And what about the OP thread subject has you thinking it is supporting those things?
I am not sure if the OP is written clearly to address anything particular. It doesn’t read clearly on what it is trying to debate on, apart from the suggestion that the OP’s occult practice could have some scientific grounds?
My inference is telling me, it is not the case based on my last posts.
Then read the opening post - perhaps carefully and therein one should be able to get a sure bead on why it matters to me that this thread doesn’t slip into argument support notions of supernaturalism.
It changes the way we approach the thing.
For example, My partner and I recently came back from an overseas trip and noticed that our clock had gained 2 hours.
We didn’t resort to “ghosts did it” by way of explaintion.
Yes I remember. I am unsure of the context of my supposed claim about “prediction” and when you first mentioned it, I don’t recall a quote. I tend not to reply to that type of thing.
Again, without context, I have nothing to go on by way of reply.
I may be confusing you for another poster, but did you not say you had no time to test ideomotor effect by replicating my own process? How does that couple with you “always ready” claim?
Fear of the unknown. Your fear. Your conscious fear. Your rejection of your capacity to reason in favor of being a puppet to fearful imagination.
Your imaginary “guys” could be your way of mismanaging opportunity to take responsibility for your own unfounded fears and reactions.
Or - maybe the “guys” are real and are all along trying to get through to you but your fears and projections consistently get in the way of that becoming an actual thing?
Yes indeed. That is what this thread subject is actually about.
Theism is about that. I look at it as a crude attempt to “explain” the unusual - or what our dominant human experience perceives as “unusual”.
“Crude” in the sense that we are somewhat forced into that position initially BUT there is no natural RULE that we have to go along with that.
We can - instead - think about the unusual as something which requires careful reasoning rather than relying on the superstitious gap filling that supernaturalism invokes…
Perhaps then think about the following. Consciousness itself is a physical thing - the fundamental physical thing, and from itself it is able to create things which - condensed - provides form which it can then occupy for the experience of said things.
We can use our own current knowledge of this universe to understand such process. From a beginning where the thing was a formless potential through the formation of galaxies to the formation of life forms on this planet - each process intimately connected to the overall and consciousness directing the outcomes by involving itself directly with the processes - experiencing what it is to be a galaxy, a star, a planet and all individual biological forms on a planet (to focus specifically on the processes which have and are unfolding in our own planet)…
(Having said that - here is my latest post in the forum where I share my journal entries)
It’s a philosophy forum. I would be startled if the members are going to jump to ghosts or other supernatural stuff for any explanation.
Anyway, some of my best friends are ghosts, and they say they find it quite offensive for you to be calling them ‘supernatural’.
They want to know who decides what is supernatural and what’s natural.
I’m asking if the things you learn at your board have any connection to the physical world which couldn’t be explained by neuroscientific theories of the unconscious. Like predicting the lottery or something. Identifying a message in a sealed envelope. That sort of thing.
I thought I explained that for you. Tens of thousands of claims, but only so many hours in my day.
OK. If you want to stand there and reason it all out while the lion is charging, lest you become a puppet to your fearful imagination, well, that is how you will play it, I guess. Me, I’m gonna let the backroom guys steer my behavior in such cases. They’re speedy.
If you think fearing a lion is unfounded, I think you might do better to allow your unconscious to handle your lion business.
[quote=“BestGuessYet, post:167, topic:2610”]
Anyway, some of my best friends are ghosts, and they say they find it quite offensive for you to be calling them ‘supernatural’.[/quote]
I didn’t.
What make them so sure there is even an option?
It has been explained to the reader. The only claim made was that the use of ideomotor effect as stated in the OP, is able to be replicated by anyone with the time and inclination to do so. You appear to have neither.
I can no longer take you seriously.
Yes all sounds good to me. I’ll make time to read your journal when I have a bit more time (I’m on vacation now), I will comment on a few things later.
1 Like
OK. 
You do realise that your logic works both ways round? So we could call it (almost) all “science”, or we could carry on with our historic habit of calling it (almost) all “life”, or “living”. 
I definitely like the idea of integration alongside segregation. We spend too much of our time dividing and breaking, instead of joining and making. IMO 
Indeed. I understand the dynamics.
Yesterday, I visited a relation and she had on her bookshelf a book titled “The Paranormal an Illustrated Encyclopedia” by an author named Stuart Gordon - first published in 1992.
I looked up “Talking Boards” but there was nothing there. I looked up “Ouija Board” and there was an entry for that, which included “A device, often used casually as a party game, for communication with the dead” and went on to describe what the board consisted of and how the device is used and also included “Sceptics may accuse others of deliberately moving the glass [pointer] (which no doubt occurs)” and continued with “yet often those who thought it a party game become disturbed or frightened, either by accurate answers, or by unexpected and apparently psychokinetic manifestations (sudden cold drafts in closed rooms, articles falling off tables, etc) that suggests the presence of a genuinely inexplicable force”
It goes on to give an account from a chief medical doctor who recalled a night when in medical school where he and six other students were “fooling around” with a ouija board for the first time (in November 1941) and they asked when the invasion would take place that would stop Hitlers Reich and the answer was “June 6” and when the Normandy invasion actually took place on that date on that date in 1944, “we called each other, remembering the ouija prediction”. The Doctor finished with “I truly can’t explain this incident.”
The entry finishes with “Frivolous of this an similar devices is not recommended.”
The overall point being, that the timeline of popular use of talking boards is
Early prototypes and homemade versions of talking boards sparked a craze in spiritualist camps in Ohio. People wanted a faster way to communicate with the dead after the massive loss of life during the American Civil War.
Commercial Patent (1890–1891): Businessman Elijah Bond and entrepreneur Charles Kennard patented the first official Ouija talking board in Baltimore in 1890, with the patent granted in February 1891. The Kennard Novelty Company manufactured them en masse.
World War I Surge: Popularity spiked again significantly during World War I, driven by grieving families searching for connection with lost soldiers. By 1920, the boards were a regular part of mainstream pop culture, featured on magazine covers like The Saturday Evening Post.
Thus the marketing had an overall effect on the collective consciousness of - mainly American Culture - to such an extent that it shaped the beliefs and continues to shape the beliefs of millions of individuals throughout the world.
This is why (or one of the reasons why) I decided to create this thread. To explore popular myth/misinformation about this device and about the so-called “paranormal” in general.