When will science be able to explain the esoteric?

When will science be able to explain the workings of metaphysical phenomena in detail? Such as remote viewing, life force, souls, angels/demons, etc.
I know of experiments which prove the existence of certain supernatural concepts, but there seems to be a lack of understanding regarding the actual mechanics of these principles scientifically. Or is it already possible, yet kept a secret?

I personally believe advanced ancient civilizations could have discovered esotericism from their sophistaced understanding of science, such as the authors of the bible knowing the structure of carbon-12 (666). By ancient I don't mean ancient Egypt or such civilizations, these civilizations had mere scraps of the knowledge originating from what I believe some older, more advanced civilization (such as Atlantis, or god knows what)

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >When will science be able to explain
    As soon as any of those things are actually proven to exist.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Inversion

      It's called neuroscience.

      MIT try to map DMT realm.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Science is a filter. It intentionally puts a filter on to examine the world from one perspective in detail. But they've mistaken the filter for all of reality itself and hurled the world into a soulless industrial oblivion.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      they don't "exist" in this plane that's why science can't explain them and never will

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >When will science be able to explain
        As soon as any of those things are actually proven to exist.

        there might be some ways to prove them like Jung did with synchronicity but mostly impossible, too. And is that same reason npcs don't believe in them

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I know that I have a supernatural soul because I experience consciousness. Naturalist science will NEVER explain consciousness, because it relies on observation, and as long as you are in the physical world, you cannot observe someone else's consciousness/soul, you can only experience your own.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Science is ultimately a practice that studies "photographs" of reality. It is not about interacting, it is about observing after isolating yourself from your subject as much as possible. When looking at a photograph, you will not necessarily know if anyone in the picture grew old, or died, or moved away. When your entire view of the world is photographs, you would of course dismiss the notion of movement. Also you're really curious about why sometimes people look smeared in photographs and have developed a mental framework you call "smearology" that's getting pretty good at predicting where smears occur.

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >When will science be able to explain the esoteric?
    let me explain to you how science works:
    >we don't have the means to measure it
    >even though we have the best measuring devices literally part of us, i.e our senses
    >therefore it doesn't exist
    science morons in a nutshell
    if you genuinely believe in 2024 the year of our lord that morons who become scientists are actually smart then boy do i have some news for you
    they are just like that kid who puts his fingers into his ears and yells "LALALALALA I CANT HEAR YOU LALALALALALA"

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >they are just like that kid who puts his fingers into his ears and yells "LALALALALA I CANT HEAR YOU LALALALALALA"
      and says that sounds do not exist*

      i've pressed post too

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        too soon*

        frick im moronic

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I’m not sure I understand anon, what do you mean by this?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >something exists
        >science doesnt have the microscope/ruler/recorder/whatever invented yet to measure it
        >therefore they say it doesnt exist because "how do you measure it? how can you prove it exists?"
        do you understand now?
        when science was invented, it was based on empiricism and because they didnt have fancy tools to measure shit, they relied on their senses
        now it's the other way around
        if you dont have the fancy tool to measure it, then it doesnt exist
        even tho you can experience it with your own senses

        do you understand now why science is moronic?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      We do have the means to measure it, atleast the gubbermint does

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It is not in the interests of man or reality as a whole to establish certainty in the facts, since the young cannot handle the truth about how it is limiting of humanity to be without total control of oneself and reality as a whole does not require the knowledge of itself interfering with the theoretical interpretations that make up the game at lower levels.

    So even when you are fully explained to you will doubt, unless chosen specifically to be built of the information and know it completely and few are such.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Ok tell me your knowledge then im open minded.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I am not just going to start spouting random things tbh.
        If you want to look at my thoughts as summarized to be a short read and not spending days discussing intricacies/diversities then look at this.
        https://www.lucifersapprentice.co.uk/mental-betterment/

        I do not really just start talking without input that interests me, not anymore, if I do it is just a shitpost because there is really nothing new to say that I haven't said before.

        If you have a question about something specific I will answer with my view, but aside from that I do not want to be random because knowledge is not a singular argument and a singular argument is usually a delusion.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    And the disciples came and said to Him, “Why do You speak to them in parables?”

    He answered and said to them, “Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.
    For whoever has, to him more will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him.
    Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.
    And in them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, which says: ‘Hearing you will hear and shall not understand,
    And seeing you will see and not perceive; For the hearts of this people have grown dull.
    Their ears are hard of hearing,
    And their eyes they have closed,
    Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears,
    Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn,
    So that I should heal them.’

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    When they get high resolution cameras.

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >remote viewing
    it is an altered state of consciousness and it is your mind trying to form the place or spatial memory with memories and sensations. it may even be your hearing misfiring on your location.
    >life force
    vitalism was discarded decades ago.
    although there are some new theories that sound to vitalism are with things of physics and biology they have nothing in relation to vitalism.
    >souls
    as the above, or rather is the above, vitalism.
    >angels/demons ghost,bla bla
    they already have an explanation (but obviously it is skeptical and physical because you can't prove that stupidity now) there is no technology or method to prove something like that. at least even if you want to be more positivist than materialist.
    and ironically those angels and demons of the past of abrahamic cultures are actually the closest thing to shamanic beliefs of spirits or entities whether good or evil.
    they just don't care because it's religious.
    although they have not yet taken it to the point of saying that they are tulpas, imaginary friends or things of the mind because of religiosity.
    >I know of experiments which prove the existence of certain supernatural concepts
    Maybe you read pseudoscience that shits on the method.
    >but there seems to be a lack of understanding regarding the actual mechanics of these principles scientifically
    yep. there is no way to understand something like this because it is a matter of the mind and that's it. science studies everything within the physical, not within astral assumptions.
    >I personally believe advanced ancient civilizations could have discovered esotericism from their sophistaced understanding of science
    with empiricism you can learn many things, trial and error. all cultures were like that for millennia. now there is more access to everything because all knowledge complements each other.
    >such as the authors of the bible knowing the structure of carbon-12 (666)
    see https://archive.4plebs.org/x/thread/37923005/#q37925199

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >By ancient I don't mean ancient Egypt or such civilizations, these civilizations had mere scraps of the knowledge originating from what I believe some older, more advanced civilization (such as Atlantis, or god knows what)
    sounds like the typical primordial culture thinking of perennial philosophy, theosophy and the typical universalistic esotericism of the new age.
    I really don't know, I don't believe in that.
    read up on proto-indo-european and indo-european and platonism and neo-platonism.
    It's the closest thing.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      New age spirtuality and theosophy are just straight up masonic disinformation movements. All religions sharing a common origin is undoubtedly true however; btw the Greeks admitted they got the majority of their philosophic knowledge from Egyptian priests, who claim they got their knowledge from Atlantis. Given that information, and everything else regarding the great flood, I just think it's the most likely that some older civlization that was advanced and openly practiced esotericism collapsed, and some of their knowledge was passed down to the post-flood civlizations.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This is never going to happen because the epistemology of materialist science is MATERIALIST. It excludes non-material phenomena from its field of study from the beginning.
    >I personally believe advanced ancient civilizations could have discovered esotericism
    They did. It was esotericism back then too.
    >the authors of the bible knowing the structure of carbon-12 (666)
    This is a moronic conspiracy theory, as is 90% of the stuff out there aiming to sciencify spirituality.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      so 666 is just a random number that somehow represents the beast? Or given the context of the bible declaring nature and material existence as evil, and carbon-12 being the specific isotope that is the foundation of all physical life, it makes the most sense out of any theory this is what they meant. Especially since it is also referred to as the number of man. But if you have any other explanation for why 666 is the number of the beast rather than "it just is" that makes more sense, I'd be inclined to change my beliefs.
      Also in the verse mentioning the number of the beast, the greek word "pséphizó" is used, which can translated as to calculate or compute. As if they had to actually determine the number perhaps with scientific methods. 666 representing carbon-12 just makes the most sense imo

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >it is also referred to as the number of man
        The number of a man as calculated from his name.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Whats his name?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No one knows, only that his name computes to six hundred sixty-six, and that to buy and sell goods you must receive a his mark, name, or number on your right hand or forehead.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Why do you interpret the bible literally? Do you truly think that is how it is supposed to be understood?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Why do you interpret the bible literally?
            I don't. Some parts are literal, some are metaphorical, and some parts are poetry and song.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >the authors of the bible knowing the structure of carbon-12 (666)
    no they didn't

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Revelation 13:18, This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of man, and his number is 666

      You actually just dont get it.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >for it is the number of a man
        Well that has nothing to do with the structure of an atom. And nothing to do with the number: Six hundred threescore and six.
        >It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.
        And the number must be calculated from his name.
        You have some serious reading comprehension problems.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Anon, I'm a scientist and I can tell you right away that unless the phenomena decide to show themselves, we will nwver get there. Science is the study of observable phenomena, which implies there has to be first a way of observing, doing so consistently to avoid many biases that could appear, equally refining your methodology to achieve the given results, and accepting future knowledge could completely undermine your current "truths". We can't consistently observe the phenomena, as it is both unpredictable and varies from person to person. We barely manage to properly study physical phenomena without falling into poor methodology, sampling or biases we're unaware of, let alone doing so with the paranormal.

    Other societies were more "in tune" with the supernatural precisely because they weren't scientific. Have you considered how we base literally everything into half truths limited to our knowledge? We try coming up with a logic to explain things, and yet it fails to grasp the fundamentals: what is time? How did everything begin? What came before? What is the smallest thing? What is consciousness? What is life? Whereas we have no fricking idea how to answer any of that, many other more religious or philosophical societies never actually had a crisis with such questions because their faiths weren't contradictory with such reality. Science has a pragmatic purpose and is a stepping stone for knowledge of the material, but should neither be the endgame for finding the truth, nor the only method of doing so.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Hermes

    never. Super abilities and soul contracts are fictional. Angels and Demons will never show themselves to you unless you were crazy. I have no tools to know about supernatural revelations. Nothing has been recorded on camera that is mass believed, and if you saw something real you would still think about it. Science needs to be learnable for da future guys just think about all the hacks! It must be fun to be a technomancer magic wielding solo player and still rely on the one true God Lord Jesus Christ. Amen

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    language is symbols we use to explain real things we can experience. most religious language doesn't work unless you've had a religious experience.

    likewise, if you've had a "weird" experience, maybe a time slip, or deja vu, or perhaps a pre-cognition or premonition, or maybe you once had just incredible luck in a row, or you've had a strong sensation about something, but it was a one off and it never happened again like an out of body experience or a strange encounter. all of these things can't properly be described by science until they are common and ordinary, because that's what science is about, repeatedly doing something and getting the same expected result.

    look at lighting for example, science kinda knows how it works but not really. because a machine that can generate lighting has not been created yet, we still speculate as to the exact atmospheric conditions that cause large voltages to discharge from the sky and arc towards the ground. now lightning is common enough that we don't say it's not real, because we can observe it, but since science can't perfectly reproduce it there is still some fun mystery there.

    >remote viewing, life force, souls, angels/demons, etc

    i think all of this stuff is made up and the people who believe in it are lying and trying to make money from promoting these ideas. why do i think that? because science can't understand lightning yet, a random but predictable and frequent even phenomenon we can all observe. so science wouldn't even begin to understand these other things that far fewer people have experienced, we don't have a language for explaining those things and we never will, because it's linked to deception, imagination, and the innate desire humans have to find things out. people who promote those things are just tricking you with things they can never be proven wrong on. before we knew about electricity they would've tricked you with lightning.

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Unoficially its already explained, as for official science no, it considers paranormal as more or less modern version of heresy.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *