On being Exterior, your views ?

[uniquemand]

No, it would be 100 different people having a subjective experience that they agree upon. That doesn't make it objective.

[Mark A. Baker]

Let's make a simpler experiment:

I put seven (7) pencils on a table and let one hundred (100) people count them and they all come to the conclusion that it's seven (7) pencils in our agreed number system using base ten. Would that be objective?

It's agreed upon.

No. Each individual has in his own mind a state of knowledge about the "fact" of how many pencils there are. That is knowledge and it is innately subjective.

Positing an "averaged value" of subjective knowledge does not make for "objective knowledge".

Nor does a state of knowledge need to correlate to what you think to be a fact. Modern physics is to some extent an attempt to address logically and empirically the lack of correlation between apparent behaviors and measurable phenomena.

However, some love Picasso's paintings and some hates his paintings. That's subjective. Mostly because it's not concrete and because there's some room for interpretetions.

What is "concrete" is subject to interpretation. There are many assumptions underlying your "example". Each of those inherent assumptions is subject to interpretation.

For example, light, is it to be interpreted as "wave", "particle", or "other"?

In counting seven (7) pencils there's not much room for subjective interpretentions.

This actually only seems to be "concrete" because of the assumptions you have made about what constitutes "seven pencils" and how others would "necessarily" agree with those assumptions. More generally the framing of a specific measurement is essential to its exact interpretation and that framing is itself a matter of interpretation.

In particular most of the assumptions that are made about "the world we live in" are newtonian. Those assumptions are known to be incorrect, although for the scale in which humans interact with their environment they are quite reasonable for "getting on with".

Just as a "Universal Theory of Everything" must account for everything, just so a "Universal Theory of Truth" must be seen to be true in all contexts and not just under a limited set of assumptions.


Mark A. Baker

[smartone]

When you go exterior,have you ever had the urge to look at naked lady's bathing.
I would,it would seem like a waste of an ability otherwise.

I've had the urge to look at a naked Gavin Henson.

[SweetnessandLight]

I've had all kinds of experiences all my life, including what are described as OT type stuff: shifts in viewpoints and sudden increase in perception, insights or knowing something without thinking about it, visual perceptions of other viewpoints beyond my own (exterior to my physical view in addition to perceiving thoughts and feelings) ...ability to influence people, animals and conditions in non traditional ways, etc., near death experiences, out of body experiences, etc. but I've had A LOT of awareness training and come from a long genetic line of consciousness raisers.

I can't take credit for "learning" it all, I think most of it is hard-wired into our brains, and our socialization "trains" us to filter out and consciously ignore sensations, perceptions, images, thoughts and feelings that seem to fall outside the boundaries of what is commonly accepted as "normal" by our culture. Look at the wide variations of spiritual (or non-physical) experiences that are considered "normal" for the diverse cultures of the world. Do a little casual research into cultural anthropology and you will get a completely different view on what is "normal" and "possible" for human beings to experience.

So the short answer is yes, I've been "exterior" with full perceptions (I actually think this is something most of us can do as a survival skill from our ancient hunter gatherer days) And no, I never did drugs!

I can't compare what I've experienced with Scientology OT training as I have not done those levels, but I wonder if the ability to get out of one's viewpoint of "self" is inherent in those who may have experienced it through various methodologies, and rather accidental to what those methodologies are. In other words, I do believe that we as a species can do these types of things, but I'm not sure it can be taught or trained (as sold in Scientology). In any event I think it is probably so subjective that no two people perceive or experience it at all in the same way.

I can also add that growing up in my family, everybody experienced these kinds of things that might be considered psychic or para-normal (beyond the norm), it was considered normal for us, and we were instructed not to show off or talk about it much with others, and only to use with others it in an emergency. (Wonder if that is a genetic memory of hiding and being protective from the burning times?)

I should mention that my genetic ancestry is heavily Celtic. We're a tribal people with GREAT survival skills! And LOTS of "second sight" among us.

[Student of Trinity]

False duality. ALL experience is subjective, including that which you choose to label as "objective".

I've heard a few things about the limitations of language, thanks. And once you've paid your dues in seminar hours, you know, very little has changed. If you just want to look at shapes in the clouds and assign names to them, be my guest. If you don't want to get eaten by tigers, though — well, it's funny. Some things, the people that believe them are still there to talk to the next day. The people that don't, aren't. And the tigers look fatter.

So forget 'subjective' and 'objective', then, if you somehow don't find those terms useful. My question remains, regardless of how you label my categories. Can I gain information about simple yes-or-no facts while 'exterior,' that I didn't know before, and can afterwards check?

This is not an arbitrary issue. If there is such information, then my experience is one that other people can be directly involved in. They can count out marbles on the table while my body's in the other room, and then listen when I declare how many marbles were there, and see that I get it right every time. Or not. Otherwise, all they can do is listen to my story. It's TV versus Nintendo.

If you don't find that feature important, well — watch out for tigers.

[Hubbardianen]

No, it would be 100 different people having a subjective experience that they agree upon. That doesn't make it objective.

Isn't that how you define objective?

From dictionary: "not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion."

Of course there could be some degree of objectiveness.

Is there something as objective at all?

Hubbard (and other people) talks about having different universes. I just can't understand how we all can create the same universe at the same time? Highly theoretical question of course.

[uniquemand]

This is a reference to the universe "out there". I believe it exists, I just don't believe that any individual has a complete or accurate map of it, though some maps are more accurate than others.

[SchwimmelPuckel]

Here's the straight dope on exteriorization. From a guy, me, who imagines this stuff like he was there himself! - It is a coldblooded and factual account of 7 minutes in a courseroom!

The female Course Supervisior when I did the Communications Course was a startingly beautiful woman. A woman that by her mere presence made all the male students 'unethical'. They mostly pretended they were not naturally.

So, when I was asked to do the TR8 I at first thought it was rediculous. How on earth could she expect me to be able to lift an ashtray using only my willpower?

But such was her beauty.. I would, and indeed could, do anything for her!

So I simply lifted the ashtray! - I just did it!!! - I was incredoulous!!

The heartbreakingly wonderful Course Supervisor laughed and was so happy for my win! - I became so enamoured with her being so happy because of me.

Like Mae West once said: "Give a man a free hand, and it will be all over you!" - I had a free ashtray!

Caught up in the moment of happyness and rapture I touched her everywhere with the ashtray. On her breasts and under her skirt. All the while I was sitting on the chair with my eyes open, not moving a muscle. I really looked like a dork! - But the ashtray was like a living thing.. Like my disembodied hand! - Chasing the Course Supervisor around the room. She screamed laughing and tried to grab the ashtray that flew around her like a busy moth, but I yanked the ashtray away and touched her somewhere else.

Finally she managed to grab it between her buttocks. It startled me and I suddenly realized that I wasn't behaving like a gentleman.

But the Course Supervisor had her sexual engrams and nesting implants in blatant restimulation. She wanted to play 'ashtray' and she wanted even more than that! - Her eyes filled with happy anticipation and short of breath. She was so endearing that I almost wished I had never become a $cientologist!

All my fault, because I forgot myself and behaved ungentlemanlike. Not like a scientologist at all! I had to decline her advances of course. I had to explain carefully how sex and all that was her GE acting up and how that would hamper her progress towards total spiritual freedom.

I showed her HCOB, 26 AUG 1982. Pain and Sex and this:

From the taped lecture "Flows: Patterns of Interaction" - 10 December 1952, by L.Ron Hubbard

THE GE IS A FAMILY MAN

The GE is a family man; the GE is lost without a family. It's very strange, but Homo sap is a family unit. The GE is built on that basis. It's fascinating, fascinating. It's not important to know it but a lot of your urges toward families and so forth are not thetan urges at all, they're the GE. The GE can't survive at all without a family unit. He's just as dead as a mackerel if he isn't a family unit, whereas your thetan is just dead as a mackerel if he gets too mixed up in family units.

You can't talk to GEs; they're kind of psycho. And by the way, you can fall into this dreadful trap with a GE. You see, he uses the MEST universe with which to build. He's gotten very, very bad off and he has to use MEST materials all the time.

So, you get this situation here with the GE, and your GE is busy: build, build, build, build, build. And, of course he's got to have a family to build with.

You get this terrific family thirst. And you get your GE surviving best and being loused up the most because of interfamily relationships.

And your thetan, by the way, can much more easily go into a group. Families are not good groups; they're bad groups.

Sigh! - So no romance came of that. I also had to report her to ethics of course. For having case on post and coming quite out of control.

But don't feel sad. Remember I'm a lying basterd! - While all these incredible stories are probably true, mine are most assuredly dirty lies told for the hellish fun of it!

* * * * * *
There more dubious success stories in this thread:
Dirty Despicable Lying Success Stories!

[Mark A. Baker]

So forget 'subjective' and 'objective', then, if you somehow don't find those terms useful. My question remains, regardless of how you label my categories. Can I gain information about simple yes-or-no facts while 'exterior,' that I didn't know before, and can afterwards check?

And THAT is an excellent question. It is the basis of much speculation about the reliability of "paranormal information".

In my experience the answer is "yes". Although the interpretation of such information is not necessarily a "straightforward process". Nor is it indisuptable or necessarily reliable. Hence, it can be, and has been, easily argued that the "correct answer" is "no". That argument has been going on for a long time and appears to be no nearer a resolution.

Personally, I don't view attempts to view metaphysical perceptions as a "window into the physical" as a useful exercise. The point of metaphysical explorations, whether logically or experientially based, is to examine that which lies outside the means of direct means of physical inquiry. That which responds to physical means of examination is best investigated through such tools. Accordingly, neither set of observations should be presumed to reflect "truth" wholly in themselves.

Empiricism is a provably useful tool for that which lends itself to physical measurement. Knowledge still remains the product of the subjective interpretation of such measures.

What is important is recognizing the limits of whatever tools one is using for whatever purpose so that the results can be correctly understood, and not subsequently misapplied through mischaracterization or misunderstanding.


Mark A. Baker

[SweetnessandLight]

Here's the straight dope on exteriorization. From a guy, me, who imagines this stuff like he was there himself! - It is a coldblooded and factual account of 7 minutes in a courseroom!

The female Course Supervisior when I did the Communications Course was a startingly beautiful woman. A woman that by her mere presence made all the male students 'unethical'. They mostly pretended they were not naturally.

So, when I was asked to do the TR8 I at first thought it was rediculous. How on earth could she expect me to be able to lift an ashtray using only my willpower?

But such was her beauty.. I would, and indeed could, do anything for her!

So I simply lifted the ashtray! - I just did it!!! - I was incredoulous!!

The heartbreakingly wonderful Course Supervisor laughed and was so happy for my win! - I became so enamoured with her being so happy because of me.

Like Mae West once said: "Give a man a free hand, and it will be all over you!" - I had a free ashtray!

Caught up in the moment of happyness and rapture I touched her everywhere with the ashtray. On her breasts and under her skirt. All the while I was sitting on the chair with my eyes open, not moving a muscle. I really looked like a dork! - But the ashtray was like a living thing.. Like my disembodied hand! - Chasing the Course Supervisor around the room. She screamed laughing and tried to grab the ashtray that flew around her like a busy moth, but I yanked the ashtray away and touched her somewhere else.

Finally she managed to grab it between her buttocks. It startled me and I suddenly realized that I wasn't behaving like a gentleman.

But the Course Supervisor had her sexual engrams and nesting implants in blatant restimulation. She wanted to play 'ashtray' and she wanted even more than that! - Her eyes filled with happy anticipation and short of breath. She was so endearing that I almost wished I had never become a $cientologist!

All my fault, because I forgot myself and behaved ungentlemanlike. Not like a scientologist at all! I had to decline her advances of course. I had to explain carefully how sex and all that was her GE acting up and how that would hamper her progress towards total spiritual freedom.

I showed her HCOB, 26 AUG 1982. Pain and Sex and this:



Sigh! - So no romance came of that. I also had to report her to ethics of course. For having case on post and coming quite out of control.

But don't feel sad. Remember I'm a lying basterd! - While all these incredible stories are probably true, mine are most assuredly dirty lies told for the hellish fun of it!

* * * * * *
There more dubious success stories in this thread:
Dirty Despicable Lying Success Stories!

I love this story!!! Schwimmy!!!!