Hello MaskedFox. Thank you for your kind compliments. I've read your entries on this website and respect your points of view. The fact of the matter is that no one really knows exactly how the human mind operates. All we really have are theories with varying degrees of plausibility. I consider Carl Jung's theories among the most plausible. I spoke about the, "Sensor," to moe because all that she described either contributed to, or was symptomatic of a weakening, "Sensor." I study and practice Magic. Magic has much to do with the Unconscious Mind. It makes sense, therefore, that we Magicians try to access it. And, the way we try to access it is by intentionally trying to weaken the, "Sensor." There are various methods of doing this. Advanced Magicians do this consciously through Magical Operations. However, I think that moe is weakening her, "Sensor," unconsciously and unintentionally through her lifestyle and set of life's circumstances. For example, Magicians use, "sleep deprivation," as well as, "exhaustion," as magical tools for weakening the "Sensor." Moe complained of, "restless sleep," and often staying up late at night past midnight. Magicians use, "Sensory Overload," to weaken the, "Sensor." Moe described trying to sleep with televisions going and fans running, etc. The imagination is by far the Magician's most powerful tool. Moe described herself as having an, "overactive imagination." Magicians use overt and exaggerated emotions to weaken the, "Sensor." Moe spoke at length about her, "Fears." One has to be open to the occult in order to experience occult phenomena. Moe described herself as a, "Spiritual Person." Added to this, most everything she described are symptoms of, "the waters of the unconscious," being allowed to flood the Conscious mind: common symptoms of which are, "Sensory Hallucinations." My point is that, whether she's doing it consciously and intentionally, or not, she is weakening her, "Sensor," and she is exhibiting the common symptoms.

As for the psychic telling you that you were, "born with a weaker psychic barrier than most people," and, "this barrier preventing most people from experiencing the supernatural:" regarding the occult, again, all we really have are theories with varying degrees of plausibility. Princeton Psychology Professor, Dr. Julian Jaynes, wrote a book entitled, The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. In it, he makes a rather convincing argument that human consciousness is only about two to three thousand years old: a relatively new development in the evolution of man. He speculates that human consciousness evolved as a survival mechanism when man began to urbanize in Agrarian Society. Among many pieces of evidence, he cites the first appearance of the pronoun, "I," in World Literature, the appearance of the knowledge of the difference between good and evil and the appearance of, "Codes of Ethics," such as, "The Ten Commandments," as near the beginnings of the evolution of human consciousness. So, obviously, there was a, "Pre-Conscious Man," which Jaynes calls, "Bicameral Man." He describes, "Bicameral Man," as an animal, just like any other animal, responding automatically to the environment, but who just happened to have a method of verbal and written communication. Because, "Bicameral Man," could speak, his thoughts came to him in the form of, "words." Interestingly, the Christian Holy Bible's Gospel of John opens with, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Jaynes speculates that, "Bicameral Man," heard his thoughts in the form of voices in his head. He also speculates that, "Bicameral Man," understood these, "voices," as, "Gods speaking to him." Interestingly, Bicameral Civilizations did grow up around temples, temple mounts, places of worship, etc. and, "Oracles," were an important part of Bicameral Civilizations. As Human Consciousness evolved, Man began leaving the temples, stopped relying on Oracles and Religion began becoming less important. To summarize, "Bicameral Man," was led by the Unconscious Mind. Since the evolution of Human Consciousness, present day Man is led by the Conscious Mind.

Now, here is the scary part. Jaynes points out the enormous similarities between the way Bicameral Man used the human mind and what we presently refer to as, "Schizophrenia." The two most common symptoms of Schizophrenia are: 1) Sensory Hallucination---namely, Auditory Hallucinations (hearing voices inside one's head) and, 2) Erosion of the Ego---the sense of, "Self"---in effect, the loss of the pronoun, "I." In language, Schizophrenics often refer to themselves in, "third person."

The fact of the matter is that most everyone has experienced Sensory Hallucinations, or, "heard voices inside one's head." But, this doesn't mean that a person is Schizophrenic. Jaynes calls these, "phenomena," or, Sensory Hallucinations, "vestiges of the Bicameral Mind:" in other words, traces, or leftovers from early man---Bicameral Man.

My point is that I believe present-day Man has two minds: 1) the Conscious Mind and, 2) the Unconscious Mind---quite possibly the extant Bicameral Mind. I believe that present-day Man has the ability to separate and keep the two separate. However, I also believe that the boundary between the two can become blurred under certain circumstances. I also believe that much---very much---of what the Conscious Mind perceives as, "Occult Phenomena," is a result of these blurred boundaries. Which leads me to my next point:

You mentioned, in effect, "Subjective Occult Experience," versus, "Objective Occult Experience." Consider these two occult concepts: 1) Suggestion/Suggestibility and, 2) "The Group Mind." People are, "Suggestible:" vulnerable to, "Suggestion." And, it is possible for one person to influence a group of people's thinking and beliefs. For example: people who spend inordinate amounts of time alone, deprive themselves of ordinary sensual pleasures such as listening to music, etc., and who are subject to enormous amounts of stress over prolonged periods of time are particularly vulnerable to experiencing what they perceive as, "Occult Phenomena." These living conditions are fertile breeding ground for, "Weakening the Sensor." About 11 years ago, I went through a bitter divorce with an unfaithful wife who thought another man was the father of my younger son. It resulted in a year-long divorce process, a paternity (DNA) test, three separate bankruptcy filings and both emotional and financial ruin. In the process, I was under a great deal of both emotional and financial stress for a very long time and spending inordinate amounts of time alone with no money or interest in sensual pleasures such as leisure and entertainment. And, yes, my, "Sensor," weakened and I was experiencing, "Occult Phenomena," like you wouldn't believe, although I was oblivious to the psychological reasons for the phenomena at the time. I kept hearing the faint voice of a, "Ghost Woman," singing lullabies to her, "Ghost Child," in one of the rooms of my house. I remember hearing the singing while teaching one of my private music students (whom I'll call, "Patrick," here) in my house. I remember stopping my student's lesson and telling him, "Patrick! Do you hear that?" "What?" he replied. "Don't you hear the voice of a woman singing a lullaby?" "No. I don't hear anything," he answered. "Do you mean to tell me you can't hear that? I hear it as plain as day!," I told him. (Now here's the funny part). Then my student. Patrick, said, "Wait a minute! I do hear it! You're right! Man! That's weird!"

So, do you see what I'm trying to illustrate here? I had it in my mind that I was hearing a, "Ghost Woman," singing lullabies in my house and I believed it was happening beyond the shadow of a doubt. And, through the vehicle of, "Suggestion," I was able to convince my student that he heard it, too. I'm certain that he conjured up the sound of a, "Ghost Woman," singing lullabies in his own imagination, listened to it and actually believed he heard it, too. So, this is what I mean. In order for an, "Objective Occult Experience," to be truly, "Objective," it has to be totally free of the influence, "Suggestion," and, "The Group Mind." I must laugh now. Unknowingly, through, "Suggestion," I once convinced an old girlfriend of mine that she was seeing the silhouette of a 15th-century, Roman Catholic Monk materializing outside my bedroom door. The power of suggestion is very powerful indeed. I don't know what your objective occult experiences are, MaskedFox. But, it's possible that, "Suggestion," and, "The Group Mind," concepts might have been at play.

I've got to go to bed before I start hallucinating. I hope I've answered your questions. Until next time...

I will tell you the problem I have with the concepts you have presented. I have seen the power of suggestion at work, but where do you draw the line?

One of my experiences which I considered substantiated is watching my girlfriend’s cat chase a shadow. While watching, my girlfriend commented, “He’s acting very weird, isn’t he?” I took that to mean the cat was in fact chasing something but my girlfriend was unable to see it. However, with the power of suggestion, perhaps I saw the cat acting strange and my unconscious simply created an image to explain it.

Now take your video of footprints in the snow. Could it be that the power of suggestion and the group mind caused us all to see footprints there?

How do you know that Patrick and you did not actually hear a woman singing lullabies? You have no proof either way. Is it not just as likely that you both did hear something?

In general, if the power of suggestion is so strong as to affect us with a simple statement of “do you hear that?” When someone points a dog out on the street, do you really see the dog or is it the power of suggestion showing you a dog because the other first hallucinated a dog there?

When we begin explaining things away through the power of suggestion, a limit must be defined. Otherwise, everything we perceive through our five senses can be explained away. Then all knowledge is subjective. If all knowledge is subjective, we can never really know anything.

Knowledge is life. If a person can never know anything, then life is pointless.


I realize entire philosophies are built on this premise. I don’t adhere to these as I enjoy learning and knowing things. I assume you also do not follow these views or you would have no reason to be on this forum.

We may be getting sidetracked from the original thread topic…

Hello Again MaskedFox. You make excellent points. I'm not sure how to reply to your points at this time. Police detectives will tell you that they can interview six different witnesses to the same crime and they will hear six different accounts. I've spent inordinate amounts of time and tons of money on Court proceedings with my ex-wife, the mother of my two sons. Her vision of the reality of our family law situation is the opposite of mine. I find it almost impossible to converse with her because, often, I think she's mentally ill. I can't imagine how she comes up with the stuff she comes up with. Interestingly, she thinks the same of me. Who is right? Who is wrong? I don't know, but I think I am. She thinks she is. I think the nature of reality is that it is, to a large extent, subjective. "Objective Reality," seems to be what most people agree upon. I don't know where to draw the line now, other than, perhaps, everyone should draw their own lines. Thank you for your keen insight.

I think the next best step for the situation, is to take note of my surroundings and wait til something else happens.

Many great points have been made, all of which I will consider.

Thus far, I have not heard the voice again, and I will admit I am kind of thankful. Should I or my stepsister experience something else, this is the first place I am coming to talk about it.

I am beyond appreciative of all the comments and helpful suggestions.

Thank you!

Anyone know of a website that has good EVPs? Maybe I can compare what I heard to one of those.