Mandela Effect Moves South America East

[Quagmire]

On a re-watch, I often notice new scenes and dialogue in old movies, or a completely new and different context for the same scenes/dialogue. Sometimes the difference from what I remember is so extreme that I'm certain there must be different versions of the same movie.

Far as I can see, the most logical explanation is that our memories are imperfect and like to edit themselves.

The more interesting and fun explanation is that there are several universes and we keep jumping between them without knowing that that's what we're doing.
(so that's the one I'm going with)

 

[ecco]

Well our discussion is caught in circle here. I don't need to turn toward the supernatural/mysterious but in certain (rare) cases I logically and rationally think it is the most likely explanation.

You've made that quite clear. What you haven't been able to do is provide a rational explanation for WHY you believe "logically and rationally" that the most likely explanation is to call upon the supernatural. Why do you have this need?

The case I gave was a once in a lifetime event that shook me.

Being shook is not a reason to run to the supernatural for explanations. Especially since there are explanations that fall within the realm of the natural. So, again, why do you have this need?

 

[George-ananda]

You've made that quite clear. What you haven't been able to do is provide a rational explanation for WHY you believe "logically and rationally" that the most likely explanation is to call upon the supernatural. Why do you have this need?

As you keep asking the same question, let me try to help with a simple example. If multiple people all see a ghost at the same time, I am going to lead with a supernatural hypothesis not because I have a 'need' but just because I find it the most logical and rational hypothesis.

It's the same thing with this more subtle subject. The arguments for the Mandela Effect are numerous if you are not familiar with the subject. My experience was even reproducible to add to my essential certainty. I was already a believer in the Mandela Effect before this event.

So, I have no 'need' to believe in the Mandela Effect (my life was perfectly fine without this baffling phenomena) but I logically and rationally believe after all things are considered that a genuine mystery is occurring.

Being shook is not a reason to run to the supernatural for explanations. Especially since there are explanations that fall within the realm of the natural. So, again, why do you have this need?

Same question, answered above. If I see a horrific accident I will be shook but I will not need to lead with a supernatural hypothesis unless the later logical and rational considerations suggest it.

 

[ecco]

You've made that quite clear. What you haven't been able to do is provide a rational explanation for WHY you believe "logically and rationally" that the most likely explanation is to call upon the supernatural. Why do you have this need?

As you keep asking the same question, let me try to help with a simple example. If multiple people all see a ghost at the same time, I am going to lead with a supernatural hypothesis not because I have a 'need' but just because I find it the most logical and rational hypothesis.

Gollie. If they all saw ghosts, I guess I must' seen a ghost too.

That means ghosts are real. Based on that kind of logic, alien abductions, leprechauns, Big Foot, Nessie, et al are all real.

It's the same thing with this more subtle subject. The arguments for the Mandela Effect are numerous if you are not familiar with the subject. My experience was even reproducible to add to my essential certainty. I was already a believer in the Mandela Effect before this event.

Gollie. If so many experienced the Mandela Effect, I guess it must be true.

Based on that kind of logic, alien abductions, leprechauns, Big Foot, Nessie, et al are all real.

So, I have no 'need' to believe in the Mandela Effect (my life was perfectly fine without this baffling phenomena) but I logically and rationally believe after all things are considered that a genuine mystery is occurring.

Except that it isn't a mystery. I've shown several examples of the mind "playing tricks". You just refuse to accept the rational answers because believing in the supernatural fills some void in you.

 

[George-ananda]

I've shown several examples of the mind "playing tricks". You just refuse to accept the rational answers because believing in the supernatural fills some void in you.

So your argument is that since the mind can be deceived then every unusual event is a deception. Sounds like a logical error. Sometimes the mind can encounter a real mystery is my position.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

As you keep asking the same question, let me try to help with a simple example. If multiple people all see a ghost at the same time, I am going to lead with a supernatural hypothesis not because I have a 'need' but just because I find it the most logical and rational hypothesis.

It's the same thing with this more subtle subject. The arguments for the Mandela Effect are numerous if you are not familiar with the subject. My experience was even reproducible to add to my essential certainty. I was already a believer in the Mandela Effect before this event.

Common experience suggests a common cause, period. It doesn't suggest that the cause is supernatural.

For the mandela effect, no explanation is necessary beyond two explanations we know are true regardless:

- human brains are imperfect, and often fail in similar ways.
- human memory is very mutable. Hearing a different version of an event than what you experienced can cause your memory to reflect the retelling instead of the actual experience.

 

[George-ananda]

Common experience suggests a common cause, period. It doesn't suggest that the cause is supernatural.

For the mandela effect, no explanation is necessary beyond two explanations we know are true regardless:

- human brains are imperfect, and often fail in similar ways.
- human memory is very mutable. Hearing a different version of an event than what you experienced can cause your memory to reflect the retelling instead of the actual experience.

Well, your thinking style then can be used to dismiss about every paranormal, crypto, alien, Mandela Effect, etc. thing out there. Human brains and senses are imperfect is the answer.

And I agree, no doubt they are imperfect but after years of interest in these subjects I go a step further and analyze if in a few rarer cases a deeper explanation is not suggested and sometimes from the quantity, quality and consistency of the claims I think 'yes, a true mystery is suggested'.

Back to the Mandela Effect in particular, I do all the time recognize normal memory errors in myself and others. However there are a few examples where I think something more mysterious about reality is suggested. After all, the idea that the universe is one fixed thing that we all only observe may just be a working model that only works 99.9999...% of the time. Einsteinian physics may be true but Newtonian physics works perfectly fine for all our normal needs (but is not the ultimate truth).

I believe the universe is consciousness created and you see it as physically created. Our two views will agree on normal things still 99.999...% of the time.

I think the Mandela Effect may be saying to those who are ready, hey...this universe is not what we assume it to be, 'Broaden your minds'.

To go further with this discussion we would have to give up discussing this in generalities and get into the specific cases where I don't feel the conventional explanation is satisfying.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well, your thinking style then can be used to dismiss about every paranormal, crypto, alien, Mandela Effect, etc. thing out there. Human brains and senses are imperfect is the answer.

That and outright fraud, which happens sometimes. An honest search for the truth would not jump to thr supernatural until these more mundane causes had been completely excluded.

 

[George-ananda]

That and outright fraud, which happens sometimes. An honest search for the truth would not jump to thr supernatural until these more mundane causes had been completely excluded.

One can take your point to the extreme to make everything paranormal, crypto, alien, Mandela Effect, etc., essentially impossible.

My judgment is that human experiences where quantity, quality and consistency is found are worthy of deeper serious consideration.

 

[Howard Is]

I was already a believer in the Mandela Effect before this event.

I’ll see it when I believe it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

One can take your point to the extreme to make everything paranormal, crypto, alien, Mandela Effect, etc., essentially impossible.

Not necessarily impossible, but virtually always an unjustified assumption. Why would that be a problem?

If there was good reason to believe that a thing definitely existed, it would be included in "the natural."

My judgment is that human experiences where quantity, quality and consistency is found are worthy of deeper serious consideration.

But why would "deeper serious consideration" lead you to jump to the supernatural?

 

[George-ananda]

I’ll see it when I believe it.

And I say 'my seeing and analysis caused my believing'.

 

[George-ananda]

Not necessarily impossible, but virtually always an unjustified assumption. Why would that be a problem?

These things are never an 'assumption' but it can be a 'justifiable position'.

If there was good reason to believe that a thing definitely existed, it would be included in "the natural."

I agree actually. For example: I believe in ghosts and the Mandela Effect so I believe they are also part of a broader understanding of 'the natural'.

But why would "deeper serious consideration" lead you to jump to the supernatural?

Honest analysis of a body of evidence. And it's not a 'jump' but the results of a serious consideration.