Sunday, 13 April 2008
Does the Daemon ever make physical contact with the Eidelon?
Another question to elicit stimulating discussion from the group. Thank you in advance.
Posted by ken at 16:10
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
This is the blog site for all who are interested in the theory of what may happen to consciousness at the point of death as explained in the books 'Is There Life After Death - The Extraordinary Science Of What Happens When You Die' and The Daemon - A Guide To Your Extraordinary Secret Self
Fri 4th June 2010 @ 1200 - North Manchester FM
Mon 7th June 2010 @ 1500 - BBC Radio Merseyside
Mon 21st June 2010 @ 1500 - BBC Radio Merseyside
Thu 29th July 2010 @ 1930 - Eccles Library
Sun 12th September 2010 @ 1430 - Bolton Theosopy Group
Sat 23rd October 2010 @ TBA - Fairleigh Dickinson University, New Jersey, USA
Please check my website for further details:
Note: I also do lectures for non-public organisations. Please contact me for further details:
Ken: Rather cryptic ..... a question without a question ....
Anthony-- the question I'm asking is the title of the post :-)
One day into my fifty fifth year and my observational skills are already going down the pan. Sorry Ken.
A really fascinating question. By physical I assume you mean some form of communication located in time and space. In my research I have not come across anything other than psychological (i.e. non-physical). However I suppose that the way in which the non-dominant hemisphere of split-brain patients (such as the famed "PS")did have a left hind write a comment which could be reasonably argued as being a physical manifestation. I am really interested in what the other bloggers have to say in response to this question.
Well, Ken, I would answer strongly in the affirmative, if guiding one to go to a certain place, and enter a certain bar, etc. could be counted as "physical contact". Perhaps you might say that this merely constitutes psychological guidance. But it certainly feels physical, as though one were enveloped by a cloud of dense, warm air. And when the Daemon speaks, one actually hears. Well, these are my own experiences. Not sure if they apply.
Good grief, I thought Anthony had turned 54, not 55.
SM, he has turned 54, this therefore being his 55th year !!
My answer to Ken's initial question would be a relatively simple one.
*gasps of shock resonate through the blog*
NO! At least not in this plane of consciousness, and taking the interpretation of the question to mean the Daemon manifesting itself in a corporeal form.
Indeed for some, their Daemon makes no ethereal contact with the Eidolon either!
Karl; Not very smart of me, hmmm. (About Tony's age). . . So I guess what I spoke of is psychological contact, then.
SM, I would suggest that the sensation you mentioned, if Daemonic, would be a psychological direction, and not a physical manifestation.
This is presuming I have interpreted Ken's use of the word "physical" in the original question correctly of course.
Even Tony's example of the Left-Right brain split patient and the writing is, I would say, a psychological manifestation as well.
As I originally commented, I cannot see how the Daemon could physically present itself to an Eidolon in this plain of consciousness.
In the universal field of consciousness however, as my own theory goes (very much inspired by Tony and ITLAD), it certainly can, and I would assert that it indeed does: a prime example being dream imagining and even Lucid Dreaming.
I purposely refrained from qualifying "physical" to see you all interpreted it.
Would not "hearing a voice" (such as Jaynes did) amount to physical contact? Through whatever means, the Daemon produced an effect equivalent to a physical event.
I think you've negated your own assertion there.
In the first sense (pun intended), subjective "hearing" is not a physical phenomena but an olfactory neuronal reaction.
If this "voice" was to be heard objectively (by which I mean within the empirical observation of more than one individual) then it would indeed be a physical manifestation. BUT (and it's a J-Lo (a big BUT)), in the Jaynes example, this voice was perceived inside the subjective phaneron of consciousness and it therefore cannot be argued, I would assert, that it is a physical manifestation.
oops, meant auditory neuronal reaction and not olfactory
(been talking to my friend Emma who has smell precognition and I have olfactory on the mind - sort of)
So, one person experiences an auditory (or olfactory or tactile or ...) neuronal reaction and it's not a physical manifestation but if two experience it it is?
Would that not require some independent determination that what each experienced was, indeed, from the same source and the same "thing" (to use very imprecise language)?
Furthermore, isn't each person simply experiencing an auditory neuronal reaction? So how is that different than one person experiencing it? Again, it seems that we would need some third-party, independent determination that the source of the reaction was outside the consciousness?
Is that your assumption --- that a physical manifestation always originates outside the consciousness of the person and so the voice heard is a "real" voice rather than a phantom one?
Ken: well nearly, but not quite !
In the question you ask, unfortunately you missed out the pivotal word in my original point I made, in which I said:
"subjective "hearing" is not a physical phenomena but an auditory neuronal reaction. If this "voice" was to be heard objectively (by which I mean within the empirical observation of more than one individual) then it would indeed be a physical manifestation as its causality must be physical in the first instance. But in the Jaynes example, this voice was perceived inside the subjective phaneron of her consciousness and it therefore cannot be argued, I would assert, that it is a physical manifestation as the voice was ONLY heard in her phaneron, thus being a psychological/Neuronal manifestation."
So to answer your question: No, I'm not saying that in the way you put the question: What I am saying is that if more than one person - or even a thousand people, empirically witnesses such an experience as you describe, contemporaneously, then it cannot, by definition, be a purely subjective Daemonic experience can it???
So the one person hearing something (where others don’t) is experiencing a non-physical causality meaning a psychological/neuronal causality in their own phaneron and any communication with the Daemon is therefore also not physical, and any action the Eidolon takes while being a physical effect of the cause will again NOT be a Daemonic Physical Contact as the physicality is being done by the Eidolon. If two or more people experinece what you say then the cause is indeed physical and the effect similar but again with no Daemonic physical involvement.
If you and I, in some fabulous ale-house somewhere Ken, (you're round obviously); if we both heard a bell, at the same time, then it can be argued that there must be some physical causality (ie, a bell being rung) which, in this location of a pub, would bring much sorrow as the pub is probably approaching closing time!
If only you heard it though Ken, and not I, nor indeed any of the X numbers of others in there, then the causality lies outside the physical (the bell NOT having been rung) but in the emphemeral world of the psychological/neuronal make up of your phaneron.
(Daemonic Guidance) - The Daemonic effect thereby influencing you but not other subjective and disparate consciousness.
If the bell is a physical object being rung (which we all hear), then in each of our subjective phanerons there should be a similar effect resulting from the causality, ie we both/all hear it at roughly at the same time (allowing for a milliseconds discrepancy in Conscious Buffer studies) and look around. (Given typical brains free from any atypical abnormalities).
If the bell is NOT a physical object but is heard in your own subjective consciousness only, (amidst others who do NOT hear it) then it could indeed be communication with your Daemon or suchlike, but I would assert this communication to be stemming from your own psychology/neuronal synapses and to be ethereal and not physical.
However, any cause which makes The Daemon communicate subjectively like that may cause a physiological effect within the Eidolon. The Eidolon is not experience a Daemonic Physical Manifestation but is acting out Daemonic guidance. The effect may well be physical but it is Eidolon manifested with no personal physical Daemonic contact.
Surely ALL Daemonic contact is ethereal and within psychology and neurology and hence impossible to be in physicality on this plain of existence.
I think there is an important distinction to make at this juncture: Causality and Effect in Objective Consciousness (that is more than one phaneron), can manifest a Corporeal Effect, when more than one person hears something at the same time – they can stop the bell ringing as it is ringing in physicality.
BUT, Causality in Subjective Consciousness (that being one person who can hear something where his close friends around the same table can not) can only produce an effect through the Eiodolon itself and using reverse causality we see the cause to be within the neurology of the person for they could not stop the bell ringing as for them, it wasn’t ringing in physicality at all.
And no that isn't my assumption you posit at the end of your comment: I say that a physical, corporeal manifestation of the Daemon is surely impossible on this plain of our consciousness. However, as I state that we are indeed all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively then taking Consciousness to be a Universal Wave, containing the Aquatic Records, The Book Of Life and The Information Universe etc, whereby all that has ever happened and can ever happen lies on these Waves, taking Niels Bohr's Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, our brain, with our eyes open and our senses receiving then world as wee see it actually observes this Consciousness Wave and collapse it into individual Subjective Particles of Consciousness, or in other words, all of us!!! We can then tap-in to the Objective Consciousness and the Consciousness Field to help explain deja vu, precognition and synchrondipitous ((c) Anthony Peake); meetings and events with Daemonic guidance remaining an unphysical relationship with us on this plain of Consciousness but existing in holistic glory on the Consciousness Field, and in dreams we can be shown such.
So, if one person experiences an Auditory Neuronal Reaction through hearing a Bell, that others around them cannot hear, then they have had a Subjective Consciousness Experience and it's not a physical manifestation because the cause of the initial sound is itself not physical (as The Bell has not rung in physicality), but the sound is residing in the Psychology/Neurology of the one who heard the Bell. So this person cannot STOP the bell ringing as it has not been ringing in physicality.
Following on from that, if TWO or more people experience an Auditory Neuronal Reaction through hearing a Bell that ALL of the others around them can also hear then they have had an Objective Consciousness Experience as their Subjective Consciousnesses shared the experience and it is a physical manifestation in this case, but not Daemonic as the cause of the initial sound (The Bell)is itself physical, therby allowing the group to cease the effect physically by stopping the bell ringing.
Whew! This will take some time to digest. Thank you for your patient and detailed explanation.
But one immediate follow-up question: Am I correct to assume that you assume a Daemon is restricted to interaction with its own Eidelon, and its own Eidelon only?
Again, in this plain of consciousness yet!
However, on higher states of consciousness then I do believe the Daemon may be able to manifest itself to us in dream imagining and Lucid Dreaming.
I can explain more but given that it is 2:30 am here and I need to be up at 6:00 am I could do with at least trying to get some sleep but with my legendary Insomnia it's not a given !!
So take your time over my last two replies, I hope they make my position clearer but admittedly I could have done a better job if I'd spent more time on them.
Thanks Ken, interesting debate as ever, you're a grand man !
Look forward to catching up with what you think later tomorrow night.
The term "physical contact" made me think of people who report marks on their bodies after alleged alien abductions. Lately I've been giving some thought to the abduction phenomenon, and to the possibility that these "beings" are the same ones encountered during near-death experiences or drug-induced hallucinations. (I've just finished reading "DMT: The Spirit Molecule" after reading about it here on this blog.) Perhaps these beings are a manifestation of the Daemon. Maybe our Daemon is able to make certain physical changes to our bodies, such as curing some ailments, and perhaps this is evident in reports of alien encounters in which the aliens, or beings, perform experiments or operations on the abductees -- perhaps these operations are simply the manner in which our mind interprets what our Daemon is doing to help us. I personally believe that such encounters do not take place on the physical plane, even though they apparently feel very real to those who experience them. However, I'm very open to the idea that the results can have physical manifestations, such as a cure for an illness. Given the restorative power of a good night's sleep, I often wonder what goes on in our minds and bodies overnight that can have such beneficial effects on our health (especially since science still doesn't appear to have a satisfactory answer for the exact purpose of sleep).
Susan Marie, I too made the mistake of adding an extra year to our Fearless Leader!!! Well, as Marilyn and Kylie, we are allowed some error!!! And Hey!!! Wait for me if you are entering bars and being enveloped in warm dense air!! What else would there be, surrounded by our virtual ale-infused friends?
Does pain qualify as a physical manifestation? 11 years ago my son was roused from sleep by severe ear pain just in time to save the house from burning. Once the chaos was under control he claimed his ear was fine. He described the pain as "someone pulling on my ear really hard".
(Robin jumps feet first into this brain-pool of a blog)
Dreamer; As someone who seldom sleeps I can offer a controversial answer to your question!!
(another day though)
Now, as to your alien analogy: I have to say I don't follow the logic I'm afraid, especially your statement "Perhaps these beings are a manifestation of the Daemon". The Daemon "exists" within the subjective phaneron of an Eidolon. Any communication between the two is ethereal and therefore non-physical. And "marks" reported by alleged alien abductees were either subconsciously self-inflicted or indeed actually made by extra terrestrial beings, but I don't see how that links to the ideology of The Daemon? It could just be that I've had a very long day and it's the wee small hours of the morning and yet again I have a mind that is wanting to discuss Quantum Chromodynamics with myself!!! Grrrrrr!!!
Robin; personally, I would answer NO to your question, and I'll try to explain why.
"Does PAIN qualify as a physical manifestation?":
Pain is a subjective conscious experience which exists purely in the neurons and synapses with the brain. There is NO physical aspect to pain, you just think there is!! You stub your toe and you think it hurts, only because your brain tell you it does (simple anethetics prove such to be true).
The example you give regarding your son is another wonderful example of Daemonic Guidance however, I wouldn't say it was a physical manifestation of the Daemon but merely a neuronal trigger (after all the Daemon itself also resides within our neuronal structure)
ps, I hope you enjoy paddling in the paradigm pool of Peakeianisms !!
Or Something !!
I am still thinking about Karl's ideas on this topic and hope to post a comment soon. But ...
DREAMER-- reading your comment about aliens immediately brought to mind one of the scenes from my Prednisone-induced meditation which I shared in the post titled: "Psychotic episodes of the illusion of reality". It's the one where I was flying through the paper mache images and got to the end to catch a fleeting glimpse of someone/thing behind the black "curtain" in the green (little green men from Mars?) light. These seemed to be observers of some kind who may have been "in control" to some extent.
Don't know how relevant it is, but I did make the connection.
Hi Ken; yes, sorry about that!!! My ideas take a few days for me to fully understand so goodness knows how others get their heads round them.
I'm interested in your comment to Dreamer re her alien analogy and especially your "episode".
I can't help but suspect, using your own Jungian knowledge, that you could maybe psychoanalyse the episode from an objective viewpoint rather than your subjective one!
So to add to your current musings on my comments can I add the following:
How would you use Jung as a tool to deconstruct the symbolism of your episode?
That post of yours was fascinating. These "observers," or "beings," or whatever they are, seem to be a common thread in so many different types of experiences.
Sorry about the confusion -- I probably wasn't being very clear. (Actually, when I start thinking about these things, I'm not even clear to myself.)
I think what I was trying to say was that I don't think there are actual, "physical" aliens, but that maybe when people think they've seen aliens (and my apologies to those who KNOW they've seen them), what's really happening is that their Eidolon has made contact with something -- maybe the Daemon, and possibly several other people's Daemons as well -- which the person then interprets as aliens, or beings, or transcended masters, because that's the best way their mind can interpret what they've seen -- the Eidolon can't actually "see" the Daemon in its true form, because it doesn't *have* a physical form. And as for physical manifestations, such as marks, or health changes, well, I guess what I'm wondering is whether these physical changes can be created by the mind, and whether maybe the Daemon could have an influence on that.
Of course, maybe there really are aliens, and maybe they have nothing to do with the Daemon. In any event, I'm inclined to think that if aliens, etc., do exist, they exist on a non-physical plane, i.e., they don't arrive in physical spaceships and climb through your bedroom window and implant things in you physically. They exist in the same realm where dreams, NDEs, hallucinations, etc., take place -- the realm of the Daemon.
And all this makes me wonder if there is such a thing as "physical," anyway. If we are living in a Bohmian IMAX reality -- is ANYTHING really physical? I have problems thinking of things in terms of physical and non-physical these days, or as real versus not real -- and I REALLY confuse myself when I try to think about the difference between death and near-death in an ITLADian context where death is not in fact possible -- but I know that's the subject of another post.
(Sorry if this makes no more sense than my original comment on this topic!) :)
Thank you for expanding a little on your thoughts, I can understand where you are coming from now (even if we can't do so with any aliens !!!) *giggle*
It's an interesting idea and I'll give it some thought, thank you.
Hmmm! Subjective Conscious Daemonic manifestations in alien form! BLIMEY!!
And I agree with your final comment regarding the possible illusion of all physicality. Taking David Bohm's Implicate Order of Quantum Mechanics and some of the writings of Karl Pribram (and also Tony Peake), the holographic world ideology may well be the true one, in which case all physicality is transcient.
*wonders if I really need to bother putting my bins out today or not*
In your eloquent and equally extensive comments to me you said, "the effect may well be physical but it is Eidolon manifested with no personal physical Daemonic contact." So, the Daemon does "something" and the Eidolon, itself, fires the neurons that send the signals to the brain which are interpreted as a voice, pain, physical touch, etc.?
I think I agree with this. In Jungian psychology, a triggered complex can cause definite physiological effects and there is nothing physical about the complex at all.
But, as you also say, "Surely ALL Daemonic contact is ethereal and within psychology and neurology ..." The "within ... neurology" aspect is interesting. Can we really be sure that the Daemon is not tickling our neurons which causes them to fire and present us with the manifestation of a heard voice or felt touch?
On the other hand there is the tried and true "British Standard (BS) Duck Test" which basically says:
If it looks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's probably a duck.
So, even if it is the Eidolon who fires the neurons which produce the voice (or pain or touch) the end result is that a voice IS heard in exactly the same neurological manner as if the Daemon had physically whispered into the Eidolon's ear. So, the initial cause may not have been physical contact but the end result is indistinguishable from physical contact.
Thank you for your comments, I almost completely agree with your point, yes.
Where the slight dispartity occurs is in the philosophy of exactly where the Daemon lives.
Neurology would suggest somewhere like the Pineal Gland, as this is the only part of the brain that exists in singularity, (all other parts of the brain having a mirror opposite in the alternate hemisphere).
Now, given that the Daemon resides within our consciousness it therefore is a logical assumption that it has a home within our brain. It's a moot assumption but go with it for a second.
If the Daemon does have a home within our brain, Pineal Gland or otherwise, then it itself may be able to stimulate the neuronal firings without Eidolonic involvement, which is an interesting concept if you really sit down and think about it!
So, taking it then into Jungian terms, which I know is your speciality, I hope you can see the trigger mechanism between what is a subconscious empiricism and a conscious action.
But thank you, as ever, for wonderous debate and input Ken, I value it immeasurably.
OR "If I am aware that it looks like a duck and I am aware that it swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then I'm aware that it's probably a duck."
But how accurate is our awareness of our own empiricism anyway????
And I would say that any subjective auditory sensation (being one experienced solely by oneself, within the ethereal) is not physical as it derives from within consciousness and is presented within consciousness. If such a Daemonic whisper was then to be heard objectively (by which I mean to others as well as yourself) then I would agree this to be a physical manifestation, however all Daemonic communication (to date) has been subjective.
This may be challenged once Tony meets with the young man he talks of in his Daemonic Contact post, but I shall reserve comment until such new evidence is presented.
In many ways this particular post - and series of comments - is following the development of one of the major issues of modern philosophy. That is how can a non-physical thing such as a soul or consciousness bring about a physical effect i.e. movement. Is this not one opf the major arguments against Cartesian Dualism? It is one of those subjects that can never have a satisfactory conclusion because there is no real answer. However this show sjust how amazing this blog is becoming!
Yes I agree, fabulous isn't it!! Which is primarily why I chose the Descartian Reflective Cogito as a construct for my comments in the last reply to Ken, marked Ken (2).
I'm not A Dark Philosopher for nothing !
I wrote the following in the Jaysi (as Doppelganger) "We make decisions before we know it" post last evening, but I feel it is pertinent to this discussion also so I shall repeat it.
"Rene Descartes famously said "Cogito Ergo Sum", or "I Think, Therefore I Am" - Now, is the consciousness that says "I Think" the same consciousness as that of "I am"?
I would say not, as the consciousness that says "I Think", given the existence of a Consciousness Buffer, should in actuality, as a secondary activity, be saying "I Am Aware That I Think".....Therefore I Am.
Now, this suggests that everything that we attribute to "I" such as "I see", "I hear" and even "I decide", should in truth be stated as "I am aware that I see", "I am aware that I hear" and "I am aware that I decide".
In this instance, there in no specific pre-decision as concluded from this research, but merely more evidential research towards such a consciousness buffer which results in a primary and secondary activity within subjective consciousness."
Descartes' Cogito, within his Cartesian Dualism, is the perfect metaphore, as also employed by Sartre, to re-define the duality of consciousness, leading to my own theories on the Consciousness Field and subjective collapse of consciousness waves (about which I really must finish a post of its own).
Post a Comment