A clip from the OP episode that's worth another try: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51B8MzcxOX0
-
Features
The experience of God
- Thread starter Angry Floof
- Start date
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 34,082
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
This video contains content from Little Dot Studios, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds.
This video contains content from Little Dot Studios, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds.
That's so weird. Sorry. :/
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 34,082
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
This video contains content from Little Dot Studios, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds.
That's so weird. Sorry. :/
I am, of course, assuming that you have infiltrated Little Dot Studios legal department, and unbeknownst to them, sent D-notices to YouTube for Australian viewings of these videos.
Either that, or you have nothing to apologise for.
Except making me end a sentence with a preposition.
Nothing for which to apologise against.
Apologies are for me not needed here on.
Nothing for which to apologise.
braces_for_impact
Veteran Member
Having not viewed the video (I'm at work), I think that these experiences are part of being human. As humans, we interpret these experiences as best we can, through our current lens of culture, education, religion, etc. One person in this thread can pray to Jesus about their cancer and feel peace, I can meditate in the now and feel release from my depression, and a Jihadist can go to certain doom with a smile on his face and exultation in his heart.
I think the Eastern religions have explored these things better than the Western ones, nevertheless, there's a lot of superstition and woo surrounding such techniques, which only tend to conceal it's mysteries from us. I think what many fail to understand is the power of these experiences. Many an atheist has said how they can stand face to the sky, gazing at the stars and feel awe. That is not what many people that have had these experiences is talking about. It's so much more than that. These experiences can be rare and do not happen to everyone. Sometimes one can take drugs to feel them, sometimes it takes years of practice and discipline.
I think they should be explored, both from a scientific and psychological perspective.
I think the Eastern religions have explored these things better than the Western ones, nevertheless, there's a lot of superstition and woo surrounding such techniques, which only tend to conceal it's mysteries from us. I think what many fail to understand is the power of these experiences. Many an atheist has said how they can stand face to the sky, gazing at the stars and feel awe. That is not what many people that have had these experiences is talking about. It's so much more than that. These experiences can be rare and do not happen to everyone. Sometimes one can take drugs to feel them, sometimes it takes years of practice and discipline.
I think they should be explored, both from a scientific and psychological perspective.
T.G.G. Moogly
Traditional Atheist
I've had episodes of euphoria and calm where I felt like I had all knowledge. Those episodes lasted maybe a few seconds. But I never once thought about them religiously. They've diminished as I aged and I used their frequency to gage my mental and physical health. I had a shadow of one recently. Perhaps these are what religious folk are referring to when they experience their whatevers.
Thomas II
Contributor
T.G.G. Moogly
Traditional Atheist
I watched up to about 8 minutes. Didn't find the clip interesting. For one thing, if you put someone in a pitch black room where they can't see their hand in front of their face, and under these conditions where it's part of a show and things are staged, of course people are going to think there might be something else in the room. It naturally creeps you out, not to mention the fact that such a fear has been selected for because of its survival value. One hardly needs any suggestion of "supernatural." Really lost me there with the phoniness. Too many psych experiments in college I guess.
I watched up to about 8 minutes. Didn't find the clip interesting. For one thing, if you put someone in a pitch black room where they can't see their hand in front of their face, and under these conditions where it's part of a show and things are staged, of course people are going to think there might be something else in the room. It naturally creeps you out, not to mention the fact that such a fear has been selected for because of its survival value. One hardly needs any suggestion of "supernatural." Really lost me there with the phoniness. Too many psych experiments in college I guess.Really interesting!
The point of putting people in the dark space was to observe who got scared and who didn't. Derren was looking for someone who was not given to fear and conjuring up ghosts out of darkness and suggestion. He was narrowing down to the most challenging subject to manipulate into believing in God. Derren knows how humans operate and that people given to fearful reactions are more likely to believe in spooks. Rather than choosing whoever said they were not god believers, he picked someone who demonstrated that she doesn't react with fear and superstition in a situation designed to evoke fear.
Thomas II
Contributor
I watched up to about 8 minutes. Didn't find the clip interesting. For one thing, if you put someone in a pitch black room where they can't see their hand in front of their face, and under these conditions where it's part of a show and things are staged, of course people are going to think there might be something else in the room. It naturally creeps you out, not to mention the fact that such a fear has been selected for because of its survival value. One hardly needs any suggestion of "supernatural." Really lost me there with the phoniness. Too many psych experiments in college I guess.Really interesting!
But the end is the best part! It shows that the origin of these "experiences" is our own suggestible mind, and not something external or supernatural.
To me, the lack of this supernatural figure does not detract from the experience of life. Just the opposite.
But it does put the responsibility to make this planet a heaven or a hell squarely on our shoulders...
One can also experience harmony, and enjoy it, and embrace it...
Last edited:
T.G.G. Moogly
Traditional Atheist
I agree with that and did you notice that he chose his subject carefully? If you've ever sat through one of these "demonstrations" the host chooses his subjects carefully. Needless to say I was never chosen. Made lots of eye contact repeatedly throughout the session but was never chosen. They know who to pick because they want to elicit an emotional response. That's the whole point. The clip was designed to do precisely that and to primarily entertain the viewers and thereby market and sell a product.
Sure, gods are whatever we make them. I just thought the whole thing was a bit over the top with the setting, music, lighting, etc. It was as much entertainment as anything.
I think you're missing the point entirely. He purposely did not pick anyone who seemed like an easy target. He specifically wanted someone who would not be easy to manipulate.
Derren Brown explains this clearly throughout the video and throughout almost all of his shows and demonstrations, sometimes afterward so as to not ruin surprises for the audience (as in his amazing stage shows), but the TV specials almost always come with a running commentary of explanation as to how and why the manipulations work, and how and why it's our ordinary humanness at work.
Of course it's entertainment. It's also educational. Anyone can be manipulated into god beliefs with the right suggestion and setting, but it also takes mad skills in understanding how humans operate to get certain kinds of minds to do so. If you can understand how one person can purposely manipulate you, you can then see how a lot of influences and events occur in your life also serve to manipulate you in the same way, only with no one to credit or blame for it.
Charlatans pick the easy targets, which would be a lot of us, because a lot of us don't seem to be inclined to apply to ourselves anything we learn.
I would invite you to watch one show he did called "The Assassin: Shooting Stephen Fry, about a guy he made into a murderer who shot Stephen Fry. That one took hypnotic exercises and a lot of conditioning working with Derren one-on-one before the time to pull the trigger, but it worked. This normal, decent, sweet guy shot Stephen Fry.
It's not just "those people" who hold a certain ideological identity, or who follow a certain religion, or who have an "evil" gene or some shit, or are inherently weak or bad in any way that is not shared by every last one of us, who commit atrocities. Under the right influences, circumstances, conditioning, pressures, emotions, etc., any of us could be that person. In ways that all of us share but few of us are aware of, we are whoever we demonize in the world.
If there's any useful take-home from watching Derren Brown shows, it's that we are all potential Manchurian candidates. Not that there's a big chance of anyone purposely choosing any of us for that kind of thing, but to me that doesn't matter. We all still operate under the same cognitive mechanisms that Derren takes advantage of. We ARE manipulated all the time via those mechanisms and that lack of awareness. It's just not with anyone in particular in charge of it or doing it in purpose. What's important is that we are mostly unaware of how we operate. We'd rather believe the self image story or get along with someone or be acceptable or whatever to notice what's actually going on.
Also if you watch a lot of Derren Brown, you'll soon notice that he is fearless - or you might say confident or even kind of evil at times - in his willingness to take control of someone else's behavior and thoughts and drive them to do appalling things. The subjects are too busy obeying social norms and responding to subconscious needs for acceptance, among other influences, and lacking in awareness or understanding of our own minds, to defend themselves against his techniques.
I don't know about you, but I find loads of useful stuff to learn from all this. I bet if they tried, anyone could find something more in the video than "Ho hum, someone's being manipulated. Must be for money or something distasteful like that. I'm mildly offended and uncomfortable but I don't really know why so I'll say it's superficial entertainment and not go any further with it."
This is too long of a post already, but I could go on and on.
T.G.G. Moogly
Traditional Atheist
In my view he picked someone he thought would be easy to manipulate - and I agree - but that he wants his audience to believe and think would not be easy to manipulate. He picked that person based on the criteria you mention.
I should add that I agree with you that we can all become monsters, and perhaps I just don't wish to be reminded that it is so possible given conditions. In fact I tell people this very thing while they continue to disagree. They are not able to appreciate the person they are talking about, the monster, his life. I can just do that better than others perhaps, so I know I can become the monster. I know I am the monster and I have to keep it under control.
That said, however, becoming the monster involves a change, a kind of mental illness taking over, and I know that too. It's impossible to be both at the same time.
DBT
Contributor
Rather than anything it may say about the nature of the world, the experience of 'god' is far more revealing of the psychology of the person.
free radical
New member
From what I gather so far most religious people believe that anything good that happens is gods doing and all bad is the Devil ,Satans fault..
Underseer
Contributor
Theists read fancy arguments by better educated theists, but don't quite understand the argument, so what comes out when you talk to them doesn't really make sense.
I believe that when theists talk about the "experience of god," what they are trying to do is talk about the experience of consciousness and/or thought that is often used as an argument for substance dualism (such as arguments by Plantinga):
You have the experience of having thoughts, therefore thought cannot be explained by merely physical processes, therefore there must exist a magical non-physical "soul" from which your thoughts and decisions originate. It's a bad argument.
I believe that when theists talk about the "experience of god," what they are trying to do is talk about the experience of consciousness and/or thought that is often used as an argument for substance dualism (such as arguments by Plantinga):
You have the experience of having thoughts, therefore thought cannot be explained by merely physical processes, therefore there must exist a magical non-physical "soul" from which your thoughts and decisions originate. It's a bad argument.
Yeah, and just in the asking, some attention has to be turned to the actual experience for them. Like being asked to describe what having poison ivy was like last summer. You can't avoid turning your attention to that, or to the memory of the sensations of that, however distorted, if you want to describe it. If there really hasn't been any such memorable first-hand experience they'd call God, then they're probably an ideological believer.
I respect experiences of whatever kind ('respect' not to be confused with 'approval' or 'disapproval'), however people want to talk about them. I see that respecting experience has a way of teasing irrational ideological loyalty out into the light where what's true and what's not is easier to see, and what's not true in it can't possibly negate a lived experience (at least, not without the kind of coercive, fearful, abusive conditioning that religion is famous for).
T.G.G. Moogly
Traditional Atheist
And also, religious people have this habit of objectifying language. Generally speaking they are very poor observers, so that if there is a word they automatically equate that word with something that exists external to their brain, something that is more than a sound someone else made and that was registered by their senses. For them, observation does not lead to conclusion. Instead, the process is reversed.
An example would be that according to many religionists we (our bodies) are designed and created by god. The reason that design breaks so easily and has so many problems is because we disobeyed god. I on the other hand look at that same body and conclude it was not designed by some magic space creature precisely because it breaks so easily and I could easily have made it a lot better if I had the means. My observations come first, and hence I can see how to make improvements. Their "observations" are made to fit their belief so they have to invent more conclusions to account for the conflicts between what they see and what they already believe. It's a giant mindfuck that they are unaware of.