• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

The case against Elves

Migrated topic.
Read this stuff about the history of elves, I found it really interesting and the early beliefs about elves are a nice link between DMT elves (Old World culture) with the souls/ancestors/dead of ayawaska (New World culture)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elf said:
elves appear to have been conceived as powerful and beautiful human-sized beings... Full-sized famous men could be elevated to the rank of elves after death... since Skuld was half-elven, she was very skilled in witchcraft (seiðr), and this to the point that she was almost invincible in battle. When her warriors fell, she made them rise again to continue fighting... since they had elven blood they were said to be more beautiful than most men... commonly described as semi-divine beings associated with fertility and the cult of the ancestors and ancestor worship. The notion of elves thus appears similar to the animistic belief in spirits of nature and of the deceased, common to nearly all human religions
Click to expand...
And it's interesting that dwarves were originally the undead, and could be described as 'dark elves', being very similar to elves but earthy, deathly, laborious and wise craftsmen, rather than beautiful etc. They weren't considered to be short until the 14th century, when they were 'sanitised' and made comical and mischievous. The elves and dwarves of the ancient Germanic cultures share similarities with Celtic faeries, who also used to look like people and were essentially 'the others'.
 
It seems that this thread died after I posted. so, sorry for killing this thread guys! Hopefully you guys just stepped out to think for awhile.
 
The thing with string theory is there is no experimental evidence yet for it. So it demotivates people to work on it.

But I think one step in looking for all this hyperspace extra dimension stuff is to actually look for evidence for extra dimensions which is within the realm of scientific inquiry. While putting a dmt elf in a test tube is impossible I don't think anything of the sort is required to investigate more of what is going on.

About the big bang the big bang is hardly a complete idea. We have evidence that the universe is expanding and that is was expanding in the past. The big bang is one potential explanation then for the history of the universe. Also there is no need to ask the question what was before the big bang because that question becomes meaningless if its right. But if string theory or ideas in string theory is real it opens up a much much difference possibility that the universe cycles.

There is also the possibility that our idea that the universe expanding is wrong but I doubt that there is more and more detailed information confirming that it is all the time. But again there could be something else going on.

Lots more to say on this subject but gotta run! WIll report at later date.
 
Alright I have been thinking this over the last few days. Lets see if we can push this discussion a bit further. Right now we have two view points. One (#1) that leans towards dmt entities being real separate in the sense that they are individuals a way as we are (ignore the philosophical stuff that we are all one on this because we must define the entities as something! Also they could be these connected beings living in some kind of universal conscious but still they are creatures things out there whether material or not, seems most people think they are not material which is acceptable). So ok we have conscious entities existing somewhere whether material or not and you can encounter them in the heightened/altered states of consciousness specifically those induced by dmt and its relatives.

The other view (#2) point one basically leans towards that this is all just your imagination running wild in a heightened state of consciousness. In a way like how people are able to hear voices in their head have multiple personalities etc.

There is a danger in saying "I know" anything so lets try to avoid such philosophical regressions which basically lead us back to the same questions. Also let me re-state again that I do not know the answer but I currently lean towards view number 2.

There is a thread on synchronicity so I don't want to get into that too much here as my opinion of that phenomenon is much the same. It cannot be tested under lab settings but to me the most logical answer is that its just coincidences, life has many.. Science does allow a framework for such coincidences to occur. No weird coincidence is beyond the odds. If the odds are 1 billion to 1 it can still happen. So I don't think it needs to be proven or disproven because its a phenemonen that requires nothing extra to explain it.

So are dmt entities real and how do we move further on this issue? I cannot rely on faith or faith based answers to these questions. Its just not right nor conclusive.


The DMT experience and entity contact is interactive. When you ask a question, you get a response. Imagine asking an elf about how the specifics of string theory really work... I recon in that extra dimensional state, Mr. Elf will gladly show you how it operates. He will vibrate a few different strings and do whatever the hell string theory describes. Possibly? Now what percentage of us DMT psychonauts know how to relate that "elven explanation" to higher dimensional mathematical theory? Can the DMT space be understood through higher dimensional theory? Of course! But who in this damned forum can do that? I betcha that none of us can. We are a bunch of idiots...(not in the top 0.2% of people with mathematics degrees, so no offense anyone =P)
Click to expand...

I like where you are going with this. Specifically about asking questions. But you obviously have thought about string theory so when you ask the elves about this you may be getting an answer (a visual or verbal answer) of something you already have thought about or are currently thinking about.

About designing a mathematical framework to explain hyperspace yes that lies completely out of the realm of my own personal expertise. In other words something I couldn't accomplish if I tried. Maybe someone out there can speculate more on how this could be done?

The trouble with designing an experiment to test out the elves intelligence is that the dmt experience is variable. Every time one smokes one does not encounter entities.

But an experiment could be performed much like that which can be performed on a psychic. In which one gets a question and has to formulate an answer based on what one thinks about under the influence of dmt. I don't think entity encounter needs to be a factor because on dmt you can ask questions and get answers without seeing any entity. But of course if a being does come out and give an answer that that certainly makes it interesting. Now lets say a statistically significant amount of people who smoked dmt got correct answers to the question that would at least say that dmt is either one intelligence enhancing or that dmt is giving someone some kind of enhanced psychic ability. Of course then a series of experiments could be designed to hint towards dmt being an intelligence enhancing drug at certain doses or a psychic enhancing drug at certain doses. Of course the questions or tests would have to be very well thought out to really make this kind of thing worthwhile but it could be done.

This is essentially why I do not believe psychics (besides hearing things from psychics or magicians who explain how they essentially fool people). Psychics or other weird phenomenon have been subjected to limited double blind trials and as far as I know has failed.

I think the same kinds of things could be done with dmt. Of course I know people may say well the elves are beyond all this stupid human science. They won't coorparate. But thats again giving up. I am not saying these kinds of tests really prove that they are real or not but it does provide evidence to begin asking further and more focused questions. Does anyone agree or disagreee or have any other kinds of tests or ideas that could theoretically be done?
 
No worries olderROM, you haven't killed anything. I've just been drawn into the alleged "real" world for the past few daze. Plus internet went down at home.
I'm actually on vacation rite now at a friend's house, don't have the time to formulate a good post at the moment but a response is coming. Please be patient. Might take another week before I get back home, fix the internet thingy, and get a chance to post again, but it's coming! I'm enjoying this WAY too much to drop it right now! :d
 
these thoughts are very comfortable to me. I'm not sure how else to preface this.


the idea of a conclusion seems preposterous to the tryptamine influenced conciousness

science is absolutely obsessed with conclusions
nothing in science is taken to be 'true' unless it is repeatable conclusive evidence.
if every person on the planet took DMT in some form or another...the majority would be affected in a profound way and eventually be instilled with a feeling of "contact". this does not seem to be a variable of the substance. (sure there is infinite variety in how this is shown to the subject. but this much is repeatable...there is a subject who must observe this thing. you will undeniably be this subject.)

there is no conclusion in a cycle. you may start at one point, come around and see that point again, but it is not the end...it just happens to be the place that you noted before.
the tryptamine conciousness is largely based on cycles.

so why is "science" so relied upon? why does "religion" instill such zealotry? which has caused greater vibrations in this universe...the atom bombs or the crusades? why does the word "proven" have so much value? why does the word "belief" have so much skepticism? every lifeform I have seen is a value-judging entity. why do so many of us place so much value in conclusions?

you can choose science or not science...to turn left or to turn right... but you CHOOSE. at this moment. maybe one moment you will be thrown into the tryptamine conciousness without premeditation. can you honestly say you would not be terrified? overjoyed? deeply sad? welcomed?
can it even matter what you think right now? it is hard to imagine not-time when you are immersed in time.
in this place, not breathing is called "death". it makes sense to say that on the flip side, not breathing is "waking up"
are there any lifeforms we have seen that have three of everything? or four? it seems like the vast majority comes in twos. paradoxes seem like they should be expected in a dualistic view. earlier in the cycle, there were single cells. ones. now we are at twos. perhaps threes and fours are in the future? it is not unreasonable to guess...

what part of conciousness is forever frustrated if it cannot answer distinctly 'yes' 'no' or 'maybe' ??
is it the ego??

you may say "state your sources"
but to me, the core of that statement implies to the individual "I am not a valid source"
but am I not the only source of me?
 
I think it's basically the statements like 'we have to kill person X/ all persons X, becausse god sayd so' that make some people a little weary of religion. Remember that osama bin-laden wants to kill all infidels, wich to his definition are even many muslims who don't believe exactly the way he does. That means he has the aspiration to kill at least 5 billion people. We don't know the excact amount of people hitler wanted to kill, but we know stalin killed about 25 million. So now we can conclude that osama has a 200 times greater thirst for blood than stalin had. So this could help putting the general wearyness of religion amongst some of us in some perspective.
 
I completely agree with Burnt's last post. Philosophers can be as wary against science as they like, and religious zealots as blind to it as they wish, but science is the only discipline so far with the capacity to prove and predict.

You can't think your way towards an answer on whether elves are sentient beings or not. You must experiment scientifically.
 
ohayoco said:
I completely agree with Burnt's last post. Philosophers can be as wary against science as they like, and religious zealots as blind to it as they wish, but science is the only discipline so far with the capacity to prove and predict.

You can't think your way towards an answer on whether elves are sentient beings or not. You must experiment scientifically.
Click to expand...


but yes you can think your way towards this. this is the greatest fallacy of science to me. the implication that your immediate felt present experience should be put on the back burner in favor of some scientific method. the implication that if you trust yourself and give into these experiences, yet do not emphasize finding some specific conclusive theorem, then you are labeled as crazy or unfounded.

it seems quite juvenile to say "if this cannot be proven by these recognized methods, then I cannot trust what I am experiencing"

science's devaluation of the self is at direct odds with the value of the self that psychedelics present you with. scientific progress with the mind and the self will consist of much fighting and stubborn behavior until science has a recognized facility for valuing the moment of present experience as something that is totally unique.
 
I am not disregarding the immediate subjective experience of individuals as invalid. Not at all that seems to be the initial response I get whenever I bring such topics up but that is not my intention.

Science can and is beginning to explain how these experiences happen at least at a chemical biomolecular level. Its not the whole story but its a start. Science does not have all the answers but that doesn't matter. Its one way of solving questions and coming up with answers.

My intention in these discussions to one figure how others have been influenced by this experience and two to use science as a tool to gain a deeper understanding of the experience. For example I have said it a number of times before but my imaginary friend has seen things in the psychedelic realm that really point to souls existing and afterlives and communication with ancestors. But was that real? The only way my imaginary friend can begin to answer that is through science. Subjective experience can never come to a real conclusion about whether or not I really was communicating with my dead ancestors. The only conclusion one can reach with subjective experience is a choice. A choice to believe it was real or not real. That is no different then faith or religion. It is my dream to move beyond faith and religion and start to really understand this experience.
 
burnt said:
Subjective experience can never come to a real conclusion about whether or not I really was communicating with my dead ancestors. The only conclusion one can reach with subjective experience is a choice. A choice to believe it was real or not real. That is no different then faith or religion. It is my dream to move beyond faith and religion and start to really understand this experience.
Click to expand...

and yet an answer seems to be right in here... no conclusions, only choices.
if you think that there is something other, something out there that is concrete that you can anchor knowledge and call it 'objective'...then you are still a ripe candidate for boundary dissolution
 
If you are saying that all reality is an illusion and thus all there is is subjective experience then you need to explain yourself. Too often I hear that argument and its in my opinion only founded on mystical experiences (or a mis-interpretation of modern physics) again a subjective experience. One prone to misinterpretation by mystics scholars clergy scientists and laymen.

SWIMs boundries have been dissolved enough times there is no need to repeat and repeat and repeat and wind up again with the same choice. That choice is faith. Faith is a cop out. Another way of saying "I give up" and fall in the ranks.

That is why science is the only way forward. There is an objective world out there, who claims there isn't? Our senses only interpret it thus creating our subjective experience but there is more that lies beyond our senses and our human (note human is the important word here) sensory experience.
 
Besides the fact that i realy like the old subjective/objective discussion mixed with the science vs religion stuff, i must say that i think it's realy cool that aparrently there is such a big case against elves that it never seems to end. Yo, down with the elves:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
 
burnt said:
If you are saying that all reality is an illusion and thus all there is is subjective experience then you need to explain yourself.
Click to expand...

if you imply 'illusion' to mean fake, untrustworthy, then no that is not my angle. 'illusion' as a veil, maybe... but all reality is YOU. is I. have you ever had an experience that is not your own?

burnt said:
That is why science is the only way forward. There is an objective world out there, who claims there isn't?
Click to expand...

there is an objective world out there? I would claim that there isn't. but that is a silly claim. more directly would be to point out your words "out there"
boundary dissolusion shows you that you are everything, that there is no "out there" or separateness.

having an objective vs. subjective drive is just another silly paradox.


burnt said:
Our senses only interpret it thus creating our subjective experience but there is more that lies beyond our senses and our human (note human is the important word here) sensory experience.
Click to expand...

this statement right here. where is there proof that something exists beyond our senses? how can there even be proof of this when we experience everything through our senses? this idea feels just as much like 'faith' to me as any other 'belief'.
 
We have tons of instruments and ways of detecting what we don't see. For example the vast majority of the electromagnetic spectrum we don't see or perceive. Yet we know its there. High intensity radiation can burn you. Radiowaves. Microwaves. There are a million examples.

boundary dissolusion shows you that you are everything, that there is no "out there" or separateness.
Click to expand...

What if I were to tell you that, that entire experience is a real illusion (haha funny way to phrase that but you know what I mean)? A trick of your brain. An inability of your brain to distinguish your physical body from its surroundings. That so far is just as valid of an explanation for boundry dissolution as your mystical explanation. One that has some scientific backing. We are all made of the same "stuff" so that is true. But are we all one? In some sense yes but in many other ways no we are not. Again you are relying on a subjective experience, the experience of oneness, to make your conclusions about reality. You see?

Does anyone see what I mean when I say what I said above?
 
xantus said:
burnt said:
Our senses only interpret it thus creating our subjective experience but there is more that lies beyond our senses and our human (note human is the important word here) sensory experience.
Click to expand...

this statement right here. where is there proof that something exists beyond our senses? how can there even be proof of this when we experience everything through our senses? this idea feels just as much like 'faith' to me as any other 'belief'.
Click to expand...

Well, there has to be something. Even if it would be just electrons in the computercircuits of 'the matrix' we would be jacked into.
To me it seems that if there would be no distinctions, there could be no perception as well.
Besides, you cannot deny the very existence of perceptions themselves wich, even if they would be just fantasies of some kind, would still be different from the consiousness that percieves them,but intheirvery existence also would have to exist as some kind of energy.Theywould have to obey some laws in order for you to find their existence plausible.
If it would require force to 'undo'their existence, wich is the case with all we perceive as plausible, then you could say that no matter what type of universe we would be in, they posses some kind of physicality. And they are in some sense independent as well.

if we would proceed along these lines, probably at some moment the elves would come along as well, and maybe we would be able to say something meaningfull about them.
It would be funny if we could reduce the elves to a part of ourselves and at that time we would have to conclude that neither we nor theelves realy exist in the way we thought innitially.
 
if we would proceed along these lines, probably at some moment the elves would come along as well, and maybe we would be able to say something meaningfull about them.
It would be funny if we could reduce the elves to a part of ourselves and at that time we would have to conclude that neither we nor theelves realy exist in the way we thought innitially.
Click to expand...

Yes this is why I think its important and meaningful to discuss this. Its fascinating. But I just can't lean towards something spiritual for an explanation until most other options are off the table. Spirit or god is always a possibility but why jump to that conclusion until there is no other? That's all. Also its just cool knowing how this stuff works it obviously interests us all to some degree.

Rooooock.
 
Back
Top Bottom