From a discussion in another thread with Purple Knight.
Do you believe in ghosts? Please feel free to add any more information as a post in this thread, such as a story where you encountered something you believe was a ghost, etc.
The Existence of Ghosts
Moderator: Moderators
- AgnosticBoy
- Guru
- Posts: 1620
- Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
- Has thanked: 204 times
- Been thanked: 156 times
- Contact:
Re: The Existence of Ghosts
Post #31Here's a statement of yours:
I responded by saying that we can know some details about them based on observational data alone, like how fast they're travelling, in what mediums or conditions can they travel (through air, space, and water?), etc.brunumb wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 7:58 pmHow can we possibly conclude that they defy current science when we don't know what they are?AgnosticBoy wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 6:56 pm UFOs defy current science, but they are still accepted as phenomenon that exist.
Understood. Link to MRI is not needed.Diagoras wrote: ↑Fri Jul 09, 2021 1:05 am You asked me to elaborate. I was concerned that if unchallenged, your claim would imply that subjective methods were the only methods being currently used or accepted. I could have emphasised that better. Hopefully that clears things up and doesn’t need a link to an MRI machine?
- Proud forum owner ∣ The Agnostic Forum
- As a non-partisan, I like to be on the side of truth. - AB
- As a non-partisan, I like to be on the side of truth. - AB
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: The Existence of Ghosts
Post #32What is a 'spirit'? Can you define a spirit in a manner that does not rely on metaphysical terms that are non-phyiscal in basis?Kylie wrote: ↑Mon Apr 26, 2021 9:38 pmThe general idea of a ghost, a spirit of a person left behind after that person's body dies. Of course, if someone has a different view of ghosts, then I'm happy to accept that as well.benchwarmer wrote: ↑Mon Apr 26, 2021 3:01 pm [Replying to Kylie in post #1]
What exactly do you mean by 'ghost'? That would drive my answer to the poll. For now I picked other as I don't know exactly what we are talking about.
In short, I am always open to changing my mind when presented with convincing (to me) evidence. It happens all the time. Especially when my wife is glaring at me and pointing to the evidence
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
- Diagoras
- Guru
- Posts: 1392
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:47 am
- Has thanked: 170 times
- Been thanked: 579 times
Re: The Existence of Ghosts
Post #33It sounds like we agree that performing an experiment ‘after the fact’ on things like ghost activity is problematic.Athetotheist wrote: ↑Fri Jul 09, 2021 10:19 amAnd having a friend "try to hide quickly" assumes that the unknown visitor would for some reason have done the same, which significantly lowers the reliability of such an experiment.
This was interesting to me because the details of ‘hard heels moving in a straight line’ weren’t in the original post. I’m not trying to ‘call you out’ in this instance, but I think it’s fair to say that (in the general sense), ghost stories and similar things tend to become more embellished, rather than less in the retelling.Actually, it is easy to say. The chances of the flapping of a bird's wings exactly duplicating the sound of hard heels moving in a straight line across a wooden floor are so low as not to be worth mentioning.
And at the end of the day, we’ll never know how those footstep noises were produced. To what extent your own imagination might have ‘filled in the gaps’ or your ears slightly misheard something cannot be established. But while “we will never know” is highly disappointing, it’s at least being honest. As soon as a person reaches for a supernatural explanation purely because a natural one can’t be definitively identified, then they are abandoning critical reasoning. Sorry to seem harsh, but I see no real difference between ascribing ‘ghosts’ as the reason for doors moving or unseen footsteps, and ascribing ‘demons’ to mentally disturbed people, or ‘gods’ to earthquakes and hurricanes.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2696
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 484 times
Re: The Existence of Ghosts
Post #34The specific type of heel it sounded like wasn't central to my earlier post and I believe I mentioned the sound moving across the floor, which would reasonably imply the straight line in which someone would normally walk. I go into more detail in my more recent post to illustrate how easily I could distinguish what I heard from the flapping bird wing you suggested.Diagoras wrote: ↑Mon Jul 12, 2021 7:23 pmIt sounds like we agree that performing an experiment ‘after the fact’ on things like ghost activity is problematic.Athetotheist wrote: ↑Fri Jul 09, 2021 10:19 amAnd having a friend "try to hide quickly" assumes that the unknown visitor would for some reason have done the same, which significantly lowers the reliability of such an experiment.
This was interesting to me because the details of ‘hard heels moving in a straight line’ weren’t in the original post. I’m not trying to ‘call you out’ in this instance, but I think it’s fair to say that (in the general sense), ghost stories and similar things tend to become more embellished, rather than less in the retelling.Actually, it is easy to say. The chances of the flapping of a bird's wings exactly duplicating the sound of hard heels moving in a straight line across a wooden floor are so low as not to be worth mentioning.
And at the end of the day, we’ll never know how those footstep noises were produced. To what extent your own imagination might have ‘filled in the gaps’ or your ears slightly misheard something cannot be established. But while “we will never know” is highly disappointing, it’s at least being honest. As soon as a person reaches for a supernatural explanation purely because a natural one can’t be definitively identified, then they are abandoning critical reasoning. Sorry to seem harsh, but I see no real difference between ascribing ‘ghosts’ as the reason for doors moving or unseen footsteps, and ascribing ‘demons’ to mentally disturbed people, or ‘gods’ to earthquakes and hurricanes.
-
- Apprentice
- Posts: 243
- Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2020 2:19 am
- Has thanked: 21 times
- Been thanked: 63 times
Re: The Existence of Ghosts
Post #35No, I don't think I could provide such a definition. But then again, I do not hold the belief that ghosts are real in any way.Goat wrote: ↑Sun Jul 11, 2021 8:32 pmWhat is a 'spirit'? Can you define a spirit in a manner that does not rely on metaphysical terms that are non-phyiscal in basis?Kylie wrote: ↑Mon Apr 26, 2021 9:38 pmThe general idea of a ghost, a spirit of a person left behind after that person's body dies. Of course, if someone has a different view of ghosts, then I'm happy to accept that as well.benchwarmer wrote: ↑Mon Apr 26, 2021 3:01 pm [Replying to Kylie in post #1]
What exactly do you mean by 'ghost'? That would drive my answer to the poll. For now I picked other as I don't know exactly what we are talking about.
In short, I am always open to changing my mind when presented with convincing (to me) evidence. It happens all the time. Especially when my wife is glaring at me and pointing to the evidence
For the purposes of this thread, however, I'm happy to interpret "ghost" in whatever way the readers wish. If someone has experienced an encounter with what they believe was a ghost, then that's good enough for me.
- Diagoras
- Guru
- Posts: 1392
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:47 am
- Has thanked: 170 times
- Been thanked: 579 times
Re: The Existence of Ghosts
Post #36Ok, I'm going to jump back a little bit to address an earlier point:
Or, y'know, it might have been in your imagination.
Can we put up a reasonable hypothesis for exactly how a ghost makes sound? What could be some possible foundations for such a theory (e.g. ghosts only have an incorporeal form, they are somehow associated with a real but dead person, etc)? Could a ghost 'hear' sounds made in the real world (if so, how?) and is it possible to communicate with them somehow? That's only one small part of the problem though, because such a hypothesis would need to fit into a cohesive larger framework. For instance, is a 'spirit world' possible, and if so, under what conditions is it possible for ghosts to interact with individuals? Why are these events so few and far between, usually at night in unfamiliar locations and so infrequently witnessed by more than one person? Given the number of dead people must far outweigh the number of living people, why aren't we inundated by ghost sightings at all hours of the day? Do ghosts experience similar incidents in their world when the fabric of reality momentarily tears and they see the image of someone living? I could go on, but to fairly say, "yes, it was most likely a ghost", you'd have to make at least a basic attempt at answering all these questions that arise from a set of footsteps.AgnosticBoy wrote: ↑Mon Jul 05, 2021 8:42 pm [Replying to Diagoras in post #13]However, I think the best method (not sure how practical it is given the nature of the supernatural) is to provide an explanation (or a testable hypothesis) of how any given supernatural phenomenon works. Then test it. This would be in contrast to just going by a process of elimination of simply ruling out all natural explanations. I honestly believe that there are laws to the supernatural so it should be explainable, in theory.
Or, y'know, it might have been in your imagination.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2696
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 484 times
Re: The Existence of Ghosts
Post #37Physicists have long pursued their beloved "Theory of Everything" to explain all known physical phenomena. They don't know how it all fits together, but observation tells them that it does. They don't write off an observation as illusion just because they haven't found a place for it in the grand scheme of things.Diagoras wrote: ↑Tue Jul 13, 2021 4:09 am Ok, I'm going to jump back a little bit to address an earlier point:
Can we put up a reasonable hypothesis for exactly how a ghost makes sound? What could be some possible foundations for such a theory (e.g. ghosts only have an incorporeal form, they are somehow associated with a real but dead person, etc)? Could a ghost 'hear' sounds made in the real world (if so, how?) and is it possible to communicate with them somehow? That's only one small part of the problem though, because such a hypothesis would need to fit into a cohesive larger framework. For instance, is a 'spirit world' possible, and if so, under what conditions is it possible for ghosts to interact with individuals? Why are these events so few and far between, usually at night in unfamiliar locations and so infrequently witnessed by more than one person? Given the number of dead people must far outweigh the number of living people, why aren't we inundated by ghost sightings at all hours of the day? Do ghosts experience similar incidents in their world when the fabric of reality momentarily tears and they see the image of someone living? I could go on, but to fairly say, "yes, it was most likely a ghost", you'd have to make at least a basic attempt at answering all these questions that arise from a set of footsteps.AgnosticBoy wrote: ↑Mon Jul 05, 2021 8:42 pm [Replying to Diagoras in post #13]However, I think the best method (not sure how practical it is given the nature of the supernatural) is to provide an explanation (or a testable hypothesis) of how any given supernatural phenomenon works. Then test it. This would be in contrast to just going by a process of elimination of simply ruling out all natural explanations. I honestly believe that there are laws to the supernatural so it should be explainable, in theory.
Or, y'know, it might have been in your imagination.
If the suggestion that an observation is "imagination" is being applied to me, I think it fair to point out that it's somewhat ad hominem since it assumes that I'm prone to such imaginings. If that's the case, why don't I imagine such things on at least a semi-regular basis? The infrequency of such "imagination" on my part weighs against that hypothesis.
- Difflugia
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3046
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
- Location: Michigan
- Has thanked: 3276 times
- Been thanked: 2023 times
Re: The Existence of Ghosts
Post #38They do if there's no apparently plausible mechanism and they can't reproduce it when they try.Athetotheist wrote: ↑Tue Jul 13, 2021 11:13 amThey don't write off an observation as illusion just because they haven't found a place for it in the grand scheme of things.
It's quite literally an ad hominem in that it's an argument based on your status as a human being. It's unnecessary to assume that you imagine things any more than anyone else, because humans qua humans imagine quite enough.Athetotheist wrote: ↑Tue Jul 13, 2021 11:13 amIf the suggestion that an observation is "imagination" is being applied to me, I think it fair to point out that it's somewhat ad hominem since it assumes that I'm prone to such imaginings.
Unfortunately, the implausibility of the experience reflecting reality is more powerful evidence than how infrequent you perceive your imaginings to be.Athetotheist wrote: ↑Tue Jul 13, 2021 11:13 amIf that's the case, why don't I imagine such things on at least a semi-regular basis? The infrequency of such "imagination" on my part weighs against that hypothesis.
My pronouns are he, him, and his.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3187
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
- Has thanked: 1510 times
- Been thanked: 824 times
Re: The Existence of Ghosts
Post #39I have many experiences with what some would call 'ghosts'. I've had many experiences with things some would call 'energies'. I don't know what they are, but I've never had an experience with a 'ghost' of someone I know.
I think it's possible, and I believe there are things 'out there' that we don't know about or understand. What they are...
Have a great, potentially godless, day!
- Tcg
- Savant
- Posts: 8495
- Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
- Location: Third Stone
- Has thanked: 2147 times
- Been thanked: 2295 times
Re: The Existence of Ghosts
Post #40And as we can imagine, if someone dies and comes back as a ghost, their favorite pastimes will be shutting doors and walking partially across a floor and then disappearing. Who could ask for a more fulfilling afterlife than that?Athetotheist wrote: ↑Sat May 01, 2021 10:51 pm
When a door you're looking right at starts to open slowly and then shuts with force and no one visible is anywhere near it, it makes you wonder----especially after being told by others of the same door doing the same thing. When you're on a balcony in a large upstairs room in a building and you hear footsteps cross the wood floor below in the dark and suddenly stop, it makes you wonder----especially when the people downstairs tell you later that none of them had been up there.
Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.
- American Atheists
Not believing isn't the same as believing not.
- wiploc
I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.
- Irvin D. Yalom
- American Atheists
Not believing isn't the same as believing not.
- wiploc
I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.
- Irvin D. Yalom