2 ms·

Psychology is trying to be that science, but it's hard to call it that at this point. It's more like a craft at this point, trying to masquerade as a science. B

Psychology is trying to be that science, but it's hard to call it that at this point. It's more like a craft at this point, trying to masquerade as a science. But hopefully in time it will develop into a true study of this type of mental phenomenon. And just to be clear, I'm strictly referring to things like meditation as a way to change your own mindset, not any of the silly concepts that assume the mind is somehow able to move atoms around without emitting radiation.

nuc1e0n 2y ago
The human mind is able to move atoms around. Chiefly by means of human hands.
- tsimionescu 2y ago
  Sure, but that still emits radiation (in the form of chemical or electrical signals in the nervous system down to the muscles, and also in the form of the massive amount of particles constituting your hand).
  - nuc1e0n 2y ago
    Who told you that it wouldn't? And philosophically speaking where do you draw the line between 'you' and the rest of the world? Do you think the neurons in your head are 'you' and the neurons in your arm are just inanimate in some way? That seems a rather arbitrary distinction to me.
    - tsimionescu 2y ago
      I specifically said "silly concepts that assume the mind could move matter around without emitting radiation". You responded that the mind can move objects, mostly with the use of hands, and I pointed out that the use of hands is a form of radiation, so that was perfectly in line with my original line. As to the other question, it's irrelevant to this discussion (but no, I don't draw such a distinction, except insofar as recognizing that the neurons in the arm will not normally fire to create a movement in the arm without first receiving a signal from neurons in the spine or brain, in healthy people). Ultimately my point is that the only way a person can influence the broader world is by emitting radiation in measurable ways, and the only way they can find out about the broader world is by receiving radiation. So a person in an EM shielded, inertially dampened, sound proofed room with no one to talk to can't view the city of Jerusalem from above, regardless of how hard they concentrate or believe they can.
      - nuc1e0n 2y ago
        Yeah that's a reasonable conclusion. The way we can take information in at a subconscious level and extrapolate from it I find remarkable. Maybe the extent of that capability could be tested. I also have heard that physicists may now think retro causality is real. That seems a bit far fetched to me, but I imagine that would be testable. The ancient Greeks belived it was possible to see the future in dreams, and shamans in prehistoric times tried to predict where herds of animals would be. A present-monition rather than a premonition lol. But even complex animal behaviours can be estimated. Shamans wore Animal headdresses to 'think' as those animals would.

nuc1e0n 2y ago

The human mind is able to move atoms around. Chiefly by means of human hands.

tsimionescu 2y ago
Sure, but that still emits radiation (in the form of chemical or electrical signals in the nervous system down to the muscles, and also in the form of the massive amount of particles constituting your hand).
- nuc1e0n 2y ago
  Who told you that it wouldn't? And philosophically speaking where do you draw the line between 'you' and the rest of the world? Do you think the neurons in your head are 'you' and the neurons in your arm are just inanimate in some way? That seems a rather arbitrary distinction to me.
  - tsimionescu 2y ago
    I specifically said "silly concepts that assume the mind could move matter around without emitting radiation". You responded that the mind can move objects, mostly with the use of hands, and I pointed out that the use of hands is a form of radiation, so that was perfectly in line with my original line. As to the other question, it's irrelevant to this discussion (but no, I don't draw such a distinction, except insofar as recognizing that the neurons in the arm will not normally fire to create a movement in the arm without first receiving a signal from neurons in the spine or brain, in healthy people). Ultimately my point is that the only way a person can influence the broader world is by emitting radiation in measurable ways, and the only way they can find out about the broader world is by receiving radiation. So a person in an EM shielded, inertially dampened, sound proofed room with no one to talk to can't view the city of Jerusalem from above, regardless of how hard they concentrate or believe they can.
    - nuc1e0n 2y ago
      Yeah that's a reasonable conclusion. The way we can take information in at a subconscious level and extrapolate from it I find remarkable. Maybe the extent of that capability could be tested. I also have heard that physicists may now think retro causality is real. That seems a bit far fetched to me, but I imagine that would be testable. The ancient Greeks belived it was possible to see the future in dreams, and shamans in prehistoric times tried to predict where herds of animals would be. A present-monition rather than a premonition lol. But even complex animal behaviours can be estimated. Shamans wore Animal headdresses to 'think' as those animals would.