Operation Chameleon

 

Some truly vexatious stuff in these ones. OK, maybe not, but I think it´s fairly obvious what actually happened here. 

The British military fucked up some secret military drill in Wales (the year was 2016) and therefore had to classify the matter even further. Apparently, there are still some Freedom of Information requests pending. Meanwhile, well-meaning eyewitnesses and various Schwärmers have turned the event into another installment in the apparently never ending UFO saga. 

In other words: the conspiracy is the conspiracy. What perhaps makes this case unusual is that *something* out of the ordinary obviously happened in the area around Pentyrch. But was it really the RAF and the USAF attacking perfectly peaceful aliens from another solar system? 

Somehow, I doubt it. But then, you already knew that was my position. So there´s that.  

A sense of non-self

 

Do you want to know more about some obscure subject in the middle of the night CET? 

Yes, Metzinger´s work on out-of-body illusions. Sounds interesting!

Great choice—Thomas Metzinger’s work on out-of-body experiences (OBEs) and self-model disruption is a fascinating window into how our brains construct the sense of "I am here, in this body."

While Metzinger himself is a philosopher, not a lab-based neuroscientist, he collaborates with or draws on work from cognitive scientists and neurophysiologists—especially people like Olaf Blanke in Switzerland—who perform real-world experiments on bodily self-location and ownership. Metzinger provides the theoretical framework for understanding these experiences.

---

🧠 Key Concept: The Phenomenal Self-Model (PSM)

Metzinger proposes that:

• The “self” is not a metaphysical entity, but a model your brain creates.

• Your sense of being located inside your body, seeing the world from a specific perspective, and having a unified "I" is part of this self-model.

• OBEs, lucid dreams, and mystical states occur when this self-model is partially or radically disrupted.

---

🧪 Neuroscience of Out-of-Body Experiences

🔬 Metzinger + Blanke-style Experiments

Metzinger interprets a class of lab experiments where visual, tactile, and vestibular mismatches are used to trick the brain into projecting the self outside the physical body. These are not speculative—they’re replicable, peer-reviewed studies.

---

👤 Example: Full Body Illusion

Setup:

• The subject wears a virtual reality headset showing a video feed of themselves from behind.

• A researcher touches the subject’s back with a stick in sync with what the person sees in the headset.

• After a while, subjects feel like they are located in the body they see on screen—a few feet in front of where their real body is.

Result:

• The person feels that their “self” has moved to a new location—just like a mild, lab-induced OBE.

• This is strong evidence that bodily location of the self is malleable and constructed in the brain.

Metzinger interprets this as a partial deconstruction of the PSM—your brain’s internal self-location system is being temporarily hacked.

---

👽 Other Triggers of OBEs

• Epilepsy (especially in the temporoparietal junction)

• Psychedelic drugs

• Sleep paralysis / lucid dreaming

• Near-death experiences

In all these, Metzinger argues that the brain's self-model and spatial body schema are altered or break down entirely, creating the sensation of floating, seeing oneself from outside, or merging with the universe.

---

🔍 Philosophical Implications (Metzinger’s View)

1. OBEs are not evidence of a “soul” leaving the body.
   Instead, they show how fragile and constructed our sense of self is.

2. These states may be spiritually meaningful, but they’re still grounded in brain mechanics.

3. The "out-of-body" sensation is what happens when the brain misattributes the location of its own self-model.

"You are not in control of your self-model. The self is not what you are, it is what you experience." – Metzinger, "Being No One"

---

🧘 Bonus: Why This Doesn’t “Debunk” Spiritual Experience

Metzinger does not claim these experiences are worthless or delusional. He sees them as:

• Insights into consciousness architecture

• Tools for spiritual development, if properly understood

• Opportunities to create a new “consciousness culture”, where humans become more self-aware of how their inner world is shaped

In fact, he supports using safe, rational practices like meditation or lucid dreaming to explore altered states without falling into dogma.

---

Would you like a summary of Metzinger’s idea of a future “consciousness culture” and how it overlaps with spiritual disciplines?

Going back to Metzinger, does this mean that the OBE´s are illusory? That is, our consciousness can´t really leave the brain to "see" or "experience" objective reality from a non-body vantage point?

Yes, according to Thomas Metzinger, out-of-body experiences (OBEs) are illusory in nature—meaning they feel real to the experiencer, but they do not involve consciousness actually leaving the body or brain.

Here's how Metzinger and related cognitive neuroscience explain this:

---

🧠 Metzinger's View: OBEs as Self-Model Disruptions

Metzinger argues that:

1. You are not a self in the traditional, soul-like sense.
   You are a conscious model of a self, built by your brain to navigate the world.

2. In OBEs, the Phenomenal Self-Model (PSM) is temporarily projected outside the physical body, due to neurological or perceptual disruptions.

3. Consciousness itself never leaves the brain. What happens is a shift in the internal model of where the “self” is located in space.

---

🔍 What's Really Happening?

Neurologically:

• The temporoparietal junction (TPJ) in the brain integrates visual, vestibular (balance), and proprioceptive (body-position) signals.

• Disruption in this area—by seizures, trauma, or even targeted stimulation—can cause the feeling of floating above the body, seeing oneself from the outside, etc.

Experientially:

• The brain continues to generate a coherent “you”, but that “you” is now misplaced—as if located in a corner of the room, ceiling, or above your body.

Metzinger: “You are not out of your body. You are experiencing a model of yourself from an unconventional perspective.”

---

🎭 Why It Feels So Real

The brain systems that determine what’s “real”—especially in terms of spatial orientation and perspective—are fully activated. That’s why:

• OBEs can feel even more real than waking life.

• People often come away convinced they left their body and saw the world from outside it.

But this is the same principle that explains how:

• Dream worlds feel real while you’re in them.

• Phantom limb sensations can be felt even after an amputation.

• Virtual reality “presence” makes people duck when fake objects fly at them.

All of these involve embodied illusions created by the brain’s perceptual system.

---

🧘‍♂️ Does This Mean OBEs Are "Just Illusions"?

Metzinger would say:

• Yes, in the sense that they don’t involve any soul or self actually leaving the brain or body.

• But No, in the sense that they are valuable windows into how consciousness and selfhood are constructed.

He views OBEs as:

• Empirically real phenomenological events.

• Scientifically and philosophically meaningful.

• Not evidence of the soul—but evidence that the “self” is a virtual construct, not an essence.

---

🧩 Implication for Spiritual and Mystical Interpretation

Metzinger’s position does not deny that these experiences can be profound, transformative, or spiritually meaningful. But it naturalizes them. He argues that:

“The experience of being ‘out of body’ teaches us something about what the self is: not a thing, but a process—a model in the brain, and one that can be altered.”

---

🧪 Summary

Claim	Metzinger’s View
Did consciousness actually leave the body?	No – the location of the self-model shifted
Is the experience real?	Yes, as a subjective phenomenon
Is it evidence of a soul?	No, it's a brain-based illusion
Is it useful for understanding consciousness?	Yes, it's a key to studying selfhood

---

Would you like to explore how this view compares with mystical or religious interpretations of OBEs (e.g., astral projection, Tibetan dream yoga, etc.)?

Fidelio

 

Overheard on X (yes, it´s Alt Right gadfly Richard Spencer): "As Trump pivots towards supporting Ukraine militarily—as I predicted—the possibility that a more detailed Epstein client list will be leaked goes up. I say this because Russia might very well acquire it, and Trump is most definitely on it!"

Also, check out this truly weird thread, if you have access to X. Fidelio!

A veiled threat?

 

Sober Sufism

 

Tonight´s somewhat eclectic ChatGPT essay. Enjoy!

Why do spiritual and mystical experiences feel "objectively real" to the experiencer/perceiver, if everything is really happening in the mind? 

Spiritual and mystical experiences often feel objectively real to the person having them—even more real than ordinary waking life—because of how our brains process perception, emotion, and the sense of self. Here's how contemporary neuroscience and psychology approach this question:

---

🔍 1. Disruption of the Self-Model (Ego Dissolution)

During mystical experiences (induced by meditation, psychedelics, or spontaneously), the default mode network (DMN) in the brain—which underlies our sense of self—is often deactivated or disorganized. This can lead to:

• A loss of boundaries between self and world

• A feeling of unity or oneness

• A perception that what is experienced is not subjective, but universal or absolute

➡️ Without the ego to act as an interpretive filter, experiences are no longer “mine” but “truth”.

---

🧠 2. Hyperconnectivity Between Brain Regions

Under altered states (mystical states, trance, or certain meditations), brain areas that don’t normally communicate become highly synchronized. This can lead to:

• Sensory blending (synesthesia-like effects)

• A heightened sense of meaning

• A cohesive, all-encompassing perception that feels more real than reality

➡️ This intense integration of signals might be perceived as a higher-order or “meta” reality.

---

🧿 3. Emotion + Novelty = Deep Conviction

Mystical experiences often activate the limbic system (especially the amygdala), producing:

• Profound awe, bliss, terror, or reverence

• An emotionally charged "this is important" signal

Combined with the novelty of the experience, this triggers a salience response—the brain tags the event as deeply meaningful and unforgettable.

➡️ Emotional intensity reinforces the belief in the experience's objectivity.

---

⛩️ 4. No Contradictory Input

Unlike dreams (where logic and external stimuli may contradict the illusion), mystical experiences often occur in deep meditative absorption, psychedelic states, or near-death experiences where normal sensory input is muted or reinterpreted.

➡️ With no “real world” to contradict the internal vision, the experience feels self-validating.

---

🧘 5. The Brain Can’t Tell the Difference

As neurologist V.S. Ramachandran once put it:

“The same neural circuits that are activated by real perception are activated during hallucination or imagination.”

This means the feeling of reality is produced in the brain, regardless of the source.

➡️ If an experience triggers the brain's "this is real" circuitry, it feels real—regardless of its origin.

---

🌀 6. The Philosophical View: Is Anything "Objectively Real"?

Some philosophers (and mystics) argue that all experience is, at base, constructed by the mind. In this view:

• The ordinary world is also a kind of "illusion" shaped by perception and conditioning.

• Mystical experiences feel real because they disrupt the usual filters and show a different construction of reality, which may feel more authentic.

➡️ From this angle, mystical states might feel real not despite being internal—but because they seem to reveal what is normally hidden.

---

🧾 Summary

Mystical experiences feel objectively real because:

1. The self is suppressed, so there's no internal "observer" to doubt.

2. Brain areas light up in ways that amplify sensory unity and meaning.

3. Intense emotion seals the experience as “truth.”

4. There's little or no sensory contradiction.

5. The brain's perception circuits don't distinguish between inner and outer.

6. Philosophically, all experience is already mind-mediated.

---

Would you like to explore how these explanations compare with spiritual interpretations (e.g., in Buddhism, Sufism, or the Fourth Way)?

The Fourth Way, please.

In the Fourth Way teachings of G.I. Gurdjieff, mystical or spiritual experiences that feel objectively real are interpreted not as illusions or hallucinations, but as glimpses of higher levels of reality and consciousness. However, Gurdjieff would caution against taking such experiences at face value unless they arise through conscious effort and verified inner development.

Here’s how the Fourth Way might explain why mystical experiences feel real—and how it distinguishes genuine spiritual insight from illusion:

---

🧠 1. "Man Is Asleep" — The Ordinary State Is the Illusion

Gurdjieff claimed that most human beings live in a state of waking sleep—they imagine they are conscious and unified, but in reality, they are fragmented and mechanical.

“Man lives his life in sleep, and in sleep he dies.”

From this standpoint, mystical experiences may feel real because they briefly interrupt this sleep, revealing something more real than our usual ego-driven perceptions.

---

⚡ 2. Higher States of Consciousness Exist

Gurdjieff taught that there are four states of consciousness:

1. Sleep (dreaming)

2. Waking state (ordinary daily life)

3. Self-remembering or self-consciousness

4. Objective consciousness (full awakening)

Most people fluctuate between the first two, rarely touching the third.

A genuine mystical experience may momentarily elevate a person into the third or even fourth state, in which truth is directly perceived, without distortion from the ego or personality. This direct perception is what makes the experience feel “objectively real.”

---

🪞 3. Real vs. Imaginary Experiences

However, Gurdjieff warned that most “spiritual” experiences are self-deception—the result of imagination, emotion, or desire.

“In the work, nothing is accepted on faith. Everything must be verified by personal experience and practical effort.”

So while mystical experiences may feel real, in the Fourth Way they are tested by:

• Their transformative effect on one’s being

• Whether they produce greater inner unity

• Whether they awaken conscience and will

If an experience leads only to emotional inflation or fantasy, it’s a false signal—what he sometimes called “buffers” or “false personality” trying to protect itself.

---

🔭 4. Higher Centers and Real Perception

Gurdjieff taught that humans have higher emotional and higher intellectual centers, which operate through direct, non-verbal knowledge. They are rarely active, but when they do function:

• One perceives essences, not forms.

• Time and space may be transcended.

• Truth feels immediate, unshakable, and self-evident.

This may explain why such experiences feel “more real than real.”

---

🧗 5. No Progress Without Inner Work

In the Fourth Way, such moments are not the goal—they are side effects or “taste tests” of what sustained transformation might yield.

“One must not pursue spiritual states, but pursue the work on oneself. States will come and go.”

In other words, mystical intensity is not the measure of truth—inner growth is.

---

🔑 Summary: The Fourth Way View

• Mystical experiences feel real because they may involve contact with higher centers or consciousness beyond the personality.

• However, many such experiences are imaginary or ego-based and must be tested.

• Objective reality exists, but only higher consciousness can perceive it directly.

• The goal is not chasing mystical visions, but transforming one's being through self-observation, non-identification, and conscious work.

---

If you're interested, I can also compare Gurdjieff’s view with that of other traditions (like Vedanta or Buddhism), or walk you through an example of how a Fourth Way practitioner might evaluate a mystical experience.

How does Sufism relate to these questions?

Sufism—often described as the mystical branch of Islam—has a rich and complex view of spiritual and mystical experiences, and it offers both affirmation and caution, much like the Fourth Way and Buddhism. Here's how Sufism relates to the nature, meaning, and risks of mystical experience:

---

🌌 1. Mystical Experience Is a Real Encounter—But Not the Goal

In Sufism, mystical experiences (visions, ecstasies, inner illuminations, divine unions) are considered real encounters with the Divine, often through the unveiling of the Heart (qalb). These are called:

• Wajd – spiritual ecstasy or intoxication

• Kashf – unveiling of spiritual truths

• Fanaʼ – annihilation of the ego or self

• Baqaʼ – subsistence in God, post-self-annihilation

These are not fantasies, but degrees of nearness to God (taqarrub ilā Allāh). That said...

Mystical experience is not the destination—it is a signpost.
One must not cling to the signpost and forget the path.

---

⚖️ 2. Drunkenness vs. Sobriety: Two Attitudes Toward Experience

Sufis often distinguish between two paths:

Path	Approach	Key Figures
Drunken Sufism	Embraces ecstasy and emotional rapture	Rumi, al-Hallaj, Bistami
Sober Sufism	Emphasizes restraint, clarity, and balance	Junayd, al-Ghazali

The "drunken" Sufi might speak of union with God, lose self-awareness in ecstasy, or speak heretical-sounding truths ("I am the Truth!").
The "sober" Sufi warns that intoxication can lead to delusion unless balanced by ethical discipline, knowledge, and submission.

---

🛡️ 3. Dangers of Spiritual Experiences: Pride, Illusion, Satanic Deception

Sufis warn of the subtle ego (nafs), which can masquerade as spiritual illumination. Some dangers include:

• Kibr (pride): Believing oneself special or chosen.

• Waswasa (whispering): Being deceived by satanic or egoic suggestions posing as divine messages.

• Istidraj: False miracles granted to deluded seekers to lead them further astray.

“The worst veil between you and God is your claim to have reached Him.” — Ibn Ata’ Allah al-Iskandari

This mirrors Gurdjieff’s warning about false personality and Buddhism’s caution against spiritual clinging.

---

🕊️ 4. Heart-Centered Knowledge: A Mode of Direct Perception

Sufism affirms a form of direct knowledge called:

• Maʿrifah – Gnosis, intuitive spiritual knowledge

• Iḥsān – “To worship God as if you see Him, and if you do not see Him, He sees you.”

This isn’t abstract belief, but an unveiling of reality through the purification of the heart—a deeper form of seeing that transcends discursive reasoning.

Like Gurdjieff’s “higher centers” or the Buddhist rigpa, this points to direct, non-dual awareness.

---

🔄 5. Transformation of the Self Is the True Goal

Mystical experience in Sufism is only useful if it leads to transformation:

• From ego (nafs) to spirit (rūḥ)

• From separation to unity (tawḥīd)

• From heedlessness to remembrance (dhikr)

The goal is not the experience, but the realization of Divine Unity—not as a momentary vision, but as a permanent state of being.

---

🧭 Summary: Sufism and Mystical Experience

Aspect	Sufism’s View
Mystical experiences	Valid, often real, but not automatically signs of awakening
Spiritual dangers	Pride, illusion, false miracles, demonic whispers
Ultimate goal	Realization of tawḥīd (Divine Unity) and annihilation of the ego (fanāʼ)
Verification	Ethical transformation, sincerity, humility, and God-centered awareness
Method	Remembrance (dhikr), love, service, and submission to Divine will (islām)

---

Would you like a three-way comparison of Buddhism, Sufism, and Gurdjieff’s Fourth Way on mystical experience and spiritual development?

In a previous discussion, you mentioned an academic who claimed that Gurdjieff had taken or adapted his ideas from a Sufi order (Naqshbandis?). Can you tell me more about this? Does it affect his view of mystical experiences?

Yes, this topic has been explored by a number of scholars and researchers who have examined the potential Sufi influence—particularly from the Naqshbandi order—on G. I. Gurdjieff and his "Fourth Way" teachings.

Here’s a detailed breakdown of the academic perspectives, evidence, and how this might relate to Gurdjieff’s treatment of mystical experiences.

---

🧠 1. Scholarly Claims of Sufi Influence

Notable researchers who have made the case:

• Mark Sedgwick – a historian of Sufism and traditionalism. He argues in Western Sufism that Gurdjieff was likely influenced by Central Asian Sufism, especially the Naqshbandiyya, which emphasizes sobriety, inner work, and secrecy.

• James Moore – a Gurdjieff biographer, who cautiously acknowledges parallels with Sufism but emphasizes Gurdjieff’s originality and syncretism.

• Michel de Salzmann (son of Jeanne de Salzmann) and J.G. Bennett – both long-term Gurdjieff students, have speculated about Gurdjieff’s exposure to esoteric Sufism during his travels in Central Asia.

• Peter Kingsley, although more focused on Greek and pre-Socratic roots, also recognizes echoes of Sufi-like approaches in Gurdjieff's emphasis on presence and self-remembering.

---

📜 2. The Naqshbandi Parallel

The Naqshbandi Sufi order, especially its Khwajagan lineage in Central Asia (e.g., Bukhara, Samarkand), bears striking resemblances to Gurdjieff’s system:

Naqshbandi Sufism	Gurdjieff's Fourth Way
Silent dhikr (remembrance)	Self-remembering, inner awareness
Emphasis on sobriety over ecstatic states	Warnings against getting lost in mystical experiences
Hidden masters and transmission	Idea of esoteric schools and “schools of the Fourth Way”
Integration of spiritual work into daily life	The Fourth Way = “Work in life”
"Die before you die" — ego death	Self-observation leading to dissolution of false personality
Belief in degrees of the self	Concept of multiple “I”s and the need to form a permanent “I”

Gurdjieff even writes cryptically in Meetings with Remarkable Men about visiting a "Sarmoung Brotherhood"—which some take to be a fictionalized version of a Sufi tariqa, possibly a rendering of Sarmoun or Sarman, names that echo oral traditions from Persianate Sufism.

---

🧘 3. Impact on Mystical Experience

This context sheds light on Gurdjieff’s deep ambivalence toward mystical experiences:

• Experiences are not evidence of development: Like sober Sufis, Gurdjieff taught that visions, ecstasy, or paranormal events could be mechanical and misleading.

• Real development = transformation of being: This mirrors the Naqshbandi ideal that inner stillness, disciplined presence, and ethical refinement are more important than mystical thrills.

• No reliance on belief or dogma: Both Sufis and Gurdjieff stress direct experience of truth—yet urge that such experience must be tested by inner stability and objectivity.

---

📚 4. Related Academic Works

• Mark Sedgwick, Western Sufism (2016) – situates Gurdjieff within broader Western appropriations of Sufi ideas.

• James Moore, Gurdjieff: The Anatomy of a Myth (1991) – careful biography noting possible Sufi links.

• William James Thompson and Stephen J. Sutcliffe have also written academic studies comparing esotericism, Sufism, and Gurdjieff’s teaching.

---

🧾 Summary

There is credible academic support for the view that Gurdjieff's system incorporates elements from Sufi traditions, particularly Naqshbandi principles:

• Sobriety over ecstasy

• Integration of spiritual work into life

• Self-remembering and ego-transcendence

• Distrust of mystical visions as signs of progress

While Gurdjieff never publicly claimed to be a Sufi, his approach aligns more with "sober" Sufism than with ecstatic mysticism—and this profoundly shaped his view of spiritual experience as something to be verified through inner change, not felt intensity.

---

Would you like a comparison chart showing how Gurdjieff, Sufism, and Buddhism each treat mystical states and spiritual progress?