• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Can You Say Weltanschauung?

Free episodes:

Randall

J. Randall Murphy
Apart from established physical parameters like our body temperature and the Sun coming up every day and those kinds of things, it seems that the tendency is for everyone to think that they're normal and that it's everyone else who are the weirdoes. But if that's the case, then our perception of normalcy must be something entirely subjective. Or is it? What if the so-called weirdoes are actually more in tune with the truth than the so-called normal people, then isn't it really the weirdoes who are normal?

Words like "paranormal" imply that anything that is outside scientific understanding isn't normal, yet recent discussions here about the nature of consciousness reveal that consciousness remains beyond the grasp of direct scientific study. That means the very essence of our relationship to the world around us falls under the definition of paranormal. How do we reconcile such seemingly paradoxical realities? This is the thread for discussing these issues.

Starter Resources: World view - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Can you say Weltanschauung: Weltanschauung | Define Weltanschauung at Dictionary.com

NOTE: I had also wanted to include a poll question but the default close date is stuck on 7 days, making a poll pretty much pointless. Maybe someone could fix it to allow non-expiring polls again.
 
The Wikipedia article talks about the role of language in our worldview. Remember the comment Chris made during the Rosemary Ellen Guiley about how an unfamiliarity with the jargon of paranormal discussion makes it seem ridiculous? I think he's right, and since the late 20th century there has been an increasing tendency for paranormalists to fuse pop-science buzz words with paranormal theorizing. For example we hear them refer to alternate dimensions and quantum theory, suggesting that because those are scientific concepts they lend credibility to their ideas. Meanwhile those who are better informed in the actual science simply write it off as pseudoscientific. What we tend to miss in this divide is that regardless of the accuracy of the language, there remains phenomena we don't fully understand, and our struggle to understand them involves a natural tendency to label and catalog them in order to work them into our worldview.
 
I have less problem with people using such terminology/phrasing as quantum physics or alternate dimensions as long as it is presented as speculation and not fact. There is nothing wrong with using speculation in approaching a mystery there is a lot wrong with stating it as a fact. It seems to me that such manipulative jargon is par for the course and has been in existence for some time, only in words that were more suitable to that era. I.e other worlds, other realms, a world separate from our own, heaven, hell nirvana, hades etc. it hasn’t really changed all that much
 
I have less problem with people using such terminology/phrasing as quantum physics or alternate dimensions as long as it is presented as speculation and not fact. There is nothing wrong with using speculation in approaching a mystery there is a lot wrong with stating it as a fact. It seems to me that such manipulative jargon is par for the course and has been in existence for some time, only in words that were more suitable to that era. I.e other worlds, other realms, a world separate from our own, heaven, hell nirvana, hades etc. it hasn’t really changed all that much

Excellent observation, and it reinforces the idea that labels are essential to mapping these phenomena into our worldview. The psychic and ufology communities have made some progress in developing their own lexicon e.g close encounter, flyby, clairvoyance, clairaudience, but not everyone is familiar with them, so they are still outside the average person's "normal".
 
One man's speculation is another man's "list of possibilities". People can speculate about this or that, but I prefer making a list of possibilities, no matter how crazy, then speculating on the odds of likelihood.
 
One man's speculation is another man's "list of possibilities". People can speculate about this or that, but I prefer making a list of possibilities, no matter how crazy, then speculating on the odds of likelihood.

I tend to work the same way regarding the list of possibilities, but when evaluating how reasonable it is to believe a possibility, I prefer extrapolation to speculation.
 
One man's speculation is another man's "list of possibilities". People can speculate about this or that, but I prefer making a list of possibilities, no matter how crazy, then speculating on the odds of likelihood.

But then if one mans speculation is another mans list of possibilities and you like working from a list, aren't we talking about the same thing just different words ? .....kind of what this thread is about...as with any approach whether speculation or a list there is a rational way to eliminate extraneous results. As long as both ways use common sense...and rudimentary physics.
 
But then if one mans speculation is another mans list of possibilities and you like working from a list, aren't we talking about the same thing just different words ? .....kind of what this thread is about...as with any approach whether speculation or a list there is a rational way to eliminate extraneous results. As long as both ways use common sense...and rudimentary physics.

To clarify: Possibilities and speculation about the same subject matter creates a pool of general ideas from which to extrapolate. In that sense we're talking about "the same thing". However extrapolation takes it a step further by filtering those ideas into a hierarchy of what is more or less reasonable based on what we know to be facts or well established principles. This process includes the use of logic, science, critical thinking, and/or whatever else advances us toward the truth. So although we may be discussing the same subject matter, the idea of extrapolation, and your caveat, to quote: "As long as both ways use common sense...and rudimentary physics." are important additions to mere speculation alone.
 
Yeah, 6 of one...half dozen of the other........speculations-possibilities.................po-tay-toe...po-tah-toe (I prefer tater)....
I guess it's in the feeling I get from certain words.
Speculations are for wild eyed mouth-foamy true believers........
Possibilities are for the genteel intellectual to calmly provide a discourse on a number of alternatives(pipe in hand of course).;)
 
Yeah, 6 of one...half dozen of the other........speculations-possibilities.................po-tay-toe...po-tah-toe (I prefer tater)....
I guess it's in the feeling I get from certain words.
Speculations are for wild eyed mouth-foamy true believers........
Possibilities are for the genteel intellectual to calmly provide a discourse on a number of alternatives(pipe in hand of course).;)

Granted. upon looking at the definition of speculation and the way it's used I may not have a good grasp on its meaning. Going from your definitions though I have to consider myself a possibility person.
 
Apart from established physical parameters like our body temperature and the Sun coming up every day and those kinds of things, it seems that the tendency is for everyone to think that they're normal and that it's everyone else who are the weirdoes. But if that's the case, then our perception of normalcy must be something entirely subjective. Or is it? What if the so-called weirdoes are actually more in tune with the truth than the so-called normal people, then isn't it really the weirdoes who are normal?

Words like "paranormal" imply that anything that is outside scientific understanding isn't normal, yet recent discussions here about the nature of consciousness reveal that consciousness remains beyond the grasp of direct scientific study. That means the very essence of our relationship to the world around us falls under the definition of paranormal. How do we reconcile such seemingly paradoxical realities? This is the thread for discussing these issues.

Starter Resources: World view - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Can you say Weltanschauung: Weltanschauung | Define Weltanschauung at Dictionary.com

NOTE: I had also wanted to include a poll question but the default close date is stuck on 7 days, making a poll pretty much pointless. Maybe someone could fix it to allow non-expiring polls again.

I had to spend some time reading this through--and I have to say much of my thinking on these matters has changed so much that I feel like when I try to re-use the terms its almost as if I am walking revisiting a fondly remembered place from my childhood and realizing that my adulthood and experience has spoiled me forever from recapturing the first moment. I say this because I find myself balking at terms like "entirely subjective," simply because so much of what we are as subjects is already all around us....and directs our very existence.
Right now: this computer with a small thin black solar powered keyboard sitting on a faux granite formica covered slab of particle board attached on three sides to walls. The monitor staring back at me from a short distance in front of the keyboard with what appears to be a nuclear powered fluorescent light above it that flickers from time to time. To the side a subwoofer blasting out noise from whatever music I am listening to ...all of these things are the results of millions of souls pouring their subjectivity into the things around me...nothing in my existence is free of subjectivity--it is embodied subjectivity. My reactions are almost predictable from that point (what else are you going to do with all this stuff?).

So what's normalcy? That's an interesting question and I hate to say that it is the familiarity for which we are already dwelling in as we grow into the world. Now of course not everyone has my unique experience, but I doubt there are many in existent today who aren't surrounded by their own field of extra-subjectival beings (equipment, objects, art, food...) which have the same effect on others as it does to them (other proximate peers).

Better yet, there are days which I don't even realize what I have--it just gets used or consumed and I move about in a world with other people sharing the same world and never does the thought occur to me--like, for instance, when I hand in a report to my boss--that I can simply say "well, how do you know I didn't give it to you already. Are you sure you aren't just a subject with your own private thoughts without any connection to the outside real world? I gave you that report yesterday." No I am afraid before I was able to even articulate the "normality" and "familiarity" of the shared world I live in, I was already assuming it in my everyday activities.

Regarding the paranormal, I think its a horrid and meaningless term--I have up to this point, been writing these things down in this post and I haven't a clue how any of the processes in my body or mind have been processing all of this. Even though I know that somehow my brain and body functions (many breakdown scenarios in my own experience has reminded me as much: broken bodies and brains don't work very well!) are necessary for all of this to happen. Much less am I directly aware of anything like the transmission of signals, neuron synapses connecting and firing through axons, and other innumerable autonomic subsystem processes. Nope, the only thing I have is this little Fischer-Price mental playhouse where everything in my body seems telepathically controlled by my "thoughts" and simply does what I want--the rest is the man behind the curtain.
 
I'm more concerned about people who regard themselves as within the parameters of a so called social norm, but at the same time foist bad consequences of their own neuroses and personality disorders upon others without a moment's introspection because they have no need or want to know themselves. This is made even worse when they happen to be people in positions of authority. Whether it be authority over their own children, or in corridors of socioeconomic power. Read the news lately?

'Normal' is a perfectly valid term in the fields of medicine or aviation. In describing an individual's world view it's pretty well useless.
 
Back
Top