Do demons exist? Can that be tested?

[John Human]

When I lived in Bali, I couldn't help observing the pervasive evidence of belief in demons. And of course demons put in an appearance in the Bible, not to mention in the gargoyles of old cathedrals.

On the other hand, modern science would seem to categorically reject the existence of demons, without a clear reason why, unless it has to do with the axiomatic presuppositions of science's governing ideology of reductionist materialism.

Question: Do demons exist? What evidence is there, for or against?

--

[JoeyKnothead]

Oh man, you oughta see some of the haircuts the grandgirls've given me over the years. And how they do my makeup and nails. They each get a side, cause fair. I looked either gorgeous, or hideous over Thanksgiving. Pretty thing has all the pictures, in an obvious ploy to blackmail me in the future.

Don't care, grandgirls.

[Swami]

This is the way spiritual questions in general should be approached: Does the spiritual explanation sound convincing? Does the world look as if there is a spiritual dimension to it? Is the spiritual explanation congruent with the world we observe? Is it a convincing explanation?

My thinking is that every doubter is potentially one mystical experience away from becoming spiritual. If someone has never encountered demons, then it is unlikely that they will accept explanations of any sort.

This is why I advocate for people to not just read to learn but also engage in field research. My first discussion on this forum was about using field research to discover the nature and origin of life, consciousness, and the Universe.

[mgb]

In denying a child a snack between meals, is my intent to cause em to go hungry, or keep the pretty thing from finding out I gave him a snack?

If your intention is to cause distress for its own sake yes you are being cruel.

Even if I declare my intent was to be cruel, I could just as easily, per my example above, declare my intent was to be kind.

What you declare is not the issue. Your intention is the issue. Here is Peterson on Hitler's intentions-

[mgb]

This is the way spiritual questions in general should be approached: Does the spiritual explanation sound convincing? Does the world look as if there is a spiritual dimension to it? Is the spiritual explanation congruent with the world we observe? Is it a convincing explanation?

My thinking is that every doubter is potentially one mystical experience away from becoming spiritual. If someone has never encountered demons, then it is unlikely that they will accept explanations of any sort.

I agree but my intention in this thread is to argue that theist arguments are reasonable and this constitutes evidence. People can admit that an argument is reasonable but still say it is not true because reason and truth are not the same. Logic and truth are not the same.

[JoeyKnothead]

In denying a child a snack between meals, is my intent to cause em to go hungry, or keep the pretty thing from finding out I gave him a snack?

If your intention is to cause distress for its own sake yes you are being cruel.

Who are you to decide what's cruel?

Who are you to decide who's being cruel?

You're still stuck with a subjective term.

[mgb]

In denying a child a snack between meals, is my intent to cause em to go hungry, or keep the pretty thing from finding out I gave him a snack?

If your intention is to cause distress for its own sake yes you are being cruel.

Who are you to decide what's cruel?

Who are you to decide who's being cruel?

You're still stuck with a subjective term.

I'm telling you what cruelty is by definition. But semantics don't matter, a person who willfully causes suffering is doing evil whether you call it cruelty or not. Do you really think Hitler's atrocities are a matter of opinion?

[JoeyKnothead]

I'm telling you what cruelty is by definition. But semantics don't matter, a person who willfully causes suffering is doing evil whether you call it cruelty or not. Do you really think Hitler's atrocities are a matter of opinion?

Then Hitler, considering his acts justified, could not possibly be evil. Remember, he thought he was saving humanity from the Jews (and others). It can't be shown, beyond Hitler's opinion, if he felt he was causing suffering.

This is the kinda conundrum you create when trying to use a subjective moral value to declare an objective moral truth.

All you do, all you've done is to declare what you consider to be imposing suffering.

Where have you shown the victims of such suffering (as defined by you) agree they were suffering? Where have you shown you know the minds of folks that, according to you, have imposed "suffering"?

Sure, we can define suffering, what we can't do is use our personal opinion to declare who or what is suffering, as a reliable means of confirming the existed of "evil" (as religiously understood).

That opinion is left strictly to those who feel they've suffered.

So, you're back to square one. How are you ever gonna show "evil" to be anything beyond the opinion of folks telling about it?

[mgb]

Then Hitler, considering his acts justified, could not possibly be evil.

Hitler was a violent, murderous individual. He was driven by hatred.

Where have you shown the victims of such suffering (as defined by you) agree they were suffering?

I have not mentioned any particular individual but are you going to argue that nobody ever suffered at the hands of a cruel individual? You can discuss specific cases all day but that does not alter the reality of evil and cruelty in people's hearts and minds. I'm not talking here about criminality in society in general, I'm talking about what is in people's hearts and minds.

[JoeyKnothead]

Then Hitler, considering his acts justified, could not possibly be evil.

Hitler was a violent, murderous individual. He was driven by hatred.

None of those words, in any order they may be configured, refute the fact they're your subjective opinion.

How many folks do ya think were happy for him?

Where have you shown the victims of such suffering (as defined by you) agree they were suffering?

I have not mentioned any particular individual...

So we're left with your personal, subjective opinion.

but are you going to argue that nobody ever suffered at the hands of a cruel individual?

You're the one trying to use subjective opinions to shore up your "evil exists" (as a demon or other religious deal). I'm under no obligation to provide an opinion of my own. Please consult the mods if you find this condition too upsetting.

You can discuss specific cases all day but that does not alter the reality of evil and cruelty in people's hearts and minds.

By what means can we confirm you know what's in the hearts and minds of any but yourself.

I'm not talking here about criminality in society in general, I'm talking about what is in people's hearts and minds.

As above, I await confirmation of your heart and mind reading prowess.

[mgb]

As above, I await confirmation of your heart and mind reading prowess.

It has nothing to do with mind reading, it has to do with common sense and the knowledge that cruelty is a reality.
You seem to be saying that there is no cruelty anywhere and never has been. I have to disagree.