|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
 Posted - 11/18/2004 : 11:57:25 [Permalink]
|
Valiant, you said,
But if the boat is a mirage and isn't actually on the water, no amount of swimming will get you to it.
A very good point. Maybe swimming is not the way out to the "boat" we are talking about. You and I have calculating, reason oriented minds with different viewpoints. Our arguments are based on a form of logic (however flawed our personal point of view might be). What if what we are seeking can not be found solely with the use of intellect? If man has another facet to our being. (as I've alluded to in my thread 'Does man have a spirit or is he just mind & body?') What if we've neglected that facet and it has grown cold withered for lack of use?
Consider that paranormal phenomenom are activities related to a supposed "spiritual" rhealm. How can we study such things using only our mind and physical methods? Not that such means are eliminated, only they aren't the primary means. If I am attempting to measure the height of an object do I use a voltage meter? When I want to know the voltage of my household circuit, do I use a tape measure? Using the right tool and method to gather empiricle data is essential. Now, if I want to measure "hope" in a person's life. What do I use? Obviously, a voltmeter and tapemeasure won't be helpful. A pychologist will use the person's own experience, behavior, and feeling to evaluate their level of hope. He'll compare it to his own level of hope and that of other people in general. It is pretty subjective, but he has to use what is available. In other words, the beliefs and feelings of the subject do have an actual outward affect on the person which can be evaluated. In the case of paranormal happenings, it is similar. The person who had the experience was affected by it. You can assume it happened or was just a figment of his/her imagination. However, when several people also experienced the same phenomenom at the same time in the same place, I think you can rule out the imagination. When the phenomenom actually caused physical changes, then those changes can be measured. An observer can reject the claims that the paranorml happening had something to do with the physical change, but will probably have little affect on those that experienced it. Their experience supercedes your ability to observe the changes in their psychi. How to empirically observe such things within a person has yet to be determined, and seems a ways off to our modern level of science. However, because that is the case today, will you deny the fact that one day it could be done, or that the experience of those people is "unprovable", therefore, unscientific and unbelievable. On the contrary, their experience shows that science is not yet capable of understanding some facets of reality that affect emotional and physical change. Consider that scientific methods and means for space travel/and long distance observation did not always exist, but that did not make the reality of the moons of Saturn any less, we just couldn't confirm them as yet. Their existence was just unknown to us neandrathals. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
| Edited by - Doomar on 11/18/2004 11:58:31 |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2004 : 12:08:22 [Permalink]
|
Doomar wrote:quote:
Just had a new thought on this subject of "validation". Why are we obsessed with finding validation for our experience?
Personally, I'd much rather not have wasted 20+ years of my life. That's why.quote:
[Snip] However, to the new couple who is experiencing it for the first time and even the second and third and fourth, it is an amazing event! A miracle! Wow. Science just can't comprehend that side of it. Why? Because it is not in their field to do so. Such things are not empiracally based or fact oriented. It is feeling, emotion, enlightenment of mind and spirit.
But you're simply wrong on this, in a couple of ways. For one thing, psychology considers itself to be a science. Secondly, feelings and emotions are empirical phenomena. It is a fact that people have them, and a well-written survey can actually measure them. To deny these things is to deny reality.quote:
Science can only point to chemical and electro pulses and such.
Please, go tell all the sociologists, anthropologists and the like that they're not scientists.quote:
It's kinda like analysing a Michal Angelo sculpture or painting with the callousness of science. How the art "affects" you is insignificant to the scientist, only the type of clay and stone and paint and the level of strokes and lenth of brush play into their empiracle account.
Utter nonsense. A dogmatic picture of scientific harshness which fails to match reality. Open your mind to other possibilities, Doomar.quote:
In other words, friends, science is way too low of level of understanding to comprehend the "magnificent".
A weak opinion, supported by nothing but an incorrect comprehension of science.
That we even have science is "magnificent." And what science shows us is, at times, incredible. The nature of reality is awe-inspiring, without the need for easy answers like ghosts or gods for what we do not understand. With those premises in place, there's nothing to question, and the feeling of magnificence vanishes. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2004 : 12:26:31 [Permalink]
|
As always, Dave, you seem to drift toward a negative viewpoint of my posts and I'm sure I can certify that with empirical data. I am not putting down pyschologists at all or scientists, but neither am I lifting them up to the sky, as you seem to do.
I am open to ideas, Dave. Do you have a positive one for me, or simply an array of negative responses?
Personal, I don't think it would be fair to judge your 20 years of searching as wasted years. It seems that you have already done that to a degree and I think you are making a mistake.
If the answers to deep questions of life are so easy to find, why doesn't everyone have them? Why all the books and all the searching for answers? Why all the looking for scientific answers? Dave, you are simply still on your quest, just in another mode. I think it is letting you down and discouraging you from what I can tell, but that is purely a subjective response. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2004 : 14:06:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doomar
Valiant, you said,
But if the boat is a mirage and isn't actually on the water, no amount of swimming will get you to it.
A very good point. Maybe swimming is not the way out to the "boat" we are talking about. You and I have calculating, reason oriented minds with different viewpoints. Our arguments are based on a form of logic (however flawed our personal point of view might be). What if what we are seeking can not be found solely with the use of intellect? If man has another facet to our being. (as I've alluded to in my thread 'Does man have a spirit or is he just mind & body?') What if we've neglected that facet and it has grown cold withered for lack of use?
Consider that paranormal phenomenom are activities related to a supposed "spiritual" rhealm. How can we study such things using only our mind and physical methods? Not that such means are eliminated, only they aren't the primary means. If I am attempting to measure the height of an object do I use a voltage meter? When I want to know the voltage of my household circuit, do I use a tape measure? Using the right tool and method to gather empiricle data is essential. Now, if I want to measure "hope" in a person's life. What do I use? Obviously, a voltmeter and tapemeasure won't be helpful. A pychologist will use the person's own experience, behavior, and feeling to evaluate their level of hope. He'll compare it to his own level of hope and that of other people in general. It is pretty subjective, but he has to use what is available. In other words, the beliefs and feelings of the subject do have an actual outward affect on the person which can be evaluated. In the case of paranormal happenings, it is similar. The person who had the experience was affected by it. You can assume it happened or was just a figment of his/her imagination. However, when several people also experienced the same phenomenom at the same time in the same place, I think you can rule out the imagination. When the phenomenom actually caused physical changes, then those changes can be measured. An observer can reject the claims that the paranorml happening had something to do with the physical change, but will probably have little affect on those that experienced it. Their experience supercedes your ability to observe the changes in their psychi. How to empirically observe such things within a person has yet to be determined, and seems a ways off to our modern level of science. However, because that is the case today, will you deny the fact that one day it could be done, or that the experience of those people is "unprovable", therefore, unscientific and unbelievable. On the contrary, their experience shows that science is not yet capable of understanding some facets of reality that affect emotional and physical change. Consider that scientific methods and means for space travel/and long distance observation did not always exist, but that did not make the reality of the moons of Saturn any less, we just couldn't confirm them as yet. Their existence was just unknown to us neandrathals.
And the focus of science, indeed the common individual, were unconcerned with the existance of Saturnian moons until science found a way to better image Saturn and discovered them as a byproduct.
Again, noone is claiming that ghosts don't exist. What they are saying is that there exists no proof and, absent personal experience, the common person is unconcerned with ghosts except for the entertaining stories. The problem isn't with the methodology of science, it's with the unsupported assertations made by people based on personal experience presented as evidence.
Years ago, disease was thought to be caused by spirits in the blood and bloodletting was a common practice. Through science, disease was found to be caused by several different means and treatments which were far more effective were discovered. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2004 : 15:09:58 [Permalink]
|
quote:
That we even have science is "magnificent." And what science shows us is, at times, incredible. The nature of reality is awe-inspiring, without the need for easy answers like ghosts or gods for what we do not understand. With those premises in place, there's nothing to question, and the feeling of magnificence vanishes.
To paraphrase Jostein Gaardner in his book Maya, "What is more wonderful than the universe that created itself, rather than been created?" |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2004 : 19:21:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
Who Says the phenomenon is not real. [...] The phenomenon is real!! Whether it is all in our minds {which I have not ruled out}or a replay of some past event or the soul of a dearly departed one the "PHENOMENON" known as "Ghosts" is real.
This is true. Much like the "alien abduction" phenomenon. Whether or not aliens are really pulling people out of their beds at night (doubtful), or are simply suffering from a shared cultural delusion (likely), something is going on.
Storm, I used to really be into ghosts. I mean from the time I could first read I was taking books out of the library on them. I watched every television special that came out and, if the internet had been around when I was younger, I'm certain I would have neck-deep in ghost lore. I was a true believer.
However, the question that always got me was this: "Why isn't everyone convinced?" I mean, I read about a lot of scientists, truly smart people, who were dismissing ghostly phenomenon out of hand. People who were professionally trained to evaluate and test evidence stated time and time again that there were most likely no such thing as ghosts.
What??!! If they only knew what I knew! How could such smart people claim that? Well, I reasoned, it had to be one of two things: either they knew less about the ghost phenomena than I did, or they knew more.
I would encourage you to consider both possibilities. Do not presume to understand why most scientists reject ghostly phenomena, whether it be because of "the ball-and-chain of spiritualism" or any other explanation others may have offered you in their stead. You have prodded all of us to educate ourselves on the topic. While I have never been a "professional" ghost hunter (which is not a profession I recognize), I do feel somewhat knowlegable on the subject. I spent a large portion of my youth investigating the literature, and even did my fair share of exploring spooky haunts.
I no longer believe that ghosts exist. The phenomena is very real, yes, but I do not think it is the result of anything paranormal. You have obviously read a lot about ghosts, as I once did. Now I would encourage you to read up on the opposing view points. I'm not saying you'll come to the same conclusion that I did, but until you understand the ghost debunkers' reasoning and methods, you'll never have a clear view of this phenomena. Right now, you're only getting half the story.
If you wanted, I could share a few links to or books to get you started. But I'm at work now and must go.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 11/18/2004 19:29:24 |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2004 : 19:37:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
quote:
That we even have science is "magnificent." And what science shows us is, at times, incredible. The nature of reality is awe-inspiring, without the need for easy answers like ghosts or gods for what we do not understand. With those premises in place, there's nothing to question, and the feeling of magnificence vanishes.
To paraphrase Jostein Gaardner in his book Maya, "What is more wonderful than the universe that created itself, rather than been created?"
Quite possible the deepest thing I have ever heard came out of the mouth of a cosmologist. It was a woman on a television program I saw long ago, so I no longer remember her name. Whether the thought was hers or she was simply passing along something someone else said, I'm not quite certain. Anyway, to paraphrase from memory, her comment was something like this:
"All the heavy elements necessary for life on earth can only be formed inside the furnaces of immense stars. We are then, in a very real sense, only star dust. And when someone stands in a darkened field and contemplates the innumerable pinpoints of light buring in the night sky, it is nothing less than the Universe contemplating itself."
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 11/18/2004 19:42:29 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2004 : 07:19:07 [Permalink]
|
Doomar wrote:quote:
As always, Dave, you seem to drift toward a negative viewpoint of my posts and I'm sure I can certify that with empirical data.
No need, I find your posts about what scientists and/or skeptics think to present a highly negative and blatantly ignorant caricature of reality, and respond in kind.quote:
I am not putting down pyschologists at all or scientists...
Oh? You don't think that falsehoods aren't "putting down" scientists? Here are some of yours:- "By definition, the skeptical scientists just discount such happenings and are unable to study them empirically (they don't really care to find something that might counter there long held beliefs)."
- "My point is, skeptics who are believers in only what you can see and touch are constantly debating those who believe in more, rather than actually looking at the possibilities."
- "They hold to their religion of naturism science as the only method of explaining anything in the universe."
- "So, trying to get them to even study "paranormal" things goes against their grain."
- "Spiritual scientists, however, are much more open to the topic, but their brothers in the naturalism belief look down on them as deluded."
- "However, to the new couple who is experiencing it for the first time and even the second and third and fourth, it is an amazing event! A miracle! Wow. Science just can't comprehend that side of it."
- "It's kinda like analysing a Michal Angelo sculpture or painting with the callousness of science. How the art "affects" you is insignificant to the scientist, only the type of clay and stone and paint and the level of strokes and lenth of brush play into their empiracle account."
- "In other words, friends, science is way too low of level of understanding to comprehend the "magnificent"."
I could go back through older threads and find more examples of your extremely nasty view of scientists and skeptics, the above are just from this thread.quote:
...but neither am I lifting them up to the sky, as you seem to do.
Not at all. Compared to you, perhaps, but you've got these ideas about scientists which are simply incorrect to begin with, thus biasing your opinion towards the "down in the mud" end of the scale.
Look, do I think that the philosophy of science is a more reliable epistemology than, say, religious revelation, intuition or personal experience? Absolutely, as it has demonstrated itself to be more reliable. It's not perfect, but its flaws are not nearly so monumental as those of other "ways of knowing." We can find tons of examples for comparitive purposes, if you'd like.quote:
I am open to ideas, Dave. Do you have a positive one for me, or simply an array of negative responses?
Yes, I already gave you a new and positive idea, which you seem to have missed: investigate what science, scientists and skeptics are really like, and get rid of the negative stereotypes you've got stuck in your head.quote:
Personal, I don't think it would be fair to judge your 20 years of searching as wasted years. It seems that you have already done that to a degree and I think you are making a mistake.
Well, it seems you're reading things into my posts which just aren't there. I said that if I wasted 20 years, it'd be depressing. I can't tell if they're wasted or not. But people like Storm certainly aren't providing any reason for me to think that those years were spent fruitfully.quote:
If the answers to deep questions of life are so easy to find, why doesn't everyone have them? Why all the books and all the searching for answers? Why all the looking for scientific answers?
These are good questions to ask of, say, a Biblical literalist. For my end, I've argued for years that the answers are difficult to find.quote:
Dave, you are simply still on your quest, just in another mode. I think it is letting you down and discouraging you from what I can tell, but that is purely a subjective response.
And very much wrong. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2004 : 09:55:22 [Permalink]
|
You know, I take on the bias issue of skeptics and scientists in a fan mail called Paradigm Paralysis. The letters are a conversation with a spiritualist who is convinced that skeptics and atheists are stuck in a belief system that does not allow us to consider anything but what we already agree on among ourselves. To Doomar and Storm, perhaps you might read this article as it might clear up some misconceptions you both have about us skeptics and shed some light on how we deal with any bias we may hold. It might also serve as an example of how the accusation that we are closed minded may be a kind of paradigm paralysis displayed by our accusers…
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/showquestion.asp?faq=7&fldAuto=167
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2004 : 07:58:36 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
quote:
That we even have science is "magnificent." And what science shows us is, at times, incredible. The nature of reality is awe-inspiring, without the need for easy answers like ghosts or gods for what we do not understand. With those premises in place, there's nothing to question, and the feeling of magnificence vanishes.
To paraphrase Jostein Gaardner in his book Maya, "What is more wonderful than the universe that created itself, rather than been created?"
Quite possible the deepest thing I have ever heard came out of the mouth of a cosmologist. It was a woman on a television program I saw long ago, so I no longer remember her name. Whether the thought was hers or she was simply passing along something someone else said, I'm not quite certain. Anyway, to paraphrase from memory, her comment was something like this:
"All the heavy elements necessary for life on earth can only be formed inside the furnaces of immense stars. We are then, in a very real sense, only star dust. And when someone stands in a darkened field and contemplates the innumerable pinpoints of light buring in the night sky, it is nothing less than the Universe contemplating itself."
She was also paraphrasing (or directly quoting) Jostein Gaardner, same book. I remember that phrase very well. It's a wonderful book, that one. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2004 : 11:58:15 [Permalink]
|
| Hmmmmm good idea... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 11/29/2004 : 07:28:20 [Permalink]
|
Hello,
Long time no writing. I hope everyone had a happy Thanksgiving. I have been seriously contemplating all that has been said over the past weeks in reference to ghosts. Someone had said I believe it was Dave that science is not about everyone for themselves. I believe that to a certain degree but I believe it starts out with that notion. We all want to believe that our existence goes on beyond now. I believe there are many proofs to the existence of the phenomenon Ghosts. One just has to read between the lines.
H. Humbert please let me know of what books you have read that has changed your mind towards ghosts. |
Storm |
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 11/29/2004 : 08:10:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
Hello,
Long time no writing. I hope everyone had a happy Thanksgiving. I have been seriously contemplating all that has been said over the past weeks in reference to ghosts. Someone had said I believe it was Dave that science is not about everyone for themselves. I believe that to a certain degree but I believe it starts out with that notion. We all want to believe that our existence goes on beyond now. I believe there are many proofs to the existence of the phenomenon Ghosts. One just has to read between the lines.
H. Humbert please let me know of what books you have read that has changed your mind towards ghosts.
Hello, thanks and same to you, although we don't have such thing as Thanksgiving here where I live.
Storm, I do agree we all want to believe something will happen to us after death. All in all, there's also curiosity for what comes beyond. But the fact is, we don't know, and whatever belief we have is just that: a belief, that can be either right or wrong.
Now, there's a difference between the phenomenon called ghost and ghosts per se. What do you understand as the phenomenon ghost? |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 11/29/2004 : 08:25:51 [Permalink]
|
Siberia,
Thanksgiving is a North American thing. Although the tradition of giving thanks goes back many centuries through many cultures.
the phenomenon we call "ghosts" can be unexplained noises, smells, tastes, touch, etc. They can be full apparitions, they can be just a floating head. They can be imprints on the environment oe they might even be the soul of a dead person or a living person. Although as of right now science does not know if the soul survives death the phenomenon of seeing the dead and experiencing things associated with the dead are true and real. But ghosts don't always have to be dead. The ghosts of the living can also be seen. things like Bilocation, Doppelganger, Astral Projection. Do you understand? So what do you think are ghosts the souls of those dead or living? Are they an illusion created by the mind. In a Doppelganger or Astral projection we can say maybe they are? But in ghosts of the Dead? |
Storm |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
