Indigo/starseeds
What is your take on Indigos who say they are high functioning autists/aspies/schizos? What about starseeds? Are we better off thinking we are indigos or starseeds if we function better that way, have more confidence, etc? What if imagination is a downplayed aspect of the brain and in ours it is just more active? What if we are normal in that way and have psychic ability that translates as disability?
There's a line between confidence and delusional, this is experience talking. Confidence doesn't show up on maslow's hierarchy of human needs until the 3rd level, competence comes with hours of practice depending on the skill set and not only leads to confidence, can actually produce results that other people can appreciate (more confidence).
life is a delusion for the most part. How much time do you spend watching tv, daydreaming, listening to music, remembering, not living in the present? We are hard wired to live in delusion for the greater part of our lives.
The question is what is it for? How does it serve us?
If I wanna make my numbers colors, or correlate letters to feelings, and if that works for me although science can't validate my mind, who cares.
Who cares?
Have fun. I am Indigo hear me roarrr, not some ret*d aspie that is ignored. Well ignore me please because popularity never pleased me as much as individuality and I am me, not nothing, the queen of the universe in my own mind.
Go get a slip or validation permit to tell you who you are.
I've had your outlook before yellowallpaper, and to some degree you're absolutely right, having confidence in who you are is better than looking to other people for validation. Truthfully, most people aren't all that confident themselves and can appear confident only if they can outshine someone else, people with AS are easy targets.
I agree its important to operate on some level of contentment, having a low self-esteem invites attacks and prevents self-improvment. But there are more important things than self esteem if you ask me. I can't bluff to save my life, but ever since I took physical fitness more seriously (years ago), I haven't had to do any kind of bluffing to avoid getting assaulted. The one time I've had someone attack me, I reacted quickly and physically showed him that I was not going to be an easy target, the person who did it hasn't once tried doing it again (as drunk and out of control as he claims to get).
Showing your self-confidence only encourages people to cherish the moment you don't pull through, they'll love to help you re-live it. People hate the notion that anyone out there is more amazing than they are.
I don't really like to think of myself as special or anything. I don't want to pigeon hole myself by mentally separating myself from everyone else. I like to focus more on my commonalities with others than differences, because that's where the real change will come from.
I think its better to not see yourself as a creature that's damaged beyond repair, but it could be just as bad to form a self image that's at the opposite extreme. I think were all star children technically. Like Sagan said, were all made of the same star stuff.
I agree its important to operate on some level of contentment, having a low self-esteem invites attacks and prevents self-improvment. But there are more important things than self esteem if you ask me. I can't bluff to save my life, but ever since I took physical fitness more seriously (years ago), I haven't had to do any kind of bluffing to avoid getting assaulted. The one time I've had someone attack me, I reacted quickly and physically showed him that I was not going to be an easy target, the person who did it hasn't once tried doing it again (as drunk and out of control as he claims to get).
Showing your self-confidence only encourages people to cherish the moment you don't pull through, they'll love to help you re-live it. People hate the notion that anyone out there is more amazing than they are.
thanks.
con means to bamboozle, so confidence is to pretend, if it gets us by, it gets us by
There is no valid empirical evidence for any claim supporting the existence of "Indigo" people. Any claim for the existence of Indigo people is based on belief alone, and is therefore subjective in nature. Insisting that Indigo people exist in spite of the lack of valid empirical evidence may indicate a delusional mind-set.
Things that are not valid empirical evidence:
- Sarcasm against those who know better ("Obviously, you're not smart / spiritual / perceptive enough to even understand the concept").
- Appeal to Popularity of the idea ("Millions of people believe in Indigo People, so there must be some truth to it").
- Appeal from Incredulity that anyone would not believe ("I can't believe that the existence of Indigo People is is not obvious to you").
- Appeal to False Authority of "experts" in unrelated fields of study ("9 out of 10 storefront psychics believe in Indigo People, so they must exist").
- Argument from Ignorance ("You can't prove that Indigo People do not exist, so they must exist by default").
- Irrelevant Conclusion ("Mitt Romney believes in Indigo People, therefore they must exist").
- Begging the Question ("Indigo people are the next step in human evolution, because humans are evolving into a higher form").
- No Truly Open Mind ("No one with an open mind would reject this idea"). This is a variation on "No True Scotsman".
- Word Salad (A seemingly endless barrage of sentences that follow no progression of reasoning, but only seem to re-iterate the original idea in any number of ways).
Therefore, it is safe to assume that Indigo People do not exist, except in the minds of those who have been fooled into believing that they do.
_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.
The post isn't about whether star children exist or not. Its about whether or not living though a self empowering personal narrative is a better way of living than by a self defeating one.
This THREAD is about a lot of topics related to the "Indigo Child / Starseed" myth...
People can self-diagnose themselves any way they like. I call such people "Poseurs", and not "Indigo People".
Just as bogus as "Indigo People".
No. We are better off accepting reality and learning to cope with it, than we would be if we lived in a fantasy world populated by "Indigo People" and "Starseeds".
Please provide valid emprirical evidence that our imaginations are any more active than any random group of neuronormative / neurotypical people.
Please provide valid empirical evidence that this fantasy of yours is real.
There exists no valid empirical evidence for the existence of psychic ability. Any so-called "evidence" is either mis-interpretation of natural events by ignorant and superstitious people, or it is blatant fakery. Nor is their any valid empirical evidence to support the claims that we are the next step in human evolution, or that we are the descendents of extra-terrestrial beings.
You might want to consider watching more episodes of Nova on PBS than any other program on the History Channel.
_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.
Even if this world is make-believe, you're still talking to him inside this fictional world of illusions, thus it's real to anyone inside this potentially fictional world.
I do not have an indigo/crystal aura. My brain is hardwired slightly differently than that of a NT and thus, I have what's called Asperger's syndrome. Security cameras, heat detectors or anything similar has ever detected any aura surrounding me.
That's right. Nothing could detect an "Aura" around you or anyone else except someone with one or more of the following maladies:
- Cataracts: Hardening and clouding of the lens in the eye, which produces halos or "auras" around lights.
- Diabetic hypoglycemia: One of the most dangerous short-term side effects of diabetes, in which the individual suffers a low sugar reaction. This is also called "hypoglycemic shock" or "insulin shock", and symptoms may include visual halos or "auras" around objects and people.
- Glaucoma: An increase of fluid pressure inside the eye. Symptoms include halos or "auras" around bright lights, objects, and people. Often leads to blindness.
- Sattler veil: Swelling of the cornea and vision problems due to insufficient oxygen supply to the surface of the eye; usually as a result of wearing contact lenses. Symptoms include visual halos or "auras" around objects and people.
Of course, I now expect those who believe otherwise to claim that their vision is "perfect".
_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.
