5 ms·

This isn't asking the hard question though: how did the oracle see the future?

asiachick 4y ago
Oracle: Lisa, this supplicant has not groveled in the least Lisa: Then zot them into oblivion darling Oracle: Your groveling is unacceptable! I shall ZOT THEE! You have been zotted!
kordlessagain 4y ago
According to mystical based beliefs described in A Textbook of Theosophy by C.W. Leadbeater: > When a man thinks of any concrete object - a book, a house, a landscape - he builds a tiny image of the object in the matter of his mental body. This image floats in the upper part of that body, usually in front of the face of the man and at about the level of the eyes. It remains there as long as the man is contemplating the object, and usually for a little time afterwards, the length of time depending upon the intensity and the clearness of the thought. This form is quite objective, and can be seen by another person, if that other has developed the sight of his own mental body. If a man thinks of another, he creates a tiny portrait in just the same way. If his thought is merely contemplative and involves no feeling (such as affection or dislike) or desire (such as a wish to see the person) the thought does not usually perceptively affect the man of whom he thinks. These mental bodies are not considered by the textbook to be bound by time, given they are "astral bodies" for which, under certain conditions, time and space don't matter.
mcphage 4y ago
I think first it would need to be established that she did in fact see the future.
- tshaddox 4y ago
  Yes. The explanation “it was all made up by one or more writers” sufficiently covers not just the precognition, but also the hallucinations and even the existence of the oracle.
  - mcphage 4y ago
    I think enough prediction requests have been found that the existence of the Oracle is non-controversial.
- kordlessagain 4y ago
  This is an example of Positivism. I think the primary problem with positivism is the knowledge about the universe is never fully attained, so it feels more like a confused reasoning process. The assumption the scientific method will explain everything someday is irrational. When is that going to happen? With more work? What positivism really is, is a commitment to a bunch of work in the future to "prove" something is this and not that. The future never arrives. Mysticism is the flipside of that. A mystical approach builds a metaphor to exist that "makes sense" but can't really be tested or analyzed by scientific methods. Faith takes over there, where just believing something irrational to be true, makes it true. Maybe that includes visualizing something over and over again? Between these two extremes sits a philosophy that holds that there is value in both kinds of knowledge, and that both can be used to improve our understanding of the world. This philosophy emphasizes the need for both scientific and spiritual knowledge in order to create a complete picture of reality. Unfortunately, the scientific method is a bit annoying sometimes, given it's absolute insistence all things may be disproved. It's a little like a virus in that regard, growing without bounds or purpose, other than to try to avoid the mystical outlooks at all costs.
  - coeneedell 4y ago
    Well okay, but when the scientific method produces knowledge, the voracity of that knowledge can be checked by an observer. When a mystic convinces a large number of people that their opinions are in fact, truths, that is not a process that can be checked by an observer, and the “knowledge” produced has nothing tying itself back to reality.
    - quinnjh 4y ago
      How do corporations forecast the future?
      - lmm 4y ago
        Poorly, on the whole.
    - justinmcp 4y ago
- mise_en_place 4y ago
  The predictive power that most people have (at least with normally functioning brains, for some neutral definition of normal being the baseline) is surprisingly good. Executive function requires making many such predictions and forecasts every minute. If I had to give a rough estimate, I’d say slightly greater than a coin flip for future event outcomes.
quinnjh 4y ago
Probably the same way you can construct a data oracle to project out guesses for what a time series will do? The thinking goes: the more, nd better sources of market intelligence you can feed to the oracle, the better predictions it can make. I would assume the oracle at delphi was being fed the most / best market intelligence to then prophesize from
jotm 4y ago
Same way I can see the future of everyone commenting here with near 100% accuracy. If you're curious, I can see that you will die. If you're scared, I can help you avoid death for only $4.99/day or a war against Lichtenstein, your choice. Do as I say, or do you really want to risk dying tomorrow?

Oracle: Lisa, this supplicant has not groveled in the least Lisa: Then zot them into oblivion darling Oracle: Your groveling is unacceptable! I shall ZOT THEE! You have been zotted!

kordlessagain 4y ago

According to mystical based beliefs described in A Textbook of Theosophy by C.W. Leadbeater: > When a man thinks of any concrete object - a book, a house, a landscape - he builds a tiny image of the object in the matter of his mental body. This image floats in the upper part of that body, usually in front of the face of the man and at about the level of the eyes. It remains there as long as the man is contemplating the object, and usually for a little time afterwards, the length of time depending upon the intensity and the clearness of the thought. This form is quite objective, and can be seen by another person, if that other has developed the sight of his own mental body. If a man thinks of another, he creates a tiny portrait in just the same way. If his thought is merely contemplative and involves no feeling (such as affection or dislike) or desire (such as a wish to see the person) the thought does not usually perceptively affect the man of whom he thinks. These mental bodies are not considered by the textbook to be bound by time, given they are "astral bodies" for which, under certain conditions, time and space don't matter.

mcphage 4y ago

I think first it would need to be established that she did in fact see the future.

tshaddox 4y ago
Yes. The explanation “it was all made up by one or more writers” sufficiently covers not just the precognition, but also the hallucinations and even the existence of the oracle.
- mcphage 4y ago
  I think enough prediction requests have been found that the existence of the Oracle is non-controversial.
kordlessagain 4y ago
This is an example of Positivism. I think the primary problem with positivism is the knowledge about the universe is never fully attained, so it feels more like a confused reasoning process. The assumption the scientific method will explain everything someday is irrational. When is that going to happen? With more work? What positivism really is, is a commitment to a bunch of work in the future to "prove" something is this and not that. The future never arrives. Mysticism is the flipside of that. A mystical approach builds a metaphor to exist that "makes sense" but can't really be tested or analyzed by scientific methods. Faith takes over there, where just believing something irrational to be true, makes it true. Maybe that includes visualizing something over and over again? Between these two extremes sits a philosophy that holds that there is value in both kinds of knowledge, and that both can be used to improve our understanding of the world. This philosophy emphasizes the need for both scientific and spiritual knowledge in order to create a complete picture of reality. Unfortunately, the scientific method is a bit annoying sometimes, given it's absolute insistence all things may be disproved. It's a little like a virus in that regard, growing without bounds or purpose, other than to try to avoid the mystical outlooks at all costs.
- coeneedell 4y ago
  Well okay, but when the scientific method produces knowledge, the voracity of that knowledge can be checked by an observer. When a mystic convinces a large number of people that their opinions are in fact, truths, that is not a process that can be checked by an observer, and the “knowledge” produced has nothing tying itself back to reality.
  - quinnjh 4y ago
    How do corporations forecast the future?
    - lmm 4y ago
      Poorly, on the whole.
  - justinmcp 4y ago
mise_en_place 4y ago
The predictive power that most people have (at least with normally functioning brains, for some neutral definition of normal being the baseline) is surprisingly good. Executive function requires making many such predictions and forecasts every minute. If I had to give a rough estimate, I’d say slightly greater than a coin flip for future event outcomes.

quinnjh 4y ago

Probably the same way you can construct a data oracle to project out guesses for what a time series will do? The thinking goes: the more, nd better sources of market intelligence you can feed to the oracle, the better predictions it can make. I would assume the oracle at delphi was being fed the most / best market intelligence to then prophesize from

jotm 4y ago

Same way I can see the future of everyone commenting here with near 100% accuracy. If you're curious, I can see that you will die. If you're scared, I can help you avoid death for only $4.99/day or a war against Lichtenstein, your choice. Do as I say, or do you really want to risk dying tomorrow?