Show #63 - Into the supernatural: Interview with parapsychologist Stephen Braude

Anam Cara said:
Really looking forward to this show! It sounds very interesting indeed! :)

Btw, it should be Sunday April 27th - unless my calender has gone abit strange :)

You are right, it's now corrected.
 
Kniall said:
Approaching Infinity said:
Hesper said:
This sounds like an amazing show! I'm looking forward to it. Is this the philosopher mentioned by Harrison Koehli on his Blogtalk Radio Show? I'm thinking of the philosopher who made the very clear distinction concerning common sense that is "common" and the more scientific/refined common sense.

Nope, that was David Ray Griffin. I may have mentioned Braude, too. Can't remember. Griffin wrote a book on parapsychology, too (a really good one).

You did:

AI said:
There's a philosopher named Stephen Braude who researches and writes about parapsychology. And that's exactly his point; is that he thinks that all this research is kind of useless. We're spending all this money and doing all these experiments to prove these tiny effects that a) aren't very interesting and b) we experience them all the time in life. That's the very reason we do it, is that we know that these things happen or at least we have the experience of them. I think he might argue that we've done enough experiments in the labs. Let's try to find out the really exciting stuff, the really interesting stuff, but that's a whole other topic.

The reason I bring this parapsychology stuff up is that it comes back to the mind/body problem where we ask, how do we view the mind? Do we view it as identical with the brain? Do we view it as an epiphenomenon of the brain? These really fall short of being satisfactory answers, primarily because it doesn't give any room for a causal influence of the mind. The mind can do nothing.

Hopefully on tomorrow's show we can then get straight into the really interesting stuff!

Thanks you two. Definitely looking forward to hearing the nitty gritty.
 
That was a great show, thank you! And also thanks to Laura and Ark for being present. :thup:
 
Aiming said:
That was a great show, thank you! And also thanks to Laura and Ark for being present. :thup:

Ditto, the presence of all three was very refreshing and usefull. Although it made the guest for a while quiet uneasy. But who can resist Ark when the talk starts about information fields and quantum waves? ;D

Also, the remark about the heart transplant cases was interesting. I remember stories of my now ex-girlfriend who did a bio-tech bachelor studies with a two-year follow-up practice in London with one of the best lung transplant specialist. She was talking about the same experiences the patients had after getting a transplant. New habits, seemingly irrational decisions taken etc. Upon researching history of donors they discovered the connection.

Furthermore, only about half of receivers lived reasonably long after. The rest was not neither so lucky, neither happy after surgery. Could that be that the FRVs of receivers would require matching those of donors in order for success of transplantation?
 
anka said:
Aiming said:
That was a great show, thank you! And also thanks to Laura and Ark for being present. :thup:

Ditto, the presence of all three was very refreshing and usefull. Although it made the guest for a while quiet uneasy. But who can resist Ark when the talk starts about information fields and quantum waves? ;D

Yeah, we were a bit surprised that he was kinda backward compared to the research/work we do. But, that's what happens when philosophers get into anything! They have to reinvent the wheel with their own hands to understand it and try to explain it.
 
What a great Show!

Thanks SotT Talk, Stephen Braude and Laura and Ark for you're enriching attendance. Thanks also to the caller, HK. :)
 
Yes, as always, a great show!

I was very excited that Laura and Ark were both present. In the beginning, when the subject of 'information' was being discussed, I began to get a little frustrated (for lack of a better word), particularly with the phrase 'semantic knowledge'. I was glad for the appearance of HK. I think because I just finished reading some of his thoughts on that subject (so they were fresh in mind) that were very well presented, understandable and lead me to open my own thinking. I guess I thought that his questions would open more discussion on that particular subject.

I have not yet read Stephen's book, I wish I had, so I would have a better perspective. This is a fascinating subject and I am glad that I was able to listen 'live' for this show. It's hard not to be skeptical about this 'parapsych business', and it's certainly hard to 'prove' with our limited knowledge, but I was left feeling that so much energy is being wasted debunking, disproving the 'charlatans' (not that that isn't important) that could be used to investigate the possibilities. The probabilities even because there is so much evidence to show that there is so much we don't know with any certainty, but yet it exists.

I guess I really need to read his book to get a better handle on where he is coming from and a better grasp on my subjective interpretation.

So, Thanks SOTT Talk Radio & Hosts, for another interesting and informative show.
 
For those who want to see The Gold Leaf Lady, check out this video at minute 7:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYQ3SpaInk4

Bizarro!
 
Gaby said:
For those who want to see The Gold Leaf Lady, check out this video at minute 7:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYQ3SpaInk4

Bizarro!
Thanks for link - High Strangeness indeed. It is interesting that Brass is its leaf medium, yet not sure what to make of that.
 
Back
Top Bottom