S.R.L., does that mean that you believe that there is no way to have "proof" in an arena of academic science?
In that case, let me turn the question around and drift into the hypothetical; if you were, by some means meeting your standards and your definition of the paranormal, to review evidence, or a collection of evidence, that proved your topic of interest in the field was, beyond all shadow of doubt, false, would your interest in that particular topic, or the broader topic, evaporate? Or, do you think you would continue to research these topics strictly for the campfire aspects?
I include in my own perception of the paranormal the aspect of suspension of disbelief as a necessary component to the complete experience of the medium. I relate it to Anton Levy's hypothesis on the nature of human beings and the psychological requirement the species has for engaging in ceremonies, superstitions, and/or experiences that require the willful application of suspension of disbelief. While I would definitely be considered a skeptic, and my main area of interest in the paranormal field is folklore, part of the consumption of that folklore is based around a willful, but temporary, suspension of disbelief. Listening to the stories and, in that moment in time, experiencing an emotional openness to "believe," on a profound level, what I'm hearing as fact. In that way, I think it may go beyond the campfire tale as an emotional experience, which is why I feel it is an art form that creates an experience that is very different from the majority of other forms of media.
It is similar to the campfire experience in that the form requires a community of lore-builders and believers to fortify the overall emotional experience.
To expand upon the original post, are there any other skeptics in the forums who feel similarly? Am I the only one who experiences the medium in this way? I feel like that's impossible.
There may be ways in which material / reductionist science will possibly unearth, and acknowledge the emergence of phenomena, however this will not be anytime soon. With the advent of information physics it just may be determined that there are an infinite number of realities simultaneously emerging outside of human perception, and / or comprehension, which may contain abstract forms of consciousness(s), or intelligence(s), occasionally piercing, interpenetrating, and interacting with Earth’s diverse biology. It may also be determined that consciousness is not in brain / mind only, rather having nonspatial, non-local qualities, existing outside of known space and time. As it has been suggested that the concept of dimensions should be considered a cultural artifact, and to be discarded. However, and with all due respect, if I were to be informed that ET or bigfoot were not to exist, there would be very few sleepless nights lost over this finding, as my primary interest lies in alternative origins of consciousness, viewed from the conservative, idealist’s perspective. Moreover, it should be emphasized that most all of this is speculation, an exercise in thought, and for now another campfire story, as viewed through the critical lense of material / reductionist science. With this said, there is no reason not to entertain various thoughts as to possible emanations of phenomenon, as there are apparently ongoing instances in which are cited by experiencers, along with select images, and trace evidence.
If in fact material / reductionist science using the scientific method, arrived at the undeniable conclusion thru peer reviewed research, that consciousness were only to exist within the brain / mind, .. the “Observer Effect”, along with PSI ability was proven null ,..nothing occurred before what is known as the “big bang”, .. everything in the visible Universe was not made up of atoms, consisting of protons, neutrons, electrons, gluons, and quirks, I would most likely feel as though five years would have been wasted, in which no campfire story would cure. However, viewing the Wizard of Oz during the holiday season, would most likely be entertaining.
When speaking to the late Anton LaVey, my initial impression is one of the conjuring side of the darker arts. Speaking to Mr. LaVey’s hypothesis, from what has been gathered, his views are not of his alone. I as yourself would suggest that the story teller, (lore-builder), is just as important as the story being told when constructing a belief system. The story teller, (as a performing artist), must convince his, or her audience to let their guard down long enough to entertain the tale being told. If the story teller is exceptional, and has a decent tale to tell, acceptance may be gained from the audience. Also, it may be immensely helpful if the story teller believes, (whether factual, or not), the account in which they are reciting. Folk-lore handed down through the generations can often have the general belief already accepted, even though the account may alter somewhat.
I should point out that once a certain percentage of a population believes in something, it may be next to impossible to convince them otherwise. Take for instance that it has been alleged that Jesus Christ walked on water. Even though you could prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is impossible, once the concept has been entertained and accepted, with the majority of a population believing, it can be difficult to dissuade the believers. In this respect any suspended disbelief has then been replaced by blind faith. Apparently this is what has been known to happen in regard to religions and cults. The difference here is that Jesus Christ was crucified, and died as a martyr, where as Mr. LaVey simply died.
You may be interested in the latest work of PhD, Jeffery Kripal, entitled “Mutants and Mystics”.
. Also, thanks for you compliments on the USI website It works well for an information based website. Its only downside is that cell phones and small screen tablets have a hard time with it. It's really best on an HD monitor. Hope you're having a wonderful weekend!