Nobody did it, because nobody can do it. Their books are unscientific and should be viewed as a work of fiction. Unfortunately, lucid dreaming is contaminated with every flavor of bullshit.

 

"involves one of your spirit bodies actually leaving your physical body, and everything you encounter (your room, the world around you) is real."

 

That will require you having a spirit body or a soul. Any pro-dualism argument fails to survive any logical scrutiny. The most popular argument that tries to defend dualism is that the brain is simply a receiver for a sprit body or a soul. That argument still fails miserably. Reasons why dualism is false have talked about for a long time and other people say it better than me:

 

"There are very good reasons to think it’s not true and we know this from now 150 years of neurology where you damage areas of the brain and faculties are lost. It’s not that everyone with brain damage has their soul perfectly intact, they can’t get the words out. Everything about your mind can be damaged by damaging the brain. You can cease to recognize faces, you can cease to know the names of animals but you still know the names of tools. The fragmentation in the way in which our mind is parcellated at the level of the brain is not at all intuitive, and there’s a lot known about it.

 

And what we’re being asked to consider is that you damage one part of the brain and something about the mind and subjectivity is lost, you damage another and yet more is lost, and yet if you damage the whole thing at death we can rise off the brain with all our faculties intact, recognizing grandma and speaking English."

 

 

TL; DR; Your brain is the only spirit body you have. Unless, while you're asleep, your brain will walk out of your head and start to travel around the world, your "spirit body" won't be able to travel anywhere either. It is the unfortunate reality.

Edited by DonManley, 14 May 2015 - 04:02 PM.

[VerdeGo]

You make valid points, but there's been some great anecdotal evidence from hospitals involving patients who are "awake" during surgeries that it should be impossible to be conscious during. The patients seem to describe a similar experience of drifting above their bodies, entering the next room, and describing exactly what surgeons or employees were doing while it should've been impossible to ascertain that information. There's also a lot of anecdotal evidence from sudden impact car crashes and other unfortunate events which caused a person to perceive their spirit body, or point of consciousness, leaving their physical body for a brief time, and describing in detail their physical surroundings.

 

Why is the astral cord so often referenced and perceived in OBEs? Why is a "ringing" in the ears often the last sound someone experiences before they claim they can leave their bodies during an OBE? How can healthy individuals claim the same results as patients during cardiac arrest? How can consciousness exist at a point outside the physical body? 

 

I think our consciousness is more than just electrical impulses in the brain. Even when we're unconscious, we can still dream and become aware in our dreams. Further perplexing is the above situations that involve sedation, temporary death, or other instances of minimal brain activity. 

 

http://circ.ahajourn...gAbstracts/A236

 

To be fair: http://brain.oxfordj...ntent/127/2/243

 

Of course a lot, if not most of these experiences may be attributed to hallucinations or brain damage. However these are still theories as to the how and why, and one theory attempts to explain it as a "paroxysmal cerebral dysfunction of the TPJ in a state...of impaired consciousness." Of course I don't think there will ever be proof, because if these experiences are real and otherworldly, they could never be proven by physical science. Quantum science maybe one day, but I think "proof" of life after death would negate the purpose of life in general, and that of free will. 

[DonManley]

some great anecdotal evidence from hospitals involving patients who are "awake" during surgeries that it should be impossible to be conscious during. The patients seem to describe a similar experience of drifting above their bodies, entering the next room, and describing exactly what surgeons or employees were doing while it should've been impossible to ascertain that information

 

The problem is that there is no scientific evidence. It's one thing, e.g., to claim that your dog can speak a human language. It's another one to prove it. I can claim that there is an alien under my bed that abducts me every night and I can find anecdotal evidence that other people also seen aliens. I can also write and sell a book about it. Would you believe me? No. At least aliens are not against the basic laws of physics. Dualism requires even more mental acrobatics than alien abductions. But for some reason people more inclined to believe in dualism than in alien abductions. The most likely explanation is that it's wishful thinking, that your brain tries to trick yourself to believe in something without adequate evidence. The thought that one has soul or consciousness that does not die with their body is very comforting.

 

I think our consciousness is more than just electrical impulses in the brain.

If so, then why failures of the physical machinery directly reflected on it. E.g., you can stop being able to recognize faces, you can think that you're arm does not belong to you.  Any aspect of your cognition is effected by changes in the brain. Your perception of the world is completely dependent on the brain. Why waking up somebody from an OBE results in them waking up in their physical body and not being able to stay in that reality? Is the more likely explanation that they return to their body from some other astral plan (which have never been measured by anybody on a physical level) or that they just wake up from dreaming?

 

Using the dualism logic, if we take any hallucinogens like acid, why should we believe that it just effects our perception and not causes us to see artifacts from some alternative universe?

 

they could never be proven by physical science. Quantum science maybe one day, but I think "proof" of life after death would negate the purpose of life in general, and that of free will.

 

Which means that the phenomena does not exists. If something exists it has effects on this universe or it can be effected. Light exists because photons "interact" with other particles. Imagine photons which would have no effect on anything (and anything that has any effect, by definition, can be measured or in/directly observed). We would not be able to observe it, but it would also have zero effects on this universe, i.e., it would not exist. Everything that can be observed is in the domain of science. Saying that something is not in the domain of science is synonymous to saying that it does not exists.

 

You mentioned quantum physics and free will. But there is no room for free will in quantum physics. That is a misrepresentation of the field. Quantum physics only introduces stochastic systems. There is no free will in quantum physics (as most people think of free will). There is only randomness. In quantum physics, or in any stochastic system, a human has as much free will as a coin has free will. When I spin a coin, it will randomly "decide" to show heads or tails.

 

Free will is a denial of causality. In order for something to exist in this universe, it has to be effected by this universe. Imagine a particle that would not be effected by anything, by definition, it would not exist.

 

Free will is just an illusion that some actions or decisions are immune to causality. Even if you introduce a soul to the system, free will is still not imaginable (the followings speaks about psychopaths):

 

“Whatever their conscious motives, these men cannot know why they are as they are. As sickening as I find their behavior, I have to admit that if I were to trade places with one of these men, atom for atom, I would be him: There is no extra part of me that could decide to see the world differently or to resist the impulse to victimize other people. Even if you believe that every human being harbors an immortal soul, the problem of responsibility remains: I cannot take credit for the fact that I do not have the soul of psychopath. If I had truly been in Komisarjevsky's shoes on July 23,2007 - that is, if I had his genes and life experience and identical brain (or soul) in an identical state - I would have acted exactly as he did. There is simply no intellectually respectable position from which to deny this.”

 

So even existence of a soul is not compatible with free will.

 

But let's go back to the soul.

 

Consciousness as being completely independent of the brain is also incompatible with current neuroscience.

 

“Given the right experimental manipulations, people can be led to believe that they consciously intended an action when they neither chose it nor had control over their movements.”

 

One consciousness per human is also not exactly compatible with neuroscience. Take for example split brain patients. Their left hemisphere can answer that they want to become an astronomer, but their right hemisphere can give a totally different answer. Also their left hemisphere will act as if it knows why right hemisphere does certain actions, but it will give wrong answers. Does each hemisphere has its own soul?

 

If dolphins sleep with one hemisphere at one time, does one hemisphere travel the astral plane, while another hemisphere observes this world?

[VerdeGo]

What about intuition? Everyone I've talked to has experienced intuitive thought that's guided them or warned them about a future or current situation.

 

As far as waking someone up from an OBE, I guess that would depend on whether they were actually experiencing an OBE, and could explain in detail the events preceding their awakening. 

 

Any volunteers who can travel outside their body and describe in detail the car that's sitting in my driveway? 

[OneScrewLoose]

I recommend the book Mystery of Consciousness by John Searle.

 

Dualism is trash. I am not exactly a reductionist materialist either, but I am a monist, where there is no difference between body and mind/brain.

Every thought and feeling we have is a chemical state in the brain, and as far as we know, nothing more. That's why I see socializing, exercise, meditation, supplements and medication as all part of the same thing. They change the chemical state in our brains, just in different ways.

I'm agnostic towards souls and afterlife. I don't claim to know, I believe I'll find out when I die. On this planet, I believe, if we were created, we were given these five senses to deal with. These 5 senses cause us enough trouble and difficulty, we look for more to worry about? I don't believe God would create a physical world and then tell us to look towards things our uniquely logical minds cannot fundamentally prove.

Edited by OneScrewLoose, 16 May 2015 - 09:19 PM.

[VerdeGo]

Isn't that what faith or belief in an afterlife involves? Ever since man evolved on this planet, he's always been looking up to the stars and dreaming of more than what is logically known to him. Since you've used DXM extensively, I'm surprised this didn't pique your interest in the unknown. DXM for me got me into paranormal research, and I found it to be strangely useful in increasing ESP, EVP, and unexplained phenomena. But I think it activated a part of my brain that increased those things. I really don't know, but our own consciousness I believe can affect our surroundings. People who can affect objects with their minds (psychokinesis) tend to have spikes in gamma brain waves. There's been some really strange synchronicities (Carl Jung's term for a type of coincidence) I've observed in higher, altered-conscious brain states. 

 

I guess we all have our own beliefs and assumptions. Some can be proven by science, and some will probably never be proven. But science is constantly evolving, and there are things we know now that were unheard of and thought impossible centuries ago.

 

I think it comes down what part of our brain we're using. When I'm on stimulants like sulbutiamine, the afterlife is the last thing on my mind, and sex and socialization is forefront. When I used DXM in the past, I felt a link to the paranormal and had some success with voice manifestations in both my house and on audio tape. I'm not ruling out our own mind as being behind these events, but science can't yet explain how a brain can somehow cause voices to appear on audio tape, nor can it explain valid voices that may be paranormal in nature. It's impossible to prove the paranormal, objectively at least. But I have had many subjective experiences to prove it beyond a doubt for me. That's why meditation and altered brain states are so interesting. It's like tapping into a greater energy.

[OneScrewLoose]

There are actually a number of studies that have been conducted on these phenomena and it doesn't show any consistency:

Biased data:

 

Extroverts somehow score higher ESP ratings than introverts.

 

Study where n=28,000(!) shows no results beyond chance.

I have to ask. Do you feel in control of your physical self and senses? Why not focus on that first, and save the spiritual for later?

[VerdeGo]

Yep, I feel in total control. If something is off (like mood), I turn to diet and exercise before amino acids. But I like learning about meditation and altered states as well, and I'd like a healthy way to implement meditation into my lifestyle.

 

I'm also edging toward learning more about myself spiritually, and getting back into dream research and possibly astral projection or other altered conscious states. 

[OneScrewLoose]

To me, altered states and meditation is just another fantastic aspect of our mind. We understand so little thus far, that I don't feel the need to attribute things to spiritual to understand these things.

Like I said, I don't discount the spiritual, I'm agnostic towards it. But if there exists such a thing as the supernatural, it is exactly that, above nature and the laws of nature. That means we cannot consistently interact with it, because it would not obey the laws of the universe we live in. If there are supernatural things happening to me, great! But if it is truly above nature, how could I possibly control it?

For the record, I've done high doses of DXM, Miprocin and Benedryl, among many other deep substance-induced experiences. Each showed me amazing aspects of who I am. I don't feel the need to call it spiritual, if I was created, that creator gave wonderful aspects of our mind that we can search deep into in this physical world.

[VerdeGo]

Agreed. But it's not about control, it's about enlightenment. And there are many different avenues.

 

I just hope people keep an open mind that there may be other forces, dimensions, and beings out there, somewhere, that currently can't be explained or even proven by modern science. I believe keeping an open mind opens up a door and allows us to receive this information. That's why I'm interested in visualization, meditation, astral projection, and OBEs. 

 

And I can personally attest to the law of attraction. Never underestimate intent and how you can manifest events in your own life. Negative thinking begets negative circumstances, some of them seemingly out of our control. Don't take anything for granted, count your blessings, and strive to evolve and become a better person. It's a constant struggle, believe me.

 

Anyone can do a simple experiment with plants using intent. Researchers at the CIA, IBM, and ITT all have conducted such controversial experiments with interesting results that are now widely discredited by modern society and science, since no scientist can accept the notion that plants have consciousness because they don't have a brain or CNS. I'm currently trying to devise a way to repeat Cleve Backster's experiments (he was the top CIA interrogator who hooked plants up to galvanometers using a Wheatstone bridge in the 60s). I just need to hack my oscilloscope a little and add electrodes to it. If all else fails, I'll have a working EKG. Plant meditation also seems like a viable option, and I'm wondering if anyone here has tried it?

[OneScrewLoose]

Source please for the plant studies.

[VerdeGo]

Here's a brief rundown of Backster's experiments: http://www.nytimes.c...cleve-backster/

 

Evidence of a Primary Perception in Plant life: http://www.rebprotoc...t Life 23pp.pdf

 

http://www.academia....lants_Conscious

 

Page 67 of The Secret Life of Plants: "Without perception, adaptation does not and cannot exist. If plants had no sense organs and didn't have a means of transmitting and processing information with their own language and memory, they would inevitably perish." - Vladimir Karamanov, Reports of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1 ed., 1959. 

 

For more information on the physiology of plants that are behind communication and consciousness, along with rigorous experiments, look up the research of the famed Indian scientist Jagadis Chandra Bose. The Russians also did a lot of experiments and published studies supporting plant consciousness. Also look into Vogel (IBM), Lawrence, and Sauvin (ITT) in this country. 

 

There's plenty of compelling evidence that plants communicate with one another, and perceive intent from humans. Any gardener with a green thumb will tell you they talk to their plants. Now we know why. 

[OneScrewLoose]

Here's a brief rundown of Backster's experiments: http://www.nytimes.c...cleve-backster/

 

Evidence of a Primary Perception in Plant life: http://www.rebprotoc...t Life 23pp.pdf

 

http://www.academia....lants_Conscious

 

Page 67 of The Secret Life of Plants: "Without perception, adaptation does not and cannot exist. If plants had no sense organs and didn't have a means of transmitting and processing information with their own language and memory, they would inevitably perish." - Vladimir Karamanov, Reports of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1 ed., 1959. 

 

For more information on the physiology of plants that are behind communication and consciousness, along with rigorous experiments, look up the research of the famed Indian scientist Jagadis Chandra Bose. The Russians also did a lot of experiments and published studies supporting plant consciousness. Also look into Vogel (IBM), Lawrence, and Sauvin (ITT) in this country. 

 

There's plenty of compelling evidence that plants communicate with one another, and perceive intent from humans. Any gardener with a green thumb will tell you they talk to their plants. Now we know why. 

From the first link:
[quote]
Scientists, however, were less convinced. No one could reproduce Backster’s results (this the foundation of all science, reproducibility) — a problem Backster explained away with a variety of post-hoc qualifiers. (A lettuce leaf didn’t respond to harmful stimuli? It probably shut down to protect itself.) As a result, Backster mainly worked outside the establishment, publishing his findings in outlets like The International Journal of Parapsychology, Volume X.[/quote]

The second link pulls a paper from the journal of parapsychology, a journal that has [url=http://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=15925&tip=sid]not had an SJR (similar to impact factor) above 0.3. Not 3, but 0.3. Absolutely abysmal and one of the lowest ratings on any journal I've ever seen.

The third link is from a journal with another abysmal rating, with an impact factor of .78. Looking at the paper, the author doesn't seem to process any data, or even do any experiments. Instead he just catagorizies types of literature in regards to plant consciousness and then writes conjecture based on these classifications. That's not even close to science, or more specifically, the use of the scientific method. In addition, the author himself states:

[quote]The texts discussed here cannot give a decisive answer to the question of plant .consciousness[/quote}

So even the author admits no real conclusions can be drawn from his paper. What's even the point?

You have a short time on earth, man. I very strongly advise not to waste your time on mysticism. Control what you can in the material world (as in, materialism), and if there is more, worry about it after you die. This here is just a waste of your time, and the precious little amount of life that every human has,

[AlexCanada]

Eleuthero Root Ginseng specifically has allowed me to visualize things these past few days. Quite remarkably in fact especially when I am laying down in bed. Normally my mind is very blank but I have been impressed with this herb despite it's hypoglycemic effects. It seems to have some synergy with Vyvanse as well.

 

Eleuthero suppossedly has immune system stimulating effects. Perhaps that is part of the big picture. May help for adrenal insufficiency. Does have very clear physically stimulating effects at low doses of 50-150mg. 

[VerdeGo]

I don't feel like I'm wasting my time at all, and I have all my material ducks in a row so I can allow myself time to research things that interest me. If I didn't have the time, I wouldn't be on this forum typing this response to you. 

 

There are actually hundreds of references in the bibliography of this book, though I don't have that much time to reference all of them. I wasn't trying to convince you of anything through my cherry-picking, just putting the idea out there for others to see. Somehow I got off on a tangent, and for that I apologize. I still believe that anything that adapts to its surroundings has some form of consciousness. Plants even have sexual organs, and they breathe. Not like we do, but it's a process that exists in plants. It's not a far stretch to assert they have consciousness, and some day that will probably be realized using more rigorous studies in more mainstream journals when science can catch up and record these things. Has science proven we have a consciousness yet, or is it all attributed to "brain chemistry"? If consciousness was simply electrical impulses, then there would be a lot more Frankensteins roaming the earth because we'd be able to reproduce it in a lab. I highly doubt that will ever happen, but who knows? The problem is people take these things for granted, and as I speak we're destroying life to build a parking lot. 

 

I think plant meditation is a viable option for expanding one's awareness, since you're working with and visualizing a living thing. It's been done in the past with wonderful subjective results. And plants do tend to perceive intent (sorry, I don't have a study abstract to reference, but that doesn't make it false), and they also send out electrical impulses that could theoretically be picked up on our equipment.

 

http://blogs.scienti...-sophisticated/

 

Although plants don't have nerves, plants cells are capable of generating electrical impulses called action potentials, just as nerve cells in animals do. In fact, all biological cells are electrical.

 

Whenever different concentrations of ions accumulate on opposite sides of a cell membrane, there exists the potential for an electrical current. Cells manage this electric potential using protein channels and pumps embedded in the cell membrane—gatekeepers that regulate the flow of charged particles across the cell membrane. The controlled flow of ions in and out of a cell constitutes electrical signaling in both plants and animals.

 

"In any cell you have a membrane," explains Alexander Volkov, a plant physiologist at Oakwood University in Alabama. "You have ions on both sides in different concentrations, which creates an electrical potential. It doesn't matter if it's an animal or plant cell—it's general chemistry."

 

[OneScrewLoose]

I don't feel like I'm wasting my time at all, and I have all my material ducks in a row so I can allow myself time to research things that interest me. If I didn't have the time, I wouldn't be on this forum typing this response to you. 

 

There are actually hundreds of references in the bibliography of this book, though I don't have that much time to reference all of them. I wasn't trying to convince you of anything through my cherry-picking, just putting the idea out there for others to see. Somehow I got off on a tangent, and for that I apologize. I still believe that anything that adapts to its surroundings has some form of consciousness. Plants even have sexual organs, and they breathe. Not like we do, but it's a process that exists in plants. It's not a far stretch to assert they have consciousness, and some day that will probably be realized using more rigorous studies in more mainstream journals when science can catch up and record these things. Has science proven we have a consciousness yet, or is it all attributed to "brain chemistry"? If consciousness was simply electrical impulses, then there would be a lot more Frankensteins roaming the earth because we'd be able to reproduce it in a lab. I highly doubt that will ever happen, but who knows? The problem is people take these things for granted, and as I speak we're destroying life to build a parking lot. 

 

 

If you're truly interested in these questions and the state of our knowledge, read "Mystery of Consciousness" by John Searle.

What's most accepted is that consciousness exists, brain's cause consciousness, and this happens at the neuronal/synaptic level. This is where the majority of scientists are at, though perhaps not everyone. Just because we don't know how it happens yet, does not give more credence or probability to untestable metaphysical mechanisms. If some of these supposed aspects of the mind, that you are proposing, could somehow be tested (by reputable scientists in a reputable journal), and most importantly, consistently replicated, then there would be something of value on a scientific level. But since that does not seem to be the case, it's no different than believing that Jesus died for your sins; it's simply something you accept because it improves the quality of your life in one way or another.

[VerdeGo]

Breaking off from plants, which is another topic entirely, I learned today about guided imagery and how it can boost neurotransmitter levels. 

 

This site breaks down the basics and techniques: http://www.healthjou...IsGuidedImagery

 

It's interesting that you can use guided imagery on a cellular, even molecular level by imagining (perhaps willing) cells to behave in a certain fashion (ie fighting and destroying cancer cells). 

 

http://www.webmd.com...-topic-overview

 

This example from WebMD (regarding the lemon visualization) was used by a psychologist my dad hired for me in my teens. I was quite rebellious at the time, so he sent me to a psychologist to sort things out. Not much came of it, as the guy thought I was going through a normal self discovery phase. In our down time, I asked him to try hypnosis on me out of curiosity. He told me to close my eyes and utilize my senses. My memory is a bit hazy, but I believe it involved identifying a certain smell in the air, then isolating a certain sound in the distance, and then noticing a certain sensation I was feeling (like how the chair felt against my legs). I believe I had to do this with three different smells, sensations, and sounds. Then it would go down to two the next time around, and then one for each. I may be mistaken on the proper procedure, as this was around 15 years ago. After I concentrated each of my senses on one sound, one smell, one sensation, etc., he told me to imagine a lemon, and to visualize in my mind how it would taste, smell, sound, and feel. He told me next to imagine myself as a finite piece of sand, infinite in the universe, which I believe was an attempt to dissolve the ego instead of trump it up. He tried then to hypnotize me, but I was still too aware of my surroundings and ended up laughing for awhile. He told me I could not be hypnotized.

 

However I took this information home with me, and attempted self-hypnosis several times, each with varying results. I used his same techniques to make the room turn green upon opening my eyes, and though it took a lot of concentration and visualization on my part, it was very interesting to experience, and had the best results of any meditation I've tried (if you can call self-hypnosis a form of meditation). 

 

Beyond calling it hypnosis, is this a form of guided imagery? Has anyone else used the guided imagery technique for their meditation?

 

Interestingly enough, it sounds like the same technique used in the 1500s by Jakob Boehme, who claimed he could see into another dimension by visualizing his consciousness enter into a plant and move up through the stem, into the leaves, and observe the movements of the plant on a cellular level. 

 

For someone with an overactive thought process, this was quite relaxing and put me in a deep, meditative state. I think I'll be using this again in the future, but I'm curious if anyone has any tips to get into a deeper state with this method? 

[Godof Smallthings]

 

Here's a brief rundown of Backster's experiments: http://www.nytimes.c...cleve-backster/

 

Evidence of a Primary Perception in Plant life: http://www.rebprotoc...t Life 23pp.pdf

 

http://www.academia....lants_Conscious

 

Page 67 of The Secret Life of Plants: "Without perception, adaptation does not and cannot exist. If plants had no sense organs and didn't have a means of transmitting and processing information with their own language and memory, they would inevitably perish." - Vladimir Karamanov, Reports of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1 ed., 1959. 

 

For more information on the physiology of plants that are behind communication and consciousness, along with rigorous experiments, look up the research of the famed Indian scientist Jagadis Chandra Bose. The Russians also did a lot of experiments and published studies supporting plant consciousness. Also look into Vogel (IBM), Lawrence, and Sauvin (ITT) in this country. 

 

There's plenty of compelling evidence that plants communicate with one another, and perceive intent from humans. Any gardener with a green thumb will tell you they talk to their plants. Now we know why. 

From the first link:
[quote]
Scientists, however, were less convinced. No one could reproduce Backster’s results (this the foundation of all science, reproducibility) — a problem Backster explained away with a variety of post-hoc qualifiers. (A lettuce leaf didn’t respond to harmful stimuli? It probably shut down to protect itself.) As a result, Backster mainly worked outside the establishment, publishing his findings in outlets like The International Journal of Parapsychology, Volume X.[/quote]

The second link pulls a paper from the journal of parapsychology, a journal that has [url=http://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=15925&tip=sid]not had an SJR (similar to impact factor) above 0.3. Not 3, but 0.3. Absolutely abysmal and one of the lowest ratings on any journal I've ever seen.

The third link is from a journal with another abysmal rating, with an impact factor of .78. Looking at the paper, the author doesn't seem to process any data, or even do any experiments. Instead he just catagorizies types of literature in regards to plant consciousness and then writes conjecture based on these classifications. That's not even close to science, or more specifically, the use of the scientific method. In addition, the author himself states:

[quote]The texts discussed here cannot give a decisive answer to the question of plant .consciousness[/quote}

So even the author admits no real conclusions can be drawn from his paper. What's even the point?

You have a short time on earth, man. I very strongly advise not to waste your time on mysticism. Control what you can in the material world (as in, materialism), and if there is more, worry about it after you die. This here is just a waste of your time, and the precious little amount of life that every human has,

 

If we want to examine these things, the only way, I think, is to do our own studies.

 

It is true there are charlatans and quacks, and poor science out there, but not everything is poor science just because it deals with supposedly supernatural things. Gravity is very clearly observed, but so far it is actually not explained. Is it therefore supernatural? Probably not, right?

 

One person worth checking out is Rupert Sheldrake - he is a trained biologist who has branched out into mostly researching parapsychology.

 

He conducted his own experiments on 'everyday telepathy' and the methods he used are quite rigorous. So why does he not get published? Because the scientists and journals who allow such studies are subjected to an immense barrage of criticism and feel they lose credibility. Scientific method is great, but science as an institution has the same inherent biases and flaws as other human endeavours. If you are perceived as having lost your credibility in these circles, people will officially turn away from you.

The journal ratings just tell you that nobody else would publish. The actual reasons they would not, we can not know.

Edited by Godof Smallthings, 22 May 2015 - 02:55 AM.

[VerdeGo]

I see Sheldrake has a few books out. Which one would you recommend for a basic understanding of parapsychology in every day life? I experience a lot of "psychic intuition" at certain times, and I've encountered a lot of strange occurrences that I would be easier to brush off if it wasn't for the timing. I had one of these instances occur shortly after debating the supernatural on this forum last week and hooking a pittosporum leaf up to my oscilloscope. The last time this particular event occurred was when a friend and myself tried to contact a deceased man we both knew, and who was good at fixing things. I'm not going to go into details because I don't want to detract from the original intent of this thread. 

 

But Fechner's quote stands out (he was the guy who studied afterimages from staring at the sun and went blind for 3 years as a result. When he recovered from his blindness, he could see energy fields or "souls" as he described above the flowers of plants. He was also a physics professor and medical doctor at Leipzig University, in good standing like Sheldrake). Fechner said: "...it is a dark and cold world we sit in if we will not open the inward eyes of the spirit to the inward flame of nature."

 

I also learned George Washington Carver would go into the woods and talk to fairies and plants alike, bringing a friend's 6 year old son, the future VP of the United States, into the woods to converse with beings of nature. He told one puzzled onlooker, who questioned how he became so knowledgeable without doing standard scientific experiments, "The secrets are in the plants. To elicit them you have to love them enough."

 

So we have many well-respected scientists alluding to consciousness (in some form, different from humans) in plants. Even Darwin commented the similarity of plants to animals. 

 

The point being nature can be a catalyst to better understand ourselves, to help us visualize, and to feel a connection with the universe. Maybe someone who lacks the ability to visualize should use a life form, as in a plant, to direct their intent. 

[Godof Smallthings]

The only one I have read in its entirety is 'Science Set Free' (also published as 'The Science Delusion'). It is a good read, but it does not go into great depth on his experiments with 'everyday telepathy'. It was intellectually challenging in parts, I needed to be on top of my game to follow the philosophical discussions, and I am still not sure I understood everything properly.

 

I am also not a firm believer in his morphic resonance concept, although I see it as a possibility that deserves to be explored more.

 

For the purposes of reading about his telepathy experiments, I think 'Dogs That Know Their Owners are Coming Home' and 'The Sense of Being Stared At' are the ones to get.

Edited by Godof Smallthings, 22 May 2015 - 07:46 AM.

[VerdeGo]

Thanks. I'll look into those books. 

 

I have a question for you. A coworker of mine wants to know why it's so easy for him to visualize immediately after closing his eyes. He can close his eyes and imagine/see geometric shapes, colors, etc. that he can control at any time of day. When I close my eyes I just see brown, with various specks of moving light anomalies. He wants to know what's different about him that he can do these things. He drinks alcohol, smokes cigarettes, and he doesn't exactly have the healthiest diet from what I can observe, nor does he meditate. I had him look through the questionnaire in The Mood Cure, and he could only relate to low serotonin at times, but he seems fine with dopamine and GABA. Any insights? Is visualization simply a byproduct of high dopamine levels?

[Blackkzeus]

I don't think high dopamine levels are related that much to visualization ability. If that were the case dopaminerginic such as vyvanse and adderall would increase visualization ability and they certainly don't, I'd even say they decrease creativity and visualization ability. Most likely there are multiple neurotransmitters and factors that control visualization ability. Like everything else that has to do with the brain it's usually much more complex than we think.

[Metagene]

This condition now has a name - aphantasia

http://mobile.nytime...?_r=0&referrer=

[caconym]

Hey oxiguy,

 

Francis Galton studied this in 1880! http://psychclassics...ton/imagery.htm

 

I also basically can't visualize, though I can spatialize. But Galton did find that scientists generally had worse visualization abilities than the general population. He ascribed this to being used to thinking abstractly, which resulted in atrophy of the visualization ability.

 

First learned of this at http://lesswrong.com...om_one_example/, which seems to explain parts of this thread.

[OneScrewLoose]

Realizing that the Venus Fly Trap has one of the, if not thee, highest visualization  capacities in the plant kingdom, I undertook a remarkable journey. Using what saving I had mustered over the last five years, I journeyed deep into the Peruvian Amazon, looking for the Venus Fly Trap known as 'El Engaño Sabio'. Many outright refuted the existence of such a creature, but I knew better, despite complete and utter lack of physical evidence. After weeks of searching, almost ready to turn back due to low supplies and what might have been some sort of tropical disease, I finally found El Engaño Sabio. With the little energy I had left, I spent to days opening telepathic links with Señor Engaaño and communicating, asking to know its deep secrets of visualization. Eventually he found me worthy, and showed me things beyond, what I had even expected, beyond my comprehension.

I now no longer need to see a wonderful piece of art more than once, as it is always with me in every single detail. Likewise, I no longer watch porn...

As for actual visualization, it's a complicated process with circuits that run between the occipital cortex, hippocampus, and likely the somatosensory cortex. I would start by exploring some of the racetams.