As polytrip has brought to our attention, lately we have been having an influx of posts that talk about Consciousness Ascension, Pineal Gland, Other Dimensions and the beings that objectively exist there, etc etc.
This by itself wouldn't be a problem, but there are three aspects which make it very problematic:
The first is when these theories are expoused as The Truth, instead of as a theory or philosophical thought. Nobody here has a patent on Truth, and nobody is in the position to tell others what it is.
This comes together with the second issue, which is preaching and 'holier than thou' attitude from those who bring those New Age theories and consider anybody who is skeptic, questions or points out flaws, as 'closed-minded materialists', or not enlightened enough, or unevolved, or any similar idea.
Our forum has been built on the foundations of critical thinking, of scientific thought in the realms where scientific thought applies, of conscious criticism, of well backed and sustained arguments. This means that ideas presented here are susceptible to being scrutinized, reviewed, questioned. There are other forums, such as the ayahuasca forums or others, where there is more focus on the spiritual side of things, so feel free to go there if you prefer that kind of orientation and posting, but know that here the scientific method is a pilar of this community.
Many of us seem to question traditional religions and dogmas, but lately, often when one questions anything more 'alternative', it is sometimes almost seen as an offense, and the responses are often defensive, or the typical 'one-size-fits-all' argument of 'science doesnt know everything' is used.
If 'science doesnt know everything', then who knows maybe the computer just in front of you might be made by demons and might explode at any second, but nevertheless one does trust it because it works, because it was made with scientific knowledge that is reliable. So its somehow ironic that people choose to ignore science only when its convenient to their own beliefs. How about instead we realize, as all good scientists know, that science is a useful method with a certain range of applications, and that through it, isolating variables, we can find out things we could not otherwise, and we can make use of it. Science does not have monopoly over everything existing, but it certainly is the more reliable voice in many discussions, and hence why we use it.
The fact that science evolves, that knowledge is updated or changed is not an argument against science, but for it, because theories are falsifiable, because data can be reviewed impartially, unlike religious/tradition dogmas which are not passive to change. In other discussions, maybe through science we cannot directly test something, the discussion might be beyond scientific knowledge, at least temporarily, and this is important to know too, to accept it, to know when we can speculate and theorize beyond what we know. But of course, critical thinking still applies, and being conscious (and explicit) of the difference between an opinion and a fact, is essential.
I think its VERY important that we also notice the third issue at hand: The response from those who feel opposed to the ideas presented, the ones who are 'skeptic' or critical. Now, in the same way that I mentioned the foundations of our community, another very important aspect of our community is being respectful, communicating in a conscious way, not just venting our emotions and using strong words.
If one comes talking about a new age theory you dont agree with, dont say its "crap", explain why you think its wrong, show the arguments, point to peer-reviewed or trustable sources, dissect the misunderstandings and misleading affirmations. Saying something is "bullshit" or similar will just further degenerate the atmosphere of the nexus, will polarize the debate, and does not add anything constructive. Not only that, but this kind of response is equally against our stated attitude, and hence equally unwanted in this forum.
I hope we can all realize that different people will have different philosophical/existential orientations, but we must respect the different points of view, and respectfully state why we think one thing or another and give our arguments for it. Let us work together, making our voices as complementary and not mutually exclusive. Let us learn, evolve, accept when we're wrong, concede to other arguments, be open to change and work for the community, and not just for ourselves and our previously established ideas and emotions.
This by itself wouldn't be a problem, but there are three aspects which make it very problematic:
The first is when these theories are expoused as The Truth, instead of as a theory or philosophical thought. Nobody here has a patent on Truth, and nobody is in the position to tell others what it is.
This comes together with the second issue, which is preaching and 'holier than thou' attitude from those who bring those New Age theories and consider anybody who is skeptic, questions or points out flaws, as 'closed-minded materialists', or not enlightened enough, or unevolved, or any similar idea.
Our forum has been built on the foundations of critical thinking, of scientific thought in the realms where scientific thought applies, of conscious criticism, of well backed and sustained arguments. This means that ideas presented here are susceptible to being scrutinized, reviewed, questioned. There are other forums, such as the ayahuasca forums or others, where there is more focus on the spiritual side of things, so feel free to go there if you prefer that kind of orientation and posting, but know that here the scientific method is a pilar of this community.
Many of us seem to question traditional religions and dogmas, but lately, often when one questions anything more 'alternative', it is sometimes almost seen as an offense, and the responses are often defensive, or the typical 'one-size-fits-all' argument of 'science doesnt know everything' is used.
If 'science doesnt know everything', then who knows maybe the computer just in front of you might be made by demons and might explode at any second, but nevertheless one does trust it because it works, because it was made with scientific knowledge that is reliable. So its somehow ironic that people choose to ignore science only when its convenient to their own beliefs. How about instead we realize, as all good scientists know, that science is a useful method with a certain range of applications, and that through it, isolating variables, we can find out things we could not otherwise, and we can make use of it. Science does not have monopoly over everything existing, but it certainly is the more reliable voice in many discussions, and hence why we use it.
The fact that science evolves, that knowledge is updated or changed is not an argument against science, but for it, because theories are falsifiable, because data can be reviewed impartially, unlike religious/tradition dogmas which are not passive to change. In other discussions, maybe through science we cannot directly test something, the discussion might be beyond scientific knowledge, at least temporarily, and this is important to know too, to accept it, to know when we can speculate and theorize beyond what we know. But of course, critical thinking still applies, and being conscious (and explicit) of the difference between an opinion and a fact, is essential.
I think its VERY important that we also notice the third issue at hand: The response from those who feel opposed to the ideas presented, the ones who are 'skeptic' or critical. Now, in the same way that I mentioned the foundations of our community, another very important aspect of our community is being respectful, communicating in a conscious way, not just venting our emotions and using strong words.
If one comes talking about a new age theory you dont agree with, dont say its "crap", explain why you think its wrong, show the arguments, point to peer-reviewed or trustable sources, dissect the misunderstandings and misleading affirmations. Saying something is "bullshit" or similar will just further degenerate the atmosphere of the nexus, will polarize the debate, and does not add anything constructive. Not only that, but this kind of response is equally against our stated attitude, and hence equally unwanted in this forum.
I hope we can all realize that different people will have different philosophical/existential orientations, but we must respect the different points of view, and respectfully state why we think one thing or another and give our arguments for it. Let us work together, making our voices as complementary and not mutually exclusive. Let us learn, evolve, accept when we're wrong, concede to other arguments, be open to change and work for the community, and not just for ourselves and our previously established ideas and emotions.
). I will try to improve on this in the future. 
