|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 7:24 am
dreams... some say its connecting to spirits in a way, or a way to speak with your subconcias... but really...most of the time dreams is just showing you whatever you were thinking about most when you fell asleep!
otherkin [at first] think they are not completly human, because they are thinking this when they go to sleep, thats what they dream about! causeing the awakening! they become so happy/releived to know this(even though its just them telling themselvs while they sleep) that they start subconciaslly useing the law of attraction and energy controll to make it seem like they breath fire when really its pyrokinesis!
however this is just a theory for otherkin that look just like normal humans and are not "376 years old but look 35"....
but this is just a theory that applies to some people...but not all..
I thought up this theory because I have learned that I can move my energy around to make fake astral bodyparts! so it should be easy to trick yourself into thinking your a otherkin by moveing around your energy!
this is not to say that I don't beleive in astral bodyparts and otherkin!
I'm just pointing out that you can imitate otherkin and astral bodyparts easly!
(I definitly beleive in astral bodyparts because I have a astral cat tail)
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:41 am
I'm not sure it's true that dreams are mostyl a reflection of what one was thinking about immediately prior to falling asleap. Based on personal experience at least, I find that assessment dubious. You've struck on a good basic concept though, and that's the power of the human mind to convince itself of anything as truth. Whether or not otherkin actually exist or not, the human mind is capable of convincing itself of just about anything so long as it is not harmfully contradictory to other observations. Dreams could be one avenue for this sort of thing, but not the only one.
Personally, I'm extremely skeptical of otherkin and choose to not believe in them because of the adverse consequences of such beliefs. I tend to gauge nonfalsifiable beliefs not on the merit or truth of the idea (as such things cannot be objectively assessed), but the consequences of holding such ideas. Consequences vary from person to person, but generally it seems that those who believe themselves to be otherkin (or believe themselves to have any sort of special power for that matter) are doing so for less-than-ideal psychological reasons. No offense to those who hold such beliefs. Heck, part of the reason I can attest to these less-than-ideal reasons is because I've been there myself.
Ideals set aside, the beliefs sure the hell are fun. Heh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:16 pm
Good points. My personal subjective experiences show me about 20% of otherkin are total pretty much comet-cult n00bs who do it to be cool, 20% are smart and good hearted but probably mistaken, 50% I can't tell or on a scale of not likely -to- probably, and the remaining 10% are pretty much unquestionable, and have a wealth of experience and knowledge which would give them no reason, motive or ability to lie about, especially if people figure out some of the same conclusions independently, which they could only do if they were true. I think the presence of alot of pretenders show the idea is popular, and has enough merit to have come out of something concrete. I don't think someone could have made this up off the top of their head. But thats me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 2:03 pm
I have found no arguments that convince me of the existence of otherkin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 7:04 pm
-Blind Guardian- I have found no arguments that convince me of the existence of otherkin. You can't really show otherkin, unless you are otherkin (for most can usually sense another otherkin and see their astral body parts, though not all the time. There are also humans who can sense it too, most of them are otherkin hunters...) or you both are at the same place on the astral plain. Basicly they are human for the most part, just with extra traits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 2:35 am
Xx_Nobody_xX -Blind Guardian- I have found no arguments that convince me of the existence of otherkin. (for most can usually sense another otherkin and see their astral body parts, though not all the time. There are also humans who can sense it too, most of them are otherkin hunters...) or you both are at the same place on the astral plain. Basicly they are human for the most part, just with extra traits. What an easy way to eliminate the claims of non-believers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 6:48 am
Blind Guardian the 2nd Xx_Nobody_xX -Blind Guardian- I have found no arguments that convince me of the existence of otherkin. (for most can usually sense another otherkin and see their astral body parts, though not all the time. There are also humans who can sense it too, most of them are otherkin hunters...) or you both are at the same place on the astral plain. Basicly they are human for the most part, just with extra traits. What an easy way to eliminate the claims of non-believers. In a sense I was agreeing with you. There is no evidence that can make people believe, they either do or don't like religion (Though that maybe a bad comparison). Who knows, maybe we are just a bunch of nut cases. "I am human nor anything else, I am just me."-Xx_Nobody_xX And that is how I feel. I am physicly the same as everyone else, basicly I am the same, I dislike claiming to be otherkin, though I tend too sometimes which I really hate. If I am Otherkin or not it doesn't change who I am, that is what people need to understand though that claim they are otherkin. Wow... I started to ramble.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 10:58 am
Xx_Nobody_xX Blind Guardian the 2nd Xx_Nobody_xX -Blind Guardian- I have found no arguments that convince me of the existence of otherkin. (for most can usually sense another otherkin and see their astral body parts, though not all the time. There are also humans who can sense it too, most of them are otherkin hunters...) or you both are at the same place on the astral plain. Basicly they are human for the most part, just with extra traits. What an easy way to eliminate the claims of non-believers. In a sense I was agreeing with you. There is no evidence that can make people believe, they either do or don't like religion (Though that maybe a bad comparison). Who knows, maybe we are just a bunch of nut cases. "I am human nor anything else, I am just me."-Xx_Nobody_xX And that is how I feel. I am physicly the same as everyone else, basicly I am the same, I dislike claiming to be otherkin, though I tend too sometimes which I really hate. If I am Otherkin or not it doesn't change who I am, that is what people need to understand though that claim they are otherkin. Wow... I started to ramble. I'd say there is 'evidence' that can be shown to others, but it's nature is a bit less-than-straightforward. Everyone, for instance, has mystical experiences which are the root of religion among other things. However, people's *interpretations* of those experiences differ. You could describe the experience of being otherkin and some could identify with it. However, they would not explain that experience by saying "oh, I have the soul of a nonhuman animal!" but instead maybe say, "well, we all identify with nonhuman animals... no surprise since all life is interconnected and a lot of people like animals.."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 2:17 am
Starlock I'd say there is 'evidence' that can be shown to others, but it's nature is a bit less-than-straightforward. Everyone, for instance, has mystical experiences which are the root of religion among other things. However, people's *interpretations* of those experiences differ. You could describe the experience of being otherkin and some could identify with it. However, they would not explain that experience by saying "oh, I have the soul of a nonhuman animal!" but instead maybe say, "well, we all identify with nonhuman animals... no surprise since all life is interconnected and a lot of people like animals.." Or maybe it's the fact that most "cuddly" animals have inadvertantly had human characteristic's (especially facial features) worked into them by humanity's selective breeding of beasts for work. Don't pish-posh this either. I believe it is mentioned in the book "The Ancestors Tale", but I cannot remember the author at this moment in time. It's entirely possible. No, not all animals suffer from this. But animals such as domesticated dogs and cats suffer from it greatly. EDIT: I do not deny the existence of souls, by the way. I just do not think that the universe would make such a huge ******** mistake and put so many animal souls in human bodies. Seeing as the body is only a vehicle for the soul, I do not see why the characteristics of the BODY would follow the SOUL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 9:38 am
Blind Guardian the 2nd Or maybe it's the fact that most "cuddly" animals have inadvertantly had human characteristic's (especially facial features) worked into them by humanity's selective breeding of beasts for work. Don't pish-posh this either. I believe it is mentioned in the book "The Ancestors Tale", but I cannot remember the author at this moment in time. It's entirely possible. No, not all animals suffer from this. But animals such as domesticated dogs and cats suffer from it greatly. Dawkins. I've read that work myself and I don't recall him ever mentioning any connection between 'human-like-animal-apperance' and breeding selection. But be careful here... saying that nonhuman animals have 'human' characteristics could be unwarrented anthropomorphization rather than objective observation of traits. Perhaps it's the other way around and WE are the ones who have ANIMAL characteristics. Given evolutionary mechanisms, that is much more likely. Neither here nor there with regards to this topic... Blind Guardian the 2nd EDIT: I do not deny the existence of souls, by the way. I just do not think that the universe would make such a huge ******** mistake and put so many animal souls in human bodies. Seeing as the body is only a vehicle for the soul, I do not see why the characteristics of the BODY would follow the SOUL. Heh... you speak of the soul as if it is a fact! The very existence of souls cannot be empirically proven (or at least it has not at this time). But presuming they do exist, why do you assume it is a mistake to put animal souls in human bodies?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 1:39 am
Starlock Blind Guardian the 2nd Or maybe it's the fact that most "cuddly" animals have inadvertantly had human characteristic's (especially facial features) worked into them by humanity's selective breeding of beasts for work. Don't pish-posh this either. I believe it is mentioned in the book "The Ancestors Tale", but I cannot remember the author at this moment in time. It's entirely possible. No, not all animals suffer from this. But animals such as domesticated dogs and cats suffer from it greatly. Dawkins. I've read that work myself and I don't recall him ever mentioning any connection between 'human-like-animal-apperance' and breeding selection. But be careful here... saying that nonhuman animals have 'human' characteristics could be unwarrented anthropomorphization rather than objective observation of traits. Perhaps it's the other way around and WE are the ones who have ANIMAL characteristics. Given evolutionary mechanisms, that is much more likely. Neither here nor there with regards to this topic... Blind Guardian the 2nd EDIT: I do not deny the existence of souls, by the way. I just do not think that the universe would make such a huge ******** mistake and put so many animal souls in human bodies. Seeing as the body is only a vehicle for the soul, I do not see why the characteristics of the BODY would follow the SOUL. Heh... you speak of the soul as if it is a fact! The very existence of souls cannot be empirically proven (or at least it has not at this time). But presuming they do exist, why do you assume it is a mistake to put animal souls in human bodies? I believe the part regarding that sort of selection is early in the book. Among the agricultural anthropology section. Plus, you're speaking about objectivity when it's quite apparent that the world isn't always this way. Plus, it's a noted fact that we select more human like animals for domestication and especially as pets. It has been said by many that the more domesticated a dog becomes, the more "human" its eyes are. To one with belief, it is a fact that the soul exists. Because where a soul goes unto its next life is determined by karma, and if an oxen became a human, no remenance of that oxen's life or markings follow it into human life. For instance, who was an oxen once? The Buddha. I didn't ever see him claiming to be a bloody otherkin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:27 pm
-Blind Guardian- I have found no arguments that convince me of the existence of otherkin. for those who believe, no evidence is needed, for those who don't believe, no evidence is enough.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 10:24 am
Blind Guardian the 2nd To one with belief, it is a fact that the soul exists. And to one with belief, it is a fact that otherkin exist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 7:29 pm
My personal theory, and I've yet to see anything to the contrary, is one involving placebo effects based on desire for uniqueness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 3:03 am
TallonDagmar -Blind Guardian- I have found no arguments that convince me of the existence of otherkin. for those who believe, no evidence is needed, for those who don't believe, no evidence is enough. Well said! biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
![[BlkCat]'s avatar](https://a1cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/e9/b0/68ff25f32b0e9_flip.png?t=1249230010_6.00_01)
