re: How do you you explain the phenomenon deja vu?

I actually answered this question on the OT about 9 years ago

Intelligent design proponents = crazy

But this shite here about multiple selves in multiple universes overlapping and resulting in déjà vu considered a sound theory by atheists = likely

Oh boy!

It's like this:

Every year LSU football has a great recruiting class and is ranked in the top 10.

Then, their QB sucks and Miles plays favorites and they lose.

And Nick Saban wins.

And it happens over and over again.

See?

Intelligent design isn't supported by any peer reviewed scientific evidence. Intelligent design is creationism repackaged in a rebranding attempt. The video is a physicist entertaining the idea of deja vu being caused by alternate universes (which are possible in physics) but I can assure you he is probably not that serious about it. A more sound explanation of the phenomenon of deja vu would be better explained by a Biologist/Behavioral Scientist/Psyhologist although it's hardly a pressing issue. There is not evidence, so far, to suggest it is caused by intersecting universes etc. You are falling hard for the trolls and the drunk. And who said anything at all about atheism?

As a teenager and young adult, my theory of this was along the lines of prior lives/parallel universes, etc.

Then sometime a few years ago, I had a really intense dream that I woke up from and replayed in my head, basically committing it to long term memory.

A year or so later, there was a real life event that had enough similar circumstances to trigger deja vu. That's when I started buying into this theory:

quote:

---

Every night you have 1000s of dreams you can't remember. 

The Deja vu hits you when something in real life resembles your past dream(s).

---

Since that happened, I've had it occur 3-4 other times. It's nice to have an explanation, but kind of ruined the magic of deja vu for me.

Intelligent design and creationism are indeed the same. How would one go about having the theory peer reviewed? Humans have been creating and intelligently designing things for as long as we have been around. That is a concept that we know and understand to be true. In essence, that constitutes millions of years of unofficial peer review. We, as a species, have witnessed and practiced the theory of creation and design firsthand. We know it to be a scientific truth that creation and design exists in our universe. It is not debatable and the proof for such surrounds us every day. A hundred thousand or more years of reality is more than enough peer review. Results are in. Creation and Intelligent design exists in our universe. We know this because our own species has practiced it for a very, very long time.

I would be willing to bet that the majority of the people in this thread are atheists or agnostics.

It's the point where you universe is spliced into an alternate universe.

The Discovery Institute tried to have intelligent design peer reviewed. They used arguments for irreducible complexity (god of the gaps argument essentially). I've been in enough of these debates to know that no matter what resources I offer to support the contrary that it will most likely be dismissed by anecdotes not so different than what you just offered. If, however, you are actually interested in dialogue I can offer sources. I'm not so sure this is the proper thread for that though and I still fail to see why bringing up atheism has to do with any of this whatsoever. I'm willing to wager that most people in this thread enjoy steak and beer but that also has little to do with the topic at hand.

Spoiler alert on the Discovery Institute's attempts for legitimacy - their research can't stand up to the standard of scrutiny of reputable academic journals. They failed.

As I stated earlier in this thread -

"It's a consequence of being a part of the great ape family. We are hell bent on pattern recognition (it often meant death or survival on the plains in Africa) and our cortex desperately seeks these patterns in literally every facet of our lives. It's also the reason for superstition and ritualistic behavior. There's nothing spiritual about it."

The major theories suggest it is tied to recognition, as I mentioned above, or an error in short term/long term perception. In other words - we perceive an experience that usually would be stored in short term memory at the time but instead the experience goes straight to long term memory which gives you that feeling of deja vu.

There are some less supported dream theories out there as well. And then there is the parallel universe thing people keep bringing up here but it has zero evidence to support it. It's more just a fun thought to entertain and nerd out to since the multiverse theory may be true.

Have at it:

Adachi, N.; Adachi, T.; Kimura, M.; Akanuma, N.; Takekawa, Y.; Kato, M. (2003). "Demographic and psychological features of déjà vu experiences in a nonclinical Japanese population". Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 191: 242–247.

Cleary, Anne M. (2008). "Recognition memory, familiarity and déjà vu experiences". Current Directions in Psychological Science 17 (5): 353–357. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00605.

Banister H, Zangwill OL (1941). "Experimentally induced olfactory paramnesia". British Journal of Psychology 32: 155–175. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1941.tb01018.

Banister H, Zangwill OL (1941). "Experimentally induced visual paramnesias". British Journal of Psychology 32: 30–51. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1941.tb01008.

Cleary; Brown, AS; Sawyer, BD; Nomi, JS; Ajoku, AC; Ryals, AJ; et al. (2012). "Familiarity from the configuration of objects in 3-dimensional space and its relation to déjà vu: A virtual reality investigation". Consciousness and Cognition 21 (2): 969–975. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2011.12.010

Youngson, R. "Deja Vu". The Royal Society of Medicine Health Encyclopedia. Dr R.M. Youngson. Retrieved 1 October 2012.

Robert, Efron. "TEMPORAL PERCEPTION, APHASIA AND DÉJÀ VU". Brain 86: 403–424. doi:10.1093/brain/86.3.403


This is a source for dream theory but I don't subscribe to it so much

Lohff, David C. (2004). The Dream Directory: The Comprehensive Guide to Analysis and Interpretation. Running Press. ISBN 0-7624-1962-8.

Why does creation and intelligent design need to be peer reviewed? Is there any doubt that they exist in our world? Just asking and not being a smart aleck. Is it not established that humans utilize intelligence to create new things all the time?

When musing over the origins of the Universe and our place in it, it should not be considered crazy when someone believes that it was created or brought forth by design. That is because we know creation and design exsist in the Universe. Fact. No debate.

I actually subscribe to your philosophy about pattern recognition far more than the parallel universe theories in regards to déjà vu. Nevertheless, my belief in creation and intelligent design still work perfectly well within the framework of your theory as well as any other.

Atheists, many of whom have posted in this thread, deny creationism and design on any ground because it opens up a door to the possibility of a higher God.