Poll: Which do you use for knowledge?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
I use logical and linear only
0%
0 0%
I use spiritual and intuitive only
0%
0 0%
I use both methods
100.00%
1 100.00%
Total 1 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Are you Paranormally Challenged?
#1
Many people these days have lost touch with their own intuitive abilities and are extremely skeptical of anyone's ability to access any higher source of knowledge. As a culture we seem to be paranormally challenged. We have become so dependent on modern technology and scientific proof that we no longer understand or appreciate the kind of spirit wisdom that was venerated by our ancestors. 

So I decided to take a poll to find out how many members use logical and linear thinking only and how many members also use spiritual and intuitive?
Reply

#2
Richard, that title just cracked me up!icon_lol It reminds me of people being very short and the comic quipping 'They are vertically challenged'...

BTW, I'm short myself...so I can permit myself to laugh about it.
Reply

#3
I voted both spiritual and logical/linear. 

I have had episodes where logical and linear went out the window though.  Which was probably one of the reasons how I ended up checking out expansions bs.
Reply

#4
What PurplePebble said.
Reply

#5
I was curious because it seems like some members here are unable to judge things without scientific proof. They are so skeptical of things that they almost need to hold proof in their hands before they can believe something. I know most of the world has been this way for the last 100 years or so but I expected people would become more enlightened and in touch with their other senses as we approach 2012. They say since we're entering the age of Aquarius people will become more psychic and in tune with themselves.
Reply

#6
I voted both, without hesitation! Either or causes way too much imbalance and becomes either too stilted and autocratic or too woozy, nebulous and confusing leading one down some very odd paths indeed.
Reply

#7
I voted for both, but I have a predominant "intuitive".

I think this personality profiler is interesting and thorough. My score is INFJ and it's remarkably accurate.
http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp

categories explained: (each linked at the top of page):
http://typelogic.com/enfp.html
and also here, more elaboration:
http://www.personalitypage.com/html/portraits.html
Reply

#8
Richard Wrote:I was curious because it seems like some members here are unable to judge things without scientific proof. They are so skeptical of things that they almost need to hold proof in their hands before they can believe something. I know most of the world has been this way for the last 100 years or so but I expected people would become more enlightened and in touch with their other senses as we approach 2012. They say since we're entering the age of Aquarius people will become more psychic and in tune with themselves.
Richard, in my opinion the positivist approach of discerning and understanding reality is so ingrained within humanity that even if more spiritual and intuitive with and towards the non-physical, we would stick to the existing paradigm for quite a while to come. After all, this way of thinking is several millenia old, and the basis of our whole thinking. We will, in my opinion, evolve gradually into a more intuitive way of being.


Reply

#9
Jacaranda Wrote:Richard, in my opinion the positivist approach of discerning and understanding reality is so ingrained within humanity that even if more spiritual and intuitive with and towards the non-physical, we would stick to the existing paradigm for quite a while to come. After all, this way of thinking is several millenia old, and the basis of our whole thinking. We will, in my opinion, evolve gradually into a more intuitive way of being. 
Kind of like old habitats die hard, so we have to hope the young generation will bring earth into the enlightened age.
Reply

#10
What is the nature of knowledge? Rationalist or empiricist…there is a path between the two, I think, that can aid us in understanding beyond the individual’s gut feeling. Weaknesses of human nature can divert from what can be considered knowledge and what might be considered fancy. Belief systems inherently flaws perception that might otherwise ‘feel’ different, instinctively, than that which the data suggests or in some cases, proves beyond a reasonable doubt. On the other hand, what if that data - say, statistically - is shown in a way that suggests only one avenue of thought? Words and numbers are so easily manipulated this way in order to bias the end result. Fallacy and statistical or data ‘flaws’ can both work against coming to an enlightened conclusion.

There’s a place in the middle where belief does not offend the reality. That is perhaps the place to be when it comes to refining our individual instinctual view.

And even our personally conducted data collection & experimentation can prove unreliable. That is why the scientific method requires replication of result.

To the best of my knowledge, no process or person is infallible when it comes to absolute truth. It’s all simply relative to the process or person in question.

Beyond the logical and intuitive is a completely different matter.
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 Melroy van den Berg.