Standard waking state is seen as the primary framework of all existence. It is taken as being fundamental so research on other states of reality is geared to, and modeled on, approaches suited to things within that standard.
The thing is - that approach is completely backwards. Standard waking state, and all within it, is just one attribute (one version if you prefer) of existence.
You may say that there is no proof of that and I will counter that if you mean proof that meets the "standard state" approach, I agree but even within that approach there is however an abundance of evidence of that (I assume the reader gets the difference between proof and evidence)
Almost every "anomaly" has aspects that show a connection to something other than standard waking state. I hope that the reader agrees with that much. In fact I'd go as far as to say that the whole discourse on here is based on researching that something. And there lies the rub. Even those who maintain that "greater reality" is not generated by the brain - still proceed with research approaches that are applicable only if it is. IOW almost all current research methodologies are valid only if that something has its roots in a physical source.
The allegiance to the "standard state" approach is clearly very strong - especially for those who consider themselves intellectual or "scientific minded". So strong that even many of those who see a need to move beyond materialist science think of that movement in terms that amount to "applying the principles and/or methods of materialist science in other directions." But to continue to use an approach which works well for researching the physical to investigate that which I maintain is very different to and is responsible for the physical is neither intellectual or, in the true sense of the word, scientific. It is often simply holding on to what's familiar.
The thing is - that approach is completely backwards. Standard waking state, and all within it, is just one attribute (one version if you prefer) of existence.
You may say that there is no proof of that and I will counter that if you mean proof that meets the "standard state" approach, I agree but even within that approach there is however an abundance of evidence of that (I assume the reader gets the difference between proof and evidence)
Almost every "anomaly" has aspects that show a connection to something other than standard waking state. I hope that the reader agrees with that much. In fact I'd go as far as to say that the whole discourse on here is based on researching that something. And there lies the rub. Even those who maintain that "greater reality" is not generated by the brain - still proceed with research approaches that are applicable only if it is. IOW almost all current research methodologies are valid only if that something has its roots in a physical source.
The allegiance to the "standard state" approach is clearly very strong - especially for those who consider themselves intellectual or "scientific minded". So strong that even many of those who see a need to move beyond materialist science think of that movement in terms that amount to "applying the principles and/or methods of materialist science in other directions." But to continue to use an approach which works well for researching the physical to investigate that which I maintain is very different to and is responsible for the physical is neither intellectual or, in the true sense of the word, scientific. It is often simply holding on to what's familiar.