--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <rick@> wrote: > > > > > > From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > On Behalf Of TurquoiseB > > > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 5:09 AM > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Latest from Sam Harris, 2-8-07 > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm suggesting that your mirror is as abnormal as > > > > any other, and that its reflections of the universe > > > > are as distorted as anyone else's. Can you accept > > > > that, in...dare I use the term...humility, or do you > > > > hold that your perceptions reflect some kind of > > > > "truth?" Just curious... > > > > > > Is everyone's mirror equally abnormal? > > > > In my opinion, yes. > > > > > If so, what's normal? > > > > A guy named Abby Normal...unfortunately deceased. > > They used his brain to make the creature in > > "Young Frankenstein." :-) > > > > > Why couldn't Jim's mirror be clearer than > > > most, though still not perfect? > > > > He certainly believes that it is. He's unwilling > > to consider any other possibility. > > > > That unwillingness is what I'm commenting on. > > > > > I think clarity of human perception is a > > > spectrum ranging from extremely distorted to > > > almost crystal clear. > > > > Very possibly, but who do you trust to judge > > the clarity or the distortion? > > And why do you think it is your job to do so? You say I > am unwilling to consider the possibility that my perception > is not clear. So what? I am not trying to convince you of it. > What do you know of my perception except that which has been > shared here? For example, I have seen angels countless times, > and see them whenever I choose to. To the point that it is > no longer interesting for me to comment on such a thing. Am > I trying to convince anyone here of the validity of that > perception...
Desperately, as far as I can tell. > ...or that it is accurate for them too? Almost never, to your credit. > The answer is not at all. That, as far as I can tell, is only the answer to the second question. > So what is the issue with me stating these things that > yes are unequivocally true for the moment? What is your > problem with it? No problem at all. I'm just curious as to whether you can admit the *possibility* that your perceptions might be illusory or flawed. I've had some pretty interesting perceptions as well. As far as I can tell, I'm the only person here who has seen someone levitate. We're talkin' seeing some- one rise up off his chair and just hang ten on thin air for minutes at a time, or in the desert, step up off the sand and dance in mid-air. I saw it. I was there, completely sober and under the influence of neither suggestion nor drugs. But at the same time, I am open to the possibility that what I saw would not have been captured by video cameras, had they been running (which makes what I saw as levitation a very subjective experience), or that I was somehow mistaken, and no levitation was going on at all. I have NO PROBLEM saying this. I similarly have NO PROBLEM with the possibility that any of my other perceptions of extraordinary siddhis or other paranormal events might have been the after- effects of a bad pepperoni pizza. Anything is possible. For now, barring any evidence to the contrary, I have to go with my perceptions being accurate, even though in some cases the person performing the siddhis was, in many ways, a low-vibe slime. In others, he was the most extra- ordinary teacher it has been my good fortune to meet in this lifetime. But it could all be illusion. I would never claim it as "truth." So far in these discussions, I have never heard you make such a statement. Whenever I have asked whether there might be another interpretation for the things that you consider "truth" (and which, when challenged, you tend to refer to as absolute truth), you 1) bristle, 2) tell me to get lost and not to bother you with such inanities again (and then, within a day or so, are writing to me again expecting me to reply), and 3) keep claiming that your perceptions basically EQUAL truth. I've just become curious, that's all. Can you possibly admit the possibility that your perceptions just *might* be inaccurate?
