How do you explain people's spiritual experiences scientifically

>>8459321
evolutionary coping mechanism for the banality of life

>>8459321
Stop looking to science to justify your atheism

>>8459369

why do you think im atheist?

Heterophenomenology

>>8459321
You mean hallucinations? Lots of ways to explain that, you don't need /sci/ for that, just google and wiki.

>>8459394

>Heterophenomenology

AKa one of the most stupid redundant things ive ever heard.

AKA

>>8459397

but i saw god

>>8459321
You only describe the process and go on.

>>8459400
What's got you irate, friend?

>>8459409

nothing, its just the truth of the matter

>>8459394
Do we really need a new pretentious word for "subjective report"?

>>8459321
Spiritual experiences are at their most basic, the destruction or partial lifting of the ego.

The ego is the mental structure of "ourselves". It does not actually exist, but acts as an abstract reference for memory, experience, and separating ourselves mentally from others.

When this is reduced, temporarily lifted, or removed, whether through meditation, religious conditioning, or the use of psychedelic drugs, one experiences a kind of no-self, in which the separation between themselves and others falls away, they see themselves as they are seen by others (or more accurately, how they would view themselves, if they were somebody else) and feel a deep, pervasive, and powerful sense of unity with all other things. Depending on your conditioning, this experience may be associated with the personality of a god-like figure that represents all other things, personality without figure as in islam, or "void-ness" as in bhuddism.

I'm not sure how to describe it scientifically other than that it doesn't require anything weird or religious or metaphysical, just a powerfully different perspective.

Also, its been noted that certain areas of the brain responsible for differentiating ourselves from others experience the same decrease in bloodflow during prolonged, intense mediation as during mushroom and LSD use. Can't be assed to find the study though.


>>8459437
>>8459417
>>8459409
>>8459404
>>8459400
>>8459397
Doesn't have to be hallucination. You only think you saw god.

And how do you explain non-catholic spiritual experiences if christian god is the only one?

>>8460537
I always wonder about a religious explanation for this one.

>>8460539
>>8460537

That god(s) probably don't exist, certainly not the abrahamic god, and that you only perceive non-self as the influence as a god due to psychological conditioning.

>>8460537

you ever heard of christian mysticism? that is the answer

>>8460649
How that's an answer? If, according to the Christians, Yahweh is the one and only God, then how do one explain revelations of other deities

>>8460539
i think a god or power that can be interpreted by humans in different ways is possible. its not like some we misinterpret other things and even our own perceptions.

every religion is wrong but the person feeling is is right

>>8460659
Why assume that different gods that have little or nothing in common, who say contradictory things and openly say (by the revelations and prophecies of some kind, not like they really exist) that other gods are false ones and one shouldn't worship them are in fact one god?

>>8460672

because its a fault of human interpretation for creating those idols.

its analogous to how in perception, sensory information like in vision is ambiguous and has to make inferences on data. there isnt one type of inference for what you see though. you get illusions and you can see in many illusions its possible to switch between different interpretations. like the duck-rabbit or the vase-faces illusions

>>8460711
Say there are two gods, A and B, god A says you can't worship the god B, and God B says you can't worship God A, why assume they're the same god if that leads to contradiction?

File: 1478482929298.png (1MB, 1262x1625px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1262x1625px

>>8459321

Being high af

Don't knock religion until you've tried ayahuasca, then it all makes sense

>>8460726

theyre not the same god, theyre different interpretations of the same spiritual power. its what happens when people try to elaborate upon it into the wider world and their cultures. you have to be careful not to become thirsty with the power of god.

>>8460737
Why do you think there's just one spiritual power? Maybe there are two, or ten, or one for every man alive?

>>8460741
there is no number concerning god. it is like energy, flowing like water. number only comes when you come into contact with it, when you try to interpret its being.

and like the holy trinity you can percieve the same god in many forms. as water is to liquid, solid (ice) or vapour

>>8460758
But how do you know that energy is unique, maybe there are two, five or ten billion different energies

>>8460770
like i said, there is no number until you percieve it. it doesnt matter, all you get is the sensory noise and interpret it. it doesnt really matter. it doesnt matter if it exists, only your relation to it. like when people say if you cant measure it, if it has no affect on the physical world then it might as well not be there. its about your relation to it, not it itself. some people get it, some people dont.