There is a lot of fraud and lies in modern science that is being shoved down people's throats. Science is just like religion. Pick out the good stuff and throw out the rest.

By that standard then high technology shouldnt work, but it does.

Nature works. Nature is balanced and is in harmony with itself. Technology works sometimes, but technology has done more harm to the planet than good.

Decreased suffering is debatable... also hard to quantify.

Doubling a lifespan, minimizing childhood mortalities..seems to be a good indicator , if not the best one, for measuring Quality of Life

Are you intentionally trolling, or do you genuinely believe that Quality == Quantity?

Me thinks youre trolling.. its hard to argue that doubling the average lifespan is not a good Quality of Life indicator.....is the opposite true?

Would you rather live for five years more years and experience only bliss and fulfillment or live for twenty more years and experience only crippling sadness and confusion?

The speed of light differed based on measurement until it was defined as a constant.

If i have a tool that measures the mass of something to be 1.476, then I invent a better tool that measures 1.476284956...they are both still correct approximations.

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Yes I understand the difference between certainty in science and knowing. Youre assuming too much stereotypical "science is my religion" stuff, not your fault, my English is substandard.

Im sure your aware of the differences between science and religion.. religion does not support nor does it progress by proving itself wrong. While scientific progress can be measured by falsifying its own idea.

When the questions or ideas of Reality and Truth come up so often as it does here, then its fair to advocate a time tested sucsessful self correcting method in finding Reality, the best method we have so far to seperate the static and noise from the Big Picture, given the Predictive Powers that validate a material scientific world view. I know its not welcome here and Im the minority, thats fine. Im just the messenger in a postmodern popculture that no longer recognizes the value and authority, of a strict reliable method to seperate fact from fiction. observation/ predict/ test/repeat..

It seems like you’re missing that these aren’t mutually exclusive things...

I might draw the tarot to allow myself to give a narrative to my emotions, then use reason to chart a course to where I’d like to be.

I can have a decision with no clear better option to make and consult a horoscope to feel better about my decision.

We have many such moments that we often leave to preprogrammed routines. Shaking these up can improve our experiential reality and increase awareness that we can then use in all sorts of situations including logic.

I have no problem with scientific-materialism, except for the litany of unintended consequences most scientific materialists chalk up to the cost of progress. Indeed, scientific materialism has fantastic uses it’s simply piss poor for deriving personal meaning and tends to instill an unwarranted sense of confidence. I wouldn’t go see a man about a lobotomy to cure my desire, but I might consult the Buddha or Jesus.

So I can appreciate indoor plumbing, not want to develop Alzheimer’s from the Copper (II) in the pipes that bring me water, and I can read my tea leaves to help assist my intuitive reasoning. None of these things are better or worse than the other.

In fact, many of the greatest historical scientists were also occultists! Studying the great mysteries of the past often leads to new cool tricks.

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

Correct approximations useful for certain tricks.

Your original question is one of meaning, why do you seem to think the position of “knowing” is preferable to the position of “wondering”?

Your post assumes a level of certainty in scientific answers that is similar to others certainty in religious answers. Tell me about your TOE that is superior to all others?

I’m glad you’re excited by certain scientific theories, but you seem to be convinced that your map of the territory is better than everyone else’s. How’s that working out?

What are you talking about? You have no idea what this world is and how it operates. Black holes? Physics? Yeah ok...

Aren't studies showing that consuming baby blood would be beneficial to health?

No

Can it measure dreams?

Fuck your ethics, your kids will get drafted to fight Iran for Satanists

How long was the recipe for concrete lost? My point being that there are historical mysteries that defy both science and naturalism.

I don't pick sides. Did you just assume my philosophy? ;)

Occult knowledge and use of occult knowledge is about balance with nature. We are not in balance with nature.

Incorrect.

care to enlighten him then?

Occultism, Esotericism and Mysticism are philosophical schools of thought; alchemy is "the work", and (likely) metaphorical in describing the rules/laws of the first three.

Symbolism, allegorical relationships and metaphors passed through the ages to guide practitioners back to the source--hopefully to escape this material experience.

Ultimate knowledge that this existence is a step on the path up the mountain, and death is not the summit.

At least, that's what it looks like from where I'm standing--but I've only been walking with my head up for a brief amount of time.

I was away so couldn't elaborate. But the comment by /u/handsupdontpoop describes it really well.

I would like to add that is moreover about putting meaning to items, symbols and ideas. By putting meaning you ignite your intend to believe. With willpower you want to make something work, or want to believe that an item holds symbolic value (like a picture, or a piece of jewelry does for many). Whether or not you putting meaning to something actually channels a higher energy, that will always remain hidden / unknown - which is what occult itself means.

Also, /r/occult is a place with many specialists and occasional practitioners. It's a great place for questions like these.

Wrong there's a lot you don't know

care to enlighten him then?

Yeah.. you ain't know shit.

care to enlighten him then?

Much of occult/esoteric/philosophical knowledge was actually working out the grammar that underlies naturalism. It’s not too much of a stretch to conceive that many of the mystery schools were remnants of guild knowledge left over and transmogrified from a more advanced pre-historic civilization.

Naturalism is still reliant on allegory and is often so occluded (naturally, not through intent necessarily) as to be indistinguishable from occult thought for most individuals. A bag of magic tricks that work “well enough” to accomplish certain things but break down at differing macro/micro levels.

Given the historical and practical incompleteness of natural theory I fully expect the average person to continue to attribute how things work to mystical sources and myopic know-it-all’s to continue to laugh at the average people cause they “know” how a few tricks work.

We probably have different definitions of Naturalism. I am speaking in scientific philosophical context "Philosophical Naturalism" is a fancy way of saying a nonsupernatural material scientific reductionist POV

We’re both talking about historical Cartesian/Newtonian perspectives when we use the term Naturalism.

I believe we are both referring to what could be termed a Cartesian-Newtonian Perspective when we refer to Naturalism.

Ok, I know Cartesian from Decartes, is about all I know about, the rest is fuzzy.

No, just down vote me more.

try writing something — anything of substance next time and I'd be happy to upvote you. low-effort is low effort

High effort bullshit must be met with low effort disregard.

get real

Your low effort bullshit should be met with no regard, how about that?

I'm glad that saying such a petty comment has the ability to make you feel better about yourself.

It must be nice to live such a simple life. Ignorance is truly bliss, thanks for illustrating.

So, "incorrect" is just loaded with meaning, right? Show me your profound knowledge, oh wise one.

What's the point? You clearly missed it thus far.

Tell me, why do you even go on Reddit?

Obviously to be preached to by people who don't know anything.

That isn't an answer. You can't answer a question. That's real preaching right there. People should be aware people like you cannot answer simple questions.

OHHH NOOO. I WANT YOU TO THINK FOR YOURSELF FOR A CHANGE OOO HOW SCARY.

About what? Your attitude doesn't faze me.

Wow that completely went over your head, again.

Awesome...you won't enjoy the next month, I promise you that.

And you're blocked as well, so enjoy talking to nothing.

Forbidden knowledge is understanding that we live in a /r/holofractal universe engineered entirely by consciousness. Newtonian physics are not hidden knowledge. How to hijack the consciounsess of the planet to create what you want is hidden knowledge.

Have you looked for data within the holofractal community? I think you're Gravely mistaken and taking an assumptive perspective.

I don't know much about naturalism so I can't make any general claims about what it is you believe, but holofractal is based on data. I don't necessarily trust in the agenda behind it and can't tell what kind of person Haramein truly is but he seems playful and intelligent in a childish way which I'd expect a genius of his caliber to be.

It's hard to say what to trust when everything we get comes through a screen bought and paid for every step of the way for you to get any information period.

Copernicus and Newton were both working for the Jesuits to support heliocentric beliefs. So was Einstein.

Maybe because occultism and others are working in a different realm than science, more interested in transforming self, rather than the world around.

I'll give you specific example of my angle into the topic. When someone watches pornography, it elicits changes in the body. When I think of a girl I like, it also elicits changes in the body (heart beating faster for example). For many, if you use the right insult, they get angry and maybe physical. My point? Words alone can affect changes in us that we do not control.

Occultism is in part ways to use the concept. The point of rituals, sigils...is mostly to put the practitioner in a different state of mind while trying to control (direct) the changes.

I do not know how science could help. Maybe thing like this show the way: How Yoga Changes the Brain

What? Ancient Civilizations knew A HELL OF A LOT MORE than we know today, and with absolutely NO technology whatsoever. That ought to tell you a lot.

I suggest reading "Fingerprint of the Gods" by Graham Hancock if you want a place to start on pre-civilization sciences.

Hancock doesn't suggest ET in his theories.

Well sometimes, like with alchemy for instance, it isn't meant to be interpreted literally. It's all metaphor for self-growth and personal development. Apparently.

Religion or mythology or esoterica or whatever — at least this is my take on things — isn't so much a belief as it a language. It's a tool for expressing and coming to terms with one's experience of life. This is why muslims in the war-torn, destabilized regions of the world might focus on the more violent, jihadist portions of the collective muslim teachings, whereas those in more peaceful environments that don't necessitate such a brutal life coincidentally focus on the more peaceful teachings. This goes for all religions. Now you won't hear believers admit this, or assholes like Sam Harris, but religious texts don't inspire anyone to believe or do anything. These texts are actually a kind of justification for one's preexisting internal beliefs caused by environment/life experiences.

So people turn to things like esoterica for a number of reasons. One, as I said, is that they really don't mean to do science. They mean to express human-wide subjective experiences. Two, they really believe this shit is literal and fancy themselves wizards. Three, maybe they're just LARPing. Or Four, it could just be a bit of fun.

As to why people choose this particularly over Naturalism, I'd wager it's because, at least in America, we have a terrible education system that doesn't teach math or science in any meaningful way, and we discourage students who don't immediately have an alleged 'talent' for it.

It's also far more glamorous to be interested in the occult. Even if people are equally uninformed about scientific phenomenon like black holes as they are something like the philosopher's stone, the slow, methodical, reductionist, mechanical march of science can seem to take a lot of the mystique away from mysteries that elude our understanding.

I think it's also true that people don't like science because they can't make shit up and get away with it like you can occultism. You can't really get called out on your bad, uniformed ideas since you can always hide behind some invisible nonsensical 'magic'. 'Oh your vibrations just aren't in tune with the universe brah, your theory is wrong.'

You mean the idea that reality as revealed by the scientific method is amazing and awe-inspiring on its own, without having to impose a supernatural narrative over it?

Yes exactly nailed it. But I dont have the vocabulary skills to explain in one paragraph.

Because it hasn't.

True knowledge does not include all the dis-information that we're fed.

You have to know how to read around the disinformation, which most don't unless they're part of the elite.

Here's the thing. So-called occult knowledge is real, and has power. The elites want to preserve this for themselves. So they have to keep the population away from it.

So in mainstream religion, the idea is promoted that the occult is "dangerous."

And in mainstream science, a strict materialism is enforced throughout academic culture, even though the results are getting spookier and spookier.

I like the occult as a story but see no evidence for it's supposed reality or power. Anyone who has claimed to have magic power has been pretty easily debunked.

There are a lot of frauds, can't argue with that.

The problem is that because of peer pressure in the scientific community, the proof is either suppressed or ignored.

So what happens is... 1) Some scientist or study emerges that points to the reality of certain esoteric concepts 2) It is suppressed or ignored through peer pressure 3) the New Age community latches on to it and starts promoting it with zero real understanding of the science involved 4) this makes it even more difficult for scientists to come out in favor of certain ideas that are perceived as "woo woo." It's a vicious cycle.

Some points to consider:

The U.S. government has studied the occult scientifically. These researchers were known as the Collins Elite, I believe. So right there we see that there are different scientific paradigms for the government and the rabble.

This idea of scientists being strict materialists really only got started in the 20th century. Previous to that, it was common for scientists to have an interest in esoteric ideas. Isaac Newton, for example, had a keen interest in occult studies and alchemical ideas, it's on his wiki page if you're interested. He is one of the smartest men who ever lived.

Ever take mushrooms or lsd?

Yes, several times. I've had great experiences--the feeling of being connected to everything.

The mainstream information/propaganda establishment makes them feel powerless. They want their own power base, even if its bs

Because people are crazy.

This is a strange thread to me, consisting of opinions, so I'll throw mine in as well.

There's two things to distinguish here. Intelligence and knowledge. It is easy to see that knowledge has continued to increase from the dawn of man - just as a child adds on to their knowledge over their lifetime - but intelligence is a metric that is much more difficult to observe change in.

If you believe evolutionary hypothesis, both knowledge and intelligence have increased together as mankind has been getting older. However, most religions have intelligence at the dawn of humans either identical to what we have now, or superior to what we currently posses, which means while we have more knowledge to work with, we're getting dumber and dumber and will continually be less able to improve our knowledge.

History really seems to back up the fact our ancestors were much, much smarter than us, even if they had less knowledge. Obviously, some knowledge is always lost as time goes on, but I'm taking about the overall sum here.

Can't really speak for much of what you are addressing by this post, but I think our modern academic institutions have established a track record of IGNORING the scientific method in favor of ego/profit in lab scenarios which I'm sure is a large contributing factor to this erosion.

Lots of people like to assume that people who wrote on in old dusty books or on stone tablets were not liars, despite it becoming so common in our present day.

Have you seen the John Dee Sonnet book breakdown?

Mystery schools have held knowledge that took 'Naturalization' hundreds of years to 'discover', and that is why 'hidden knowledge' is so intriguing to so many.

If those in the mystery schools understood critical rules and laws of physics hundreds of years before modern science discovered them, then what might these mystery schools know today?

Mystery schools are a test of sorts - certain types of thinkers will never find the entrance. No offense, but I think you might be one of those people. There are those of us who know, and those of us still asking questions. 'The only thing I know is that i do not know'. If you can't get behind that, mystery schools will never make sense or appeal to you.

Why would you assume Im not "one of those people" who would understand esoterics or metaphysics or" mystery schools"? I grew up christian, spiritualized, and Ive gone thru my new age, Hindu, Buddhist phases,I taken my LSD and mushrooms dozens of times and have smoked about $50,000 worth of weed in my lifetime

I grew up christian, spiritualized, and Ive gone thru my new age, Hindu, Buddhist phases,Ive taken my LSD and mushrooms dozens of times and have smoked about $50,000 worth of weed in my lifetime

and what do those things have to do with mystery schools?

You asked what these people find so fascinating about 'forbidden knowledge', and IMO the answer is mystery. They want to know what we don't know. It's as simple as that.

As far as whether you are 'one of those people' or not, that is not up to me to determine or know. However, due to the question subject, i'm assuming you don't know the answer to the question you are asking for input on.

It feeds their delusions which gives them a buzz.

No, just down vote me more.

Much of occult/esoteric/philosophical knowledge was actually working out the grammar that underlies naturalism. It’s not too much of a stretch to conceive that many of the mystery schools were remnants of guild knowledge left over and transmogrified from a more advanced pre-historic civilization.

Naturalism is still reliant on allegory and is often so occluded (naturally, not through intent necessarily) as to be indistinguishable from occult thought for most individuals. A bag of magic tricks that work “well enough” to accomplish certain things but break down at differing macro/micro levels.

Given the historical and practical incompleteness of natural theory I fully expect the average person to continue to attribute how things work to mystical sources and myopic know-it-all’s to continue to laugh at the average people cause they “know” how a few tricks work.

About what? Your attitude doesn't faze me.