What if I told you...

Post Reply New Topic

As a discussion, this thread belongs in the "Politics, Philosophy, and Religion forum, and not in GAD.

I mean, it's all hypothetical, at best, since no valid empirical evidence to link any alleged "spirituality" with autism has ever been produced - it's all fantasy and speculation, at the very least.

Here are some questions to consider:

1. How reliable is the source of the claim?

2. Have the claims been verified independently by people familiar with trickery?

3. Do the claims measure up with the way the world is observed to work?

4. Where does the preponderance of valid empirical evidence point?

5. Is the claimant playing by the rules of science or is the claimant simply presenting an opinion?

6. Is the claimant providing positive evidence, and not merely saying, "Prove me wrong"?

7. Are the claimant's own personal beliefs driving the claim?

Last edited by Fnord on 10 Apr 2016, 7:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

As I keep saying: Prove the lack of it by handing over direct evidence, instead of handing over a lack of evidence (which, I have to inform you, is not evidence, thus the "lack" in the phrase there; most seem to not notice this monstrous hole in logic, which I find absolutely baffling) and you'll have my agreement. Neither side has evidence.

IF such things exist though, frankly, I dont think we're in a position to understand them. Not with our pathetic knowledge and science. I doubt that REAL testing will be possible any time soon.

Chances are, even if a person DOES have some sort of psychic ability... they are unable to directly control it. Which makes sense; people as a whole dont entirely know what's going on in their own heads to begin with. This is all sorts of dumb when you really think about it, but it's the truth. The subconscious is always processing stuff that we're not aware of, that's how it works. All sorts of screwy mental math and who knows what else. We cant even control that, yet there it is. If psychic whatever exists, direct control of it is likely out of our reach. For now, if it exists... it's just there. But not something anyone could fully use. May as well try to break apart Mars using only the power of your face. There is not even remotely close to BEING remotely close to enough knowledge to point in either direction on this particular topic. Why anyone even bothers challenging in either direction on it, I have no idea. Seems a waste of effort, to me anyway.

Thus, yet again... "I dont know".

Very True

and as spirituality solely been connected with AS, i think all spectrum's feel in this manner to some degree... So i dont think it is a sole connection so to speak... but if it interests the op, then who knows, maybe he will be the one to find the answer later in life! who knows, thats speculation at the very least!

Argument from Ignorance (also "Argumentum ad Ignorantiam" and "Negative Proof") is a logical fallacy that claims the truth of a premise is based on the fact that it has not been proven false, or that a premise is false because it has not been proven true.

If the only evidence for something's existence is a lack of evidence for it not existing, then the default position is one of mild skepticism and not credulity. This type of negative proof is common, and is used as an attempt to shift the burden of proof onto the skeptic rather than the proponent of the idea; when in reality, the burden of proof is always on the individual proposing existence, not the one questioning existence.

So, "If you can't prove me wrong, then i must be right" is a fallacious argument that has no place anywhere except in faith-based belief systems (e.g., Religion).

These videos seem convincing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vw4FGhe9_AA
When you watch several of them.
Also check out the ones about Hendrix and Robert Johnson on the same channel

If it was just one or two satanic bands using this as a gimmick it would be easy to dismiss but when te same thing is said by several different musicians it gets convimcing

I agree with that. My own position is "if you can't prove me wrong, I might be right". The existence of spiritual beings can neither be proven nor disproven, and it seems to me that the most logical and scientific attitude would be to acknowledge that there is not enough evidence to make a definitive conclusion either way.

But yes, I agree this discussion belongs in PPR, and has nothing to do with autism.

Thank you. Unfortunately, there seems to be a world full of people who take a flying leap from "It's a remote possibility" straight to "It's an established fact". Those people I try to avoid.

I thought it would be best to put it in GAD mainly for the purpose to see how many autistic people share and/or agree with my spiritual point of view. By no means did I intend to prove that any of what I said is or ever will be real. And yes, it is speculations and fantasy. Get used to it since that's what I like to post.



Again I wasn't here to prove anything, just sharing my spiritual point of view.



As far as I'm concerned I don't plan on tricking anyone into doing or believing anything nor rob them of their values should I ever do such a thing.



Here's an even better question: do my claims measure up with the way austism is observed to work

THAT is the question you should've asked sunny. My spirituality wasn't meant to explain how the world works you know.



What the heck are you talking about?





Again, this is just me sharing my own spirituality YES, I am indeed presenting my opinion. And just because I don't play by the rules of science doesn't prove that I am any more or any less pathetic.

When I made this thread, I didn't expect this to coincide with science at all.



More like "Hey look! I believe in this stuff! What do you think?" Don't care if I have evidence.

Also it seems that you think that science should always be against religion. Well it looks like its been a while since you have heard from good old Martin...





Yes. What's wrong with that?

Well, that'll never happen, because science doesn't work that way.

If you find something, you can prove it exists. But if you don't find something, is it that it doesn't exist, or that you just haven't found it yet? You can never know for certain - unless you eventually find it, in which case you know it existed all along.

Eh... I can't prove it exists. It seems that way to me, but I can't prove it to anyone else. It's one of those things that each person has to come to their own conclusion about, based on what they have personally experienced, and what seems rational according to their own logic.

I find those ideas quite creepy.