I write a lot about the paranormal. However, over the years I’ve been accused of being both a sceptic and a believer. How is such a thing possible? Surely I must be one or the other?
It is to my great delight that I’m not classed as one or the other. Rather, I take a middle ground on the subject, accepting that most phenomena happens, but not accepting classical interpretations such as spirits of the dead, etc.
I take a different approach.
Rather, I believe that if we are ever to understand what is going on, we must accept present knowledge, and move forward taking this knowledge with us, and taking just one small step at a time.
To not do so is to take huge leaps into the darkness of knowledge, and this is nothing more than perpetuating a belief system. Hence, I am labeled a believer for accepting phenomena happens, and a sceptic for trying to place known ‘mechanisms’ onto the subject.
The purpose of paranormal research is, to me, to look at what is said to happen, then look at what our knowledge says is capable of happening, and then extending that knowledge system just a little to see if what is thought to happen COULD happen.
It is, to me, the only stance that can lead to proper understanding.
© Anthony North, January 2007
One or the other?
Surely you have been witness of discussions on politics where a neutral position will be interpreted as rightist by a leftist and at the same time as leftist by the rightist.
Neutrality ruffles all feathers since all feathers are attached to a wing and none are outside of the polarity of belief.
Open mindedness, unfortunately, can only serve the truly open minded. And it appears that the truly open minded are hard to come by and open mindedness has rather become the responsibility of the other to accept one's own ideas.
Neutrality
Hi Richard,
Your words are very true, except for one - neutrality. I'm not neutral. I'm trying to forge a path that is different.
You've maybe noticed I write about many subjects. This is because I have a philosophy I call Patternology. It looks at many areas of knowledge and attempts to see what is missed by being too specialised. The paranormal is just a part of this.
I suppose I'm trying to put reason into holism. And believe me, I may often come to a moderate conclusion, but it isn't neutral.
There are no splinters in my ass from sitting on a fence.
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North
Neutrality
Hi Anthony.
I know what you are saying.
Still, its a question of words.
Lets consider neutrality to be real open mindedness as opposed to an absence of interest or worst of all an attitude.
Consciousness is not neutral when it is based on reality.
But neutrality lies more in the faculty of not being impressed, therefore of being less susceptible to manipulations via subjective values.
In that sense, I feel you do have a degree of intelligent neutrality, if you will.
The balance of the triad
I believe what you do is a very sensible thing, but obviously it pisses some people off because we tend to view things in manicheistic terms. Things are either black or white for most people, and society forces you to take a stand, and not aligning with those two views is judged as relativism, pasiveness or even cowardice; whereas in reality it is far braver (and harder) to forge your own path.
A third alternative is what brings the balance to the other two opposing forces on a triangle, and makes it the most stable shape in the Universe.
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
Too true
Good morning Red,
It can sure get lonely sometimes taking this stance. But I'll persevere. And the amount of shots that 'fanatics' take at me disproves the cowardice theory :-)
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North
dimensions
There is this simplistic classification on many issues: you are for it, or you are against it. Or perhaps you are in the middle, but often that is not considered as a possibility. For or against, that's it.
Why not consider that the paranormal, or non-paranormal, are effects of something else? An influence outside the one-dimensional spectrum?
----
If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure.
(Bill Clinton, and perhaps others)
Dimensions?
I hope I will consider an idea behind the paranormal from any area, dimension, etc, that holds, in my mind, a touch of rationality.
To me, 'for it or against it' is valid in many areas - such as which football team you support, etc - but in terms of knowledge, it's time we moved on.
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North
yesterday and today
There are good reasons to stay with conclusions that we formed yesterday. We often took much time and effort to get to those conclusions, and to abandon them requires significant new information, or new thought.
But we should not forget why we arrived at those conclusions. If the reasons go away, we have to re-think.
----
If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure.
(Bill Clinton, and perhaps others)
Paranormality
I would suggest the only thing paranormal about the paranormal is the interpretation of a consciousness that is only partially conscious. Like the only reason for mysteries to exist is ignorance, therefore these is no such thing, universally, as a mystery.
What do you mean by:
"An influence outside the one-dimensional spectrum?"
Time we moved on
In saying 'it's time we moved on', I'm talking about attitudes, not conclusions made within our knowledge structures. I mean easing the conflict between religionist and scientist, evolutionist and creationist, and other areas.
In other words, with a more holistic, generalised attitude as bedfellow to both specialisation and belief, we can hopefully get people working together, whilst retaining their specialisation or belief, but increasingly tolerant of others, whether they accept it or not.
In doing so - in talking - we can hopefully then advance our knowledge from foundations of the past, into new areas of study. It is, basically, 'good and evil' that is old hat.
And yes, Richard, of course a mystery exists because of ignorance. Ignorance is the lack of knowledge.
...
I'm fanatical about moderation
Anthony North