Another stupid theory - ideoplastic

[Loki]

I have known Neil for fifteen years now, since he was a mod schoolboy with ambitions for adventure and I was an earnest young hippy who merely wanted to start a club for people interested in unknown animals. Nothing much has changed over the years; we are just both a tad older....

It has often been theorised that a majority of 'zooform' creatures are 'tulpas', or unintentional manifestations created by the human psyche. There is also the possibility that such phantasms, or monsters from the id, can be created intentionally. One such example was researched by George Foot Moore, an American Orientalist and religious historian, who died in 1931, who took on the view that 'monsters' are mental projections, although it has never been explained as to how several people can muster a creature. However, over the centuries such 'monsters' have been born in the form of dragons, fairies, phantom hellhounds and the like, to the modern day manifestations known as Mothman, the Jersey Devil and the Bray Road Werewolf of Wisconsin.

Polish expert Julian Ochorowicz coined the term 'ideoplastic', which he used to describe the unconscious power of a medium to create tangible and apparently autonomous physical forms. Another Polish researcher, Franek Kluski was said to have caused the materialisation of more than two-hundred apparitions, mostly in the form of animals. His most famous manifestation, or projection was the shaggy ape-man which appeared at a séance on 20th November 1921, under the supervision of Professor Geley. The bizarre beast materialised and Geley felt the apparition rub shoulders with him, and also give off a pungent stench. This monster resembled a similar ape-man conjured on August 10th 1923, and was said to have lifted several chairs (which women were sitting on at the time) and also overturned a sofa. Famous ghost hunter Harry Price also partook in several séances where 'ghosts' of children were manifested.

This complex nature brings me to the tale of the 'Mole Kingdom'. This strange place was created by the already mentioned Franek Kluski, but when he was a child. He described how he would often lay down for hours in the corner of the room of his parents house, and then as darkness drew in, he would arrange two chairs with a rug positioned over them, resembling a makeshift camp. Franek would then lie under the 'camp' and visit what he called the 'Mole Kingdom'. Although his parents left him to it, knowing full well how the imagination of children worked, little did they realise that Franek was interacting with 'creatures' he'd manifested. On one occasion Franek invited a couple of friends to join him under the canopy of the rug where they all heard a vase break, a strike from a clock that had been broken for a long time, and the footsteps of the 'Mole'. The vision appeared to be enshrouded in a bluish cloud, and was accompanied by two children who those in attendance knew had died some years ago. Franek told his friends that dead children often came back to life in the 'Kingdom'.

Scientist Charles Richet called this 'place' the 'cryptocosm', or in occult circles it has been known as the 'astral world'; places where dreams come to life. Of course, those who raise such 'monsters' seem able to dispose of, or control such levels of strangeness, but is this world, which we inhabit, plagued by forces or apparitions and monsters, which we have, over thousands of years, unintentionally manifested? It seems so, and certainly, in my opinion, the only way we can fully describe what Jon Downes originally coined as 'zooform phenomena', peculiar 'monsters' or forms with animal characteristics, which are not your average ghost of a pet. However, with the full power of the mind as yet not understood, what creatures could we create intentionally if we really wanted to? And should we attempt such a practice?

Source: Zooform Phenomena: Mole Kingdom Still on the Track -  http://forteanzoology.blogspot.com/2009/06/neil-arnold-zooform-phenomena-mole.html

I disagree with this theory - people who have paranormal abilities can project ghostly images but that cannot account for the existence of monsters as a whole. Human can raise monsters, but they cannot create them ...

[Muerte]

  I concure.  The explination of creatures of unknown origin is bound to me much more profond than simply saying " They are creations of our own mind, and only live as long as we concentrate on them"  Some people just want simple answers and accept what ever bone is thrown to them.

[Raziel]

Don't be too quick to judge. This could be an interesting spin on reality manipulation. where we "go" to places/the astral plane while conscious. And "express" our ideas in this world.


ANyone think this sounds like video game magic?


I TAP MAGIC AND THROW AN IMAGINED FIRE BALL AT J0000!!! fFor 400 damage! BOOYAHAHAH!

[blow_fly]

Hmm, does this mean that our thoughts have the potential to influence physical matter in a tangible fashion?  And if so, are there any limits to this ability? I'm inclined to agree with Moonbaby though. Not every unusual creature that we sight is bound to be a creation of our imagination.  As they sometimes say, truth can be stranger than fiction.

[Muerte]

Hmm, does this mean that our thoughts have the potential to influence physical matter in a tangible fashion?  And if so, are there any limits to this ability? I'm inclined to agree with Moonbaby though. Not every unusual creature that we sight is bound to be a creation of our imagination.  As they sometimes say, truth can be stranger than fiction.

  I think it is indeed possible for some with the talent to achieve such a feat, though it wouldn't be something from nothing.  It could be more likely that they take present physical matter and reform it to suit their needs.

[blow_fly]

So it would involve a re-arrangement of existing physical matter on an atomic level then.  Would such an act of creation involve the  permanent destruction or alteration of the material that is manipulated by the one projecting those manifestations? I'd like to hear your thoughts on this subject, Muerte,

[Muerte]

So it would involve a re-arrangement of existing physical matter on an atomic level then.  Would such an act of creation involve the  permanent destruction or alteration of the material that is manipulated by the one projecting those manifestations? I'd like to hear your thoughts on this subject, Muerte,

  I would say it is an alteration with no destruction, as matter can neither be created or destroyed simple changed, we all learned that in school.  Take H_2O ( a poor example, but easy enogh for all to undestand )  After a proper stimulant is applied you can seperate it into two seperate gasses.  Not only do you get a physical change, but you get two seperate elememnts entirely. 

  Now take into consideration the possiblity of a person who has the mental ability to not only seperate items around us into their most basic form, but to also reform it into whatever they desire.  Their abilities to start with would of course be minimal to begin with, but after years of displine and practice, their abilities would be amazing, and most likely border on horrifying.  Think of it my friends, those who may have had this ability in the past would have had nothing but instict to work with, but now that we have science to aid us?  I kept this as simple as possible so all may read and understand, also I look forward to more questions.

  It makes me wonder, what if someone were to take Oldbill's meditation practice and after perfecting it focus on altering the state of physical objects around them.

[blow_fly]

I would say it is an alteration with no destruction, as matter can neither be created or destroyed simple changed, we all learned that in school

I guess this is the part where I should feel embarassed. Shame on me for being ignorant of high-school chemistry!   

Now take into consideration the possiblity of a person who has the mental ability to not only seperate items around us into their most basic form, but to also reform it into whatever they desire.  Their abilities to start with would of course be minimal to begin with, but after years of displine and practice, their abilities would be amazing, and most likely border on horrifying.

Would such an ability be able to revive dead organic life-forms to a state of living animation again? Given the probably limitless ability of such a transformational faculty, do you think its wielder would be capable of converting a decaying corpse into  a wailing new-born?

[Muerte]

Would such an ability be able to revive dead organic life-forms to a state of living animation again? Given the probably limitless ability of such a transformational faculty, do you think its wielder would be capable of converting a decaying corpse into  a wailing new-born?

  Initially I wanted to say no, but that would be too easy of a reply would it not.  I still say no, but for a specific reason.  What we are discussing in the creation ( or rediatibution ) of matter, and while yes the body is matter, and while yes you could break down the remains of a dead organic life-form and mix it with a few other needed compounds there is one thing that can not be created out of matter and that is the soul.  The body is a puppet and the soul is the strings which gives the puppet animation.  So while he could create the body of a new born child, I doubt it would be wailing, best case sinario, the person could create a pletora of human bodies in which the organs could be harvested to help others, but we could accomplish this with cloning could we not?

  You know this reminds me of an anime I caught on adult swim not too long ago.  Full Metal Alchmist, this is sort of along those lines ( and no I did not come up with this theory because of an anime, it just occured to me while I write this that it has certain similarities )

[blow_fly]

What is a soul but a spiritual construction that we employ to describe the individual human conciousness?  If it is possible to convert a corpse into a living infant via the artifice of an ability with tremendous transformative potential, there is no reason why said infant would not be endowed with the same primal instincts as any other new-born. After all,  human conciousness is but the sum of the individual memories and experiences that underlie it. Hence, I fail to see why a living infant birthed in the manner that I've already described, provided that it has  no neurological or other physical disabilities,  would be unable to ascend the same peaks of  emotional and intellectual development as other infants produced  via more conventional methods.

[Muerte]

  Perhaps I am simple looking at it from a physical stand point.  The person creating the body would have an understanding of physical matter, not of metaphysical matter.  He can create a vessel, but how would he know to fill it?  The human soul after all is not made of the the physical.  Unless of course the final filling piece is what floats in the aether of our would looking for an empty vessel to inhabit.  Now that starts a whole new outlook on this discussion does it not?