Eidetic imagery and fantasy prone people/the occult

G K GRAY gord at homostudy.win-uk.net
Mon Jun 24 16:35:50 EST 1996

In article <4q7ohmbmrsc.fsf at hp>, ??? (oszarazi at hp.cuug.ab.ca) writes:
> >  What are these beliefs then? I'm referring to a very narrow range of 
> >  beliefs. Please let me know what your beliefs are in detail, then I might
> >  be able to tell you if I still feel that they're odd.
>Interestingly, that last comment itself is "odd."  Personal _feeling_
>as to whether or not something is "odd" might not be all that useful
>for any purpose, except perhaps for the observer.  Or more aptly, any
>oddity is, and can only be "odd" in reference to some arbitrary
>personal norm.
>Ultimately, the notation of it conveys no information whatsoever to
>anyone, except perhaps to the noter of the oddity -- i.e.  his
>notation of "oddity" helps to refine his own definition of reality
>.... in some sense it permits a truer localization of his own
>"reality".  A refinement of his own hallucination.
>But interestingly enough (or oddly enough as the case may be)
>*consciousness* doesn't belong on this newsgroup.

Why should consciousness *not*  belong to this newsgroup? After
all, it is being studied piecemeal by neuroscientists in
collaboration with experimental psychologists, physicists &c.


More information about the Neur-sci mailing list