Brushes with the unexplained

[Michael 345]

Yep..it really happened because who can possibly doubt the historical veracity of the Bible? lol!

Well the photo of the ARK looks a bit dodgy

Are you sure it hasn't been Photoshopped?

 

[sculptor]

Metaphorical of what?

Gobekli Tepe?

 

[C C]

"[...Brent Swancer...] However, I recently had an exchange with someone on the topic of why people keep their paranormal experiences to themselves and it was quite profound, to say the least, and it made me think. I did a bit of soul searching and I decided that I would come out with my own experiences. These are things which I have never told anyone, not even my closest friends or family. They have remained caged up within me, anomalies that have sat like awkward, jagged rocks upon the landscape of my mind for far too long. They are deeply personal, and even now it feels odd to let them out and put them out there, like I should hold onto them and keep them hidden. [...]"

Just by what's attributed to a "closed system", I'd personally anticipate "inexplicable incidents" as always open to eventually being explainable by that complex's conventions. Even if the incidents truly were of an ilk intruding upon its normal patterns. Unpackaging this:

To keep it from being dogmatic metaphysics, "nature" or the adjectival "natural" might refer to the systematic expectation of a world's components being able to fully serve as inter-dependent reasons or causes for each other without appealing to external or "prior in rank" provenances. An internal network of sufficient explanation or coherent functioning within that cosmos itself.

For instance (and to recruit contemporary metaphor), even a simulated domain or program maintained by a future quantum computer[*] could be arranged to be internally coherent in terms of its own appearance of how it worked without having access to the higher-level apparatus / powers making it possible. The latter could be denied by the inhabitants of the nested level (for the sake of practical interior progress within that "game" itself) without actually eliminating the possibility of the hidden elevation making it possible. {footnote [*] - In place of this iterative type metaphor (material computer within yet another material computer) one could substitute a traditional non-repeated type (like immaterial generative principles) to stop the regress.}

If such a "prior in rank" stratum was the case, and it had a tendency to intrude upon its product, then to prevent the "concept or system of natural" from being violated, there would always be a "non-extraordinary explanation" for _X_ weird event (thereby only "seeming" to be weird). But supervening upon that set of circumstances would be the cryptic meaning / influence which the intended individual(s) were receptive to. Denizens with those "crypto-cognitive" tendencies being fated to unfold from the "program" of either computer or generative principles eventually. (I reflexively interpret Chinese language as organized gibberish / meaninglessness, but Chinese readers overlay or extract significance upon / from those details.)

An alternative, cruder approach would instead have "real" (not so subtle) intrusions retconned or edited / revised away after the influence of the "bizarre event" was delivered to the applicable residents. A mundane explanation would be inserted in world's environmental records of the past and a similar revision of skeptics' memories making that doable. At first glance this would seem the far more complicated route (but perhaps not under closer analysis?). The "occult" interference also wouldn't have to be deliberate, or delivered personal revelations of any kind -- but simply anomalous glitches or arbitrary occurrences that were repaired by that not completely flawless upper process / provenance. But still, if some of the observers or recipients were allowed to retain their original memories, then it would suggest those influences slash contaminations being a legitimate part of the "internal story" being outputted.

- - -

 

[Magical Realist]

I agree with you that it's no more justifiable to believe in holy ghosts than it is to believe in ghosts.

To be frank, I can't discount the existence of any supernatural entity in a cosmos where ufos, fish from the sky, SHC, and poltergeists are possible. But I highly recommend basing any belief in them on empiricle or at least anecdotal data and not on theological treatises or religious scriptures.

 

[C C]

To be frank, I can't discount the existence of any supernatural entity in a cosmos where ufos, fish from the sky, SHC, and poltergeists are possible. But I highly recommend basing any belief in them on empiricle or at least anecdotal data and not on theological treatises or religious scriptures.

Even management of society which is not 100% ideological seems to have to rely on generalizations abstracted from statistical data, and the formalized plans for regulations and action which authority devises that is based on that.

But it's a tad insane for the individual herself to be trying to live in that generic representation / version of the world (or always basing decisions upon it) rather than the contingent one of experience and personal memories. As long as the particular events of the latter are / were publicly accessible to others (not imaginations, hallucinations, etc), and one is not a member of a state or ideology that forces the individual to "totally" conform to either its abstract models or static dogma. (Little choice then, apart from imprisonment, torture, execution.)

- - -

 

[sideshowbob]

Metaphorical of what?

You gotta build your own ark. You're responsible for your own salvation.

 

[Magical Realist]

You gotta build your own ark. You're responsible for your own salvation.

And you gotta save all the animals too. Nice..

 

[sideshowbob]

And you gotta save all the animals too.

Yup. You gotta protect your own resources. God ain't gonna do it for you.

 

[Magical Realist]

Yup. You gotta protect your own resources. God ain't gonna do it for you.

Snakes, alligators, skunks, and buzzards aren't exactly "my resources". But hey, whatever the voice in your head says, right?

 

[sideshowbob]

Snakes, alligators, skunks, and buzzards aren't exactly "my resources".

Sure they are. They're all integral parts of your ecosystem.

 

[Kittamaru]

Snakes, alligators, skunks, and buzzards aren't exactly "my resources". But hey, whatever the voice in your head says, right?

Well, buzzards at least are important, unless you want to be up to your ankles in roadkill

 

[Magical Realist]

Sure they are. They're all integral parts of your ecosystem.

That's not a resource. And it's doubtful those animals were part of Noah's ecosystem.

 

[Michael 345]

gibberish

I understand this word

What was the rest about?

 

[sideshowbob]

That's not a resource. And it's doubtful those animals were part of Noah's ecosystem.

All ecosystems are interrelated.

 

[Magical Realist]

All ecosystems are interrelated.

So what? And they're not resources for us to exploit. But hell, when the voice in your head is destroying all life, what choice do we have?

 

[sideshowbob]

And they're not resources for us to exploit.

I didn't say anything about exploiting.

 

[Magical Realist]

I didn't say anything about exploiting.

So they aren't resources now? Wow..this is one funky metaphor..

 

[sideshowbob]

So they aren't resources now?

Resources don't have to be exploited.

 

[Magical Realist]

Resources don't have to be exploited.

Riiiggghhhtt! Special non-exploited resources. Ones you just look at.

 

[Kittamaru]

Riiiggghhhtt! Special non-exploited resources. Ones you just look at.

Or ones that you leave alone and don't muck with (such as the ones that deal with dead animals and roadkill for us) - I'm not quite sure what your hangup is on what he said...