Justifying Hallucinations as "Reality"

[Meadowchik]

A very good friend of ours believes he saw Christ. I believe that he believes that.

That said, what does that have to do with MY reality? One could reason that if I am constituted to believe as he believes, I would have an experience similar to his. But at the very least, this very personal aspect, the original experience,  of his reality has nothing to do with me.

It is not mine.

[Ahab]

33 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

A very good friend of ours believes he saw Christ. I believe that he believes that.

That said, what does that have to do with MY reality? One could reason that if I am constituted to believe as he believes, I would have an experience similar to his. But at the very least, this very personal aspect, the original experience,  of his reality has nothing to do with me.

It is not mine.

I agree, unless maybe your friend said that Jesus said something and your friend told you what he said Jesus said and then you prayed to our Father about it and our Father then told you in the name of Jesus Christ that Jesus really did say that to your friend and what Jesus said was somehow relevant to you too.

[mfbukowski]

9 hours ago, SamIam said:

I have a philosophy that I trust everyone until it matters.  Visions are somewhat the same.  If some one claims such, most of the time the theological constraints which validate such potentials indicate that the vision is specific to the individual and thereby does not draw efficacy from whether or not someone else accepts it. It is as real as it is to the recipient.

However, when it matters, ie the vision is imposing potentials that may affect a larger circle than the individual having the vision then I judge them on how they stack up against the standards of the Gospel.  Even then it is not only if the vision is real that concerns me but is it true.  The adversary, I feel often provides real visions to confuse.  Does the vision address an audience that the visionary has no stewardship over, was it delivered by a sandy haired emissary, does it contain elements designed to undermine testimonies of the prophets or apostles. Does it pass the Moroni standards for truth...It is amazing how often individuals want to jump on somebody's visionary train without trying the spirits as Joseph calls it.  

When it comes to Joseph's visionary experiences we generally only know they are true when they strike a believing place in our psyche, they resonate with the individual.  A second way which I do not think is often the primary gauge, is to have a similar experience and recognize that what he describes with words is precisely what one has experienced. 

Thus, all in all, the very nature of how one determines if a spiritual vision is true defies classification along objective only limitations.  The spiritual element of confirmation by the spirit is for each an individual experience even if collectively the individuals having the individual confirmation join together to form a body of believers.  The growing body may provide impetus to seek out ones individual confirmation but it remains a one on one spiritual experience that seems to exist outside of objective constraints.

 So in other words you believe all you have been told, do not think for yourself, and can't tell what is objectively true from some tall stories, right?

 so the devil sends sandy-haired emissaries?

Edited April 8, 2017 by mfbukowski

[Ahab]

1 minute ago, mfbukowski said:

 So in other words you believe all you have been told, do not think for yourself, and can't tell what is objectively true from some tall stories, right?

Sandy haired?

No black angels, huh?

If your  emoticon is intended to indicate that you think you have the ability to think and post like an atheist or the devil himself would in response to the post you quoted, then I wonder what it would take for you to think and post like a faithful TBM latter-day saint would in response to the same post you quoted?

The world may never know.

[mfbukowski]

5 hours ago, Vance said:

Wait a minute.  IF "reality exists apart from my personal experience" then it is possible for "Life (to) goes on after people die" to be reality and you/me just not knowing or being able to know (experience) it.

Of course, AFTER you/me experience death, THEN you/me will experience at least some of the reality of it.

I missed that you were talking about life going on after OTHER people die, - DUH  Welcome to REALITY.  Is that what you were saying?  As if I was the only person in the world and others are my illusions??  How wacky is that??

Yes the world goes on even without me- I would not have even made that mistake if I was not dealing with a bunch or weirdos who believe life goes on after death.  

Of course life does not go on after death- that is why we have the word death!!  DEAD- get it???  No life.  You are gone.  Period.  Blackness forever- so get it while you can right here.  

OR maybe you are saying that because the world goes on after I die, then maybe I will go on too?

NO EVIDENCE for that whatsoever except maybe deluded reports of people who managed to come back after their brains were half dead.  What kind of hallucinations does a half dead brain have?  Who cares??   That is not exactly a reliable source.

That really IS like asking someone on LSD what's in the refrigerator- if they say "spiders" would you believe them?  What kind of logic is that??

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Ahab said:

If your  emoticon is intended to indicate that you think you have the ability to think and post like an atheist or the devil himself would in response to the post you quoted, then I wonder what it would take for you to think and post like a faithful TBM latter-day saint would in response to the same post you quoted?

The world may never know.

Duh- hence the angel

[mfbukowski]

10 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I can listen to a Mozart violin concerto at a concert or through audio equipment. I can even hear it by playing it myself. The sounds can be detected and measured by scientific devices. The same concerto can be played by any good violinist...and some bad ones, too, but no two violinists will ever play it the same way. In fact, even the best players cannot play it exactly the same way each time.

Except for deaf people, everyone in the vicinity will hear the concerto, but it will not have the same meaning for everyone. Not all will understand it, respond to it in the same way, know or care about the events surrounding its composition, appreciate the years of study the violinist put into learning it, or even like it. Some won't know who Mozart was, what a violin is, how it works, or the mechanics and physics involved in the production of the sound. A deaf person could touch the violin, feel the vibration of the strings, and verify something was happening but still have no idea what it sounded like. 

Everyone will hear the sound, but how would they describe what they are hearing? I can describe the emotions I feel while listening, but they would be inadequate to describe the whole experience in a way another person could feel the same way. Still, the sound is there, people hear and react in their own way, and no one would deny nothing happened, because it was real.

How would the composer describe the process of composing the piece? Could someone who has never written music comprehend how he did it? What if they had never heard music? What could he say to make them understand? Would they believe Mozart heard the music in his head before he put it on paper?

My thesis advisor in grad school enjoyed listening to the music of Gustav Mahler....some of the most complex music ever written. Except he did not like listening to live or recorded performances because they invariably had mistakes. Rather, he preferred to read the scores as one reads a book because he said there were no mistakes in the music he heard in his mind.

I can sit quietly and with a bit of concentration play the violin concerto perfectly in my head, much better than an actual physical performance. You can do the same with music you know. Sometimes a tune even gets stuck in a loop and plays over and over until it drives me nuts. Can you hear that sound in my head? Does it bother you like it bothers me? How could I prove to you that I am hearing it?

The sounds of a concerto performed by a violinist are demonstrably real. The sounds Mozart heard as he composed entire works in his mind, the Mahler symphony read by my friend, or the concerto I can hear just by myself.....are those real or just illusions? How do you know? 

 

 

 

That was fabulous.  I wish I could experience that- you are so fortunate to have that training and ability.  Subjective experiences are what reality IS for all of us whether those experiences originate from experiences from the world around us or from our own minds- in order for our minds to respond, they have to get "in there" somehow.  That is what the dualists miss.  Ultimately in ever situation it is a MIND that responds to "things outside" or "things inside" however we divvy that up.

I wish I could express my view of how I see things better so that I could play back that "score" somehow for others.   It is so clear and obvious to me- perhaps that is similar to the frustration probably your own teacher had in his own performances.  

To "hear" it so clearly in your own mind then then deal with the paltry attempted reproduction that gets communicated is VERY frustrating.

That's a very silly question.  What you think doesn't matter if you can't get it into the world- it is not real.  It seems like you people are just dreamers caught up in silly garbage and can't tell reality from fantasy.

Where is the evidence for what he hears in his head?   It's a nice story but dreams are not reality.

[Meadowchik]

2 hours ago, Ahab said:

I agree, unless maybe your friend said that Jesus said something and your friend told you what he said Jesus said and then you prayed to our Father about it and our Father then told you in the name of Jesus Christ that Jesus really did say that to your friend and what Jesus said was somehow relevant to you too.

So you mean that I pray and the experience is repeated for me as it was for him?

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

A very good friend of ours believes he saw Christ. I believe that he believes that.

That said, what does that have to do with MY reality? One could reason that if I am constituted to believe as he believes, I would have an experience similar to his. But at the very least, this very personal aspect, the original experience,  of his reality has nothing to do with me.

It is not mine.

No one is "constituted" for anything.  Your life is not determined and you can choose to see things any way you like.  You saw things one way for a long time and now you see them differently.  Perhaps if you combine your new view with your old view you could cobble together something that was your own.  Now you seem influenced by the voices of others- that's ok- we all learn from others.  But take that and integrate it with your previous way of seeing- 

Personal experiences are where we live our lives- in our minds, reacting responding and integrating stimuli.  Don't get stuck in one way or the other, keep integrating the good from the past with what you are learning in this new direction

You constitute yourself otherwise you are just dust in the wind responding to every breeze.

[SamIam]

3 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

 So in other words you believe all you have been told, do not think for yourself, and can't tell what is objectively true from some tall stories, right?

 so the devil sends sandy-haired emissaries?

I only believe what you've told me...

[SamIam]

3 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

 So in other words you believe all you have been told, do not think for yourself, and can't tell what is objectively true from some tall stories, right?

 so the devil sends sandy-haired emissaries?

It's funny how when you get the notification in your email that someone has responded you get the first unedited copy...It seems the has a bit of a PC streak that I never would have considered.

[MiserereNobis]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

It's a nice story but dreams are not reality.

"Dreams are lies, it's the dreaming that's real..." -- Bob Weir

[Bernard Gui]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

That's a very silly question.  What you think doesn't matter if you can't get it into the world- it is not real.  It seems like you people are just dreamers caught up in silly garbage and can't tell reality from fantasy.

Where is the evidence for what he hears in his head?   It's a nice story but dreams are not reality.

 

[3DOP]

On 4/7/2017 at 2:10 PM, mfbukowski said:

I feel I have found a way of seeing Mormonism which justifies visions as being "real" by justifying human experience as the only reality humans can know.

Visions are human experience, therefore in a sense and in a qualified way, they are as "real" as science.  They are about different subject matter, but fully justifiable as a part of human experience.  We can even justify speaking of them as being "true" within the context of Wittgensteinian language games and a pragmatic theory of truth, in which truth is dependent on a given context and in speech within a given social group.

So fans of basketball can debate whether or not a given call by a given ref was a "true call" for example- use any sport you like.  Within the rules of that game, there is "truth" within the context and the facts are debatable, but everyone agrees on what "truth" is in that context.

Scripturally I see that as cohesive with D&C 93 which speaks of the "spheres" of truth and even this talk by president Kimball   https://www.lds.org/ensign/1978/09/absolute-truth?lang=eng (as well as MANY other scriptures.)

But have been blathering my views here for a long time and will intentionally avoid voicing them in this new thread.  I just want all to know that I AM a "true believing Mormon" though here I play an atheist on the internet.

So come on all you TBM proponents of objective reality- you know who you are!

Come on and tell me why YOUR testimony is "objectively real" and Joseph Smith's vision was as well.

The intent is to show me IF there are any theories other than mine which I find justifiable which are current in the views of other "Mormons in the street" as opposed to weird philosophy types like me.  I am betting there are not after 40 years of thinking this way, but I could be wrong.

I predict this will be a short thread unless I get going on MY theories which I will try to avoid

Wait a second....  I have to put on my atheist hat.....  THERE

OK all you dang TBM's- show me how I am wrong.  Show me how Josephs hallucination was of objective reality.  Go for it!  The challenge is hereby issued!!

I have the popcorn out.....

 

 

 

Which way did Joseph Smith think?

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, SamIam said:

It's funny how when you get the notification in your email that someone has responded you get the first unedited copy...It seems the has a bit of a PC streak that I never would have considered.

Oh yeah, he's PC big time- that is part of his culture.  So make sure you don't offend anyone around him- that is worse than murdering unborn babies.

[mfbukowski]

16 minutes ago, 3DOP said:

Which way did Joseph Smith think?

That, sir is an excellent question.  I think it is clear that he understood that direct experience of God was seeing things "as they are".

For me direct experience is always "seeing things as they are"- I look around and see my stuff and realize though that I am more tolerant of my stuff than others stuff.  I think in spatial terms so I know that I left my shoes in the living room next to the couch and don't see that as "messy".  My wife on the other hand perceives my shoes differently for some weird reason and ends up throwing them into my closet where I can't find them.

For both of us the shoes are "things as they are" but for her they are a mess to be cleaned up and for me they are "I was just going to put them on, so why did you move them?" As if she could read my mind while categorizing them as another mess of mine which she takes it upon herself to clean up because I am a slob but the slob she loves, luckily for me.  

So who is seeing things as they are?

We both do from different perspectives

So yes, if Joseph did not believe that visions were "things as they are" he would have gone to bed and put a cold towel on his head and tried to sleep off the first vision.

[mfbukowski]

9 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Hey, Not so fast; You are the one writing about the "Visions" and their veracity.....Unlike the followers of this said visions, I'm asking some evidence or proof.Who prove any part of your visions being "Real" except to you, if you experience it, good for you.

Ok I am stumped.  I don't know what side that one is on.

Why do you need evidence for what you experience?  Have you ever been in love?  Have you doubted it?  What was your evidence?

What are you talking about "real for them"???  Reality is reality- you have bought into this Mormon visions are real garbage!  If you can't show it to somebody else it is all in your mind.  You are slipping there dude.

Edited April 8, 2017 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

7 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

Reality, like science, is a consensus.  IE If I say the color blue, we both more than likely will see(In our mind's eye) a slightly different shade of blue. If someone else sees the color red, then that person is either color blind or is outside the consensus. 

And how would you know what they are seeing pray tell to tell them they are in or out of the consensus?

[SteveO]

My mother is an RN who sometimes draws the unlucky straw of having to pull a night shift in psych ward.  Nobody likes going down there at night.  Apparently most of the residents are tormented by some pretty hellish hallucinations--visual or audible or whatever form they experience.  One of the first rules of thumb they follow as nurses is to never try and attempt to explain that the hallucinations aren't real--seriously, what good is it to tell a patient that there aren't voices coming from the electrical socket?  My mom never hears anything, but he obviously does.  Tearing out the electrical outlets wouldn't seem rational to the average person walking by and casually observing, but to my mother who understands the context of what the patient is experiencing, the action is perfectly reasonable.  To my mother, the extreme reaction is evidence that the patient is legitimately hearing something, even though she can't experience for it for herself.

I don't think you can prove someone's personal experience, but their actions taken into context within a given belief system should indicate that the person sincerely believes they are experiencing something no one else can see/hear.

That's why I think the life of Joseph Smith is evidence of what he experienced.  A charlatan would have had the good sense to ultimately quit. 

[Atheist Mormon]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Ok I am stumped.  I don't know what side that one is on.

Why do you need evidence for what you experience?  Have you ever been in love?  Have you doubted it?  What was your evidence?

What are you talking about "real for them"???  Reality is reality- you have bought into this Mormon visions are real garbage!  If you can't show it to somebody else it is all in your mind.  You are slipping there dude.

Of course I' do slip now & then, but end of the day I hope I grow up; I'll give you a very quick xample why your visions could be self serving & flawed as observed from you bubble.; Suppose that we became very good friends, I have no clue about your beliefs, one day you cordially invite me to your church, I accept and I really like what I see & hear from missionaries later....As time goes by I see this Church is Governed by Men, exclusively, when you invite me to GK, we go...I listen everything. After everything said & done, I ask you "Why you do not have any Women in your Priesthood, looks like your Church is led by 99.9% of Men" And you tell me "But I have no say in this, it is the lord who appoints the Prophets & GA's, all I have to do is follow them, a perfect way to happiness & salvation". I reply to you "it extremely funny to compare my profession (Medical) incidentally 50% or more are women who are in the business of saving our lives and yet the Lord does not seem appropriate His Church run by some equality?".....

I don't see visions, Of course I feel love, emphaty, anger, doubt...All those feelings are created by my brain depending on how it is stimulated for the moment.

[3DOP]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

That, sir is an excellent question.  I think it is clear that he understood that direct experience of God was seeing things "as they are".

For me direct experience is always "seeing things as they are"- I look around and see my stuff and realize though that I am more tolerant of my stuff than others stuff.  I think in spatial terms so I know that I left my shoes in the living room next to the couch and don't see that as "messy".  My wife on the other hand perceives my shoes differently for some weird reason and ends up throwing them into my closet where I can't find them.

For both of us the shoes are "things as they are" but for her they are a mess to be cleaned up and for me they are "I was just going to put them on, so why did you move them?" As if she could read my mind while categorizing them as another mess of mine which she takes it upon herself to clean up because I am a slob but the slob she loves, luckily for me.  

So who is seeing things as they are?

We both do from different perspectives

So yes, if Joseph did not believe that visions were "things as they are" he would have gone to bed and put a cold towel on his head and tried to sleep off the first vision.

Hi again Mark.

if I have understood you correctly, the principle of reality extends beyond dreams and visions? It is all encompassing. The cold towel and the bed are not known with objective certainty either?  

You will correct me if I am wrong, but there has probably yet to be an LDS Apostle who has not followed Joseph Smith in this flawed (from your point of view) way of thinking? 

What in your opinion, is gained by all people doubting that we objectively see "things as they are"? But especially for LDS when the Restoration is apparently founded through this flawed (from your point of view) way of understanding reality, and has grown the same way for 200 years, while this kind of thinking is still in the ascendant for Mormons in the 21st Century? 

Would this new way of understanding reality, if accepted by the brethren, bring with it new approaches to evangelism, mission work, or apologetics?     

It seems like you are calling for a change radical enough that it might be more easily accepted by the brethren if it came by revelation rather than schooling. The criticism leveled at my crowd by LDS, is that we began to lean too heavily on our brains, on philosophy, while ignoring revelation, a symptom at least, of apostasy.

If what you are advocating swept your church by academic exercise, without revelation, rather than being viewed as a healthy "development", it could be difficult to reconcile with its past. If it was a sign of apostasy for the Church of Jesus Christ of Former day Saints to be changed philosophically and without revelation, why would it be okay for an individual LDS, or the whole church to do similarly?

Thanks,

Rory

 

 

Edited April 9, 2017 by 3DOP

[Tacenda]

How bout' the thinking that there isn't a true church at all. Just a belief in God/Jesus? How much easier that would be on the lot of us. 

[longview]

46 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

How bout' the thinking that there isn't a true church at all. Just a belief in God/Jesus? How much easier that would be on the lot of us. 

That would defeat the purpose of this creation.   Why would you want to just drift through life singing kumbaya?  You need to enjoy the experience and don't focus exclusively on the destination.

[Ahab]

8 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Duh- hence the angel

You may think so, but how do you know that is not a hallucination?

Seriously.

[Tacenda]

50 minutes ago, longview said:

That would defeat the purpose of this creation.   Why would you want to just drift through life singing kumbaya?  You need to enjoy the experience and don't focus exclusively on the destination.

There are plenty of churches that don't proclaim to be the only true church. That's what I was meaning.

But I don't want to derail the thread, the only thing I can add is that I guess it's anybody's game.

Edited April 9, 2017 by Tacenda