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?

--

[Diagoras]

A demon is an evil spirit.

Great - we now have two definitions: yours and mine.

Reviewing progress so far in this thread, I see that back in post #457 AquinasForGod said:

demons lie and don’t want to be known openly”

- but we never heard from him how he knew this.

There were a number of basic questions repeatedly asked of him, but he finally responded in post #498 with:

I do not see a point in answering these questions.

and after some further pressure, suggested seeking out a demon to ask questions of it (post #503).

John Human left the debate without answering any of my questions (see post #425), and as far as I can tell, you are now the only poster here claiming to have first-hand experience of demons.

Given how reticent those who claim demons are real have been to back up any claims, I’m left wondering what questions I could reasonably ask of you that might elicit some actual evidence.

Perhaps you can suggest a way forward?

[OneWay]

A demon is an evil spirit.

Great - we now have two definitions: yours and mine.


Perhaps you can suggest a way forward?

Don't go backwards.

[Jose Fly]

How has it ever been established that out thoughts do NOT come from demons or angels, given the subject remains open and questions such as "Do demons exist? Can that be tested?" derive?

That's not how this works. The person making the positive claim (in this case, thoughts come from demons and angels) has the responsibility to support the claim. It does not fall on everyone else to prove it false. If the positive claim isn't supported, it can be summarily dismissed.

As long as you've participated in this debate forum, I'm surprised you don't know that.

Re that, with both Joey's testimony and Tam's, in both cases the information is that the voices heard are not recognized simply as being from ones own thought/self - but are distinct as in 'other' - so the answer is not simply "good thoughts/bad thoughts" = "my thoughts which I generated for myself.", thus - more study is required...

How did they establish the thoughts as not being their own? Via an analytical process? A medical diagnosis? Something else?

[William]

[Replying to Jose Fly in post #543]

How has it ever been established that out thoughts do NOT come from demons or angels, given the subject remains open and questions such as "Do demons exist? Can that be tested?" derive?

The person making the positive claim (in this case, thoughts come from demons and angels) has the responsibility to support the claim.

I am not debating that.

I am asking a question related to the OPQ.

Re that, with both Joey's testimony and Tam's, in both cases the information is that the voices heard are not recognized simply as being from ones own thought/self - but are distinct as in 'other' - so the answer is not simply "good thoughts/bad thoughts" = "my thoughts which I generated for myself.", thus - more study is required...

How did they establish the thoughts as not being their own? Via an analytical process? A medical diagnosis? Something else?

I cannot say that anything was established but rather, that neither have stated that the thoughts are their own by wording their witness in a way which makes it clear that they do not think that is the case.

Thus, more study is required...

[Jose Fly]

I am not debating that.

I am asking a question related to the OPQ.

The question you asked and that prompted my reply was "How has it ever been established that out thoughts do NOT come from demons or angels".

Your question is a classic example of the fallacy of shifting the burden of proof.

I cannot say that anything was established but rather, that neither have stated that the thoughts are their own by wording their witness in a way which makes it clear that they do not think that is the case.

So it's not been established that the thoughts are external.

Thus, more study is required...

Seems obvious to me that before you can even begin to wonder if the thoughts are from demons, you first need to establish that they are external to the person who has them. Once you've established that, then you can try and figure out their origin.

[William]

[Replying to Jose Fly in post #545]

The question you asked and that prompted my reply was "How has it ever been established that our thoughts do NOT come from demons or angels".

Okay. I would edit that question to now read ""How has it ever been established that our 'good' or 'evil' thoughts do NOT come from demons or angels?"

This because, some - perhaps most thoughts - may not be either 'good' or 'evil'...

Your question is a classic example of the fallacy of shifting the burden of proof.

You have not claimed that "good" or "evil" thoughts do NOT come from demons or angels, so I am not asking you to provide evidence.

I cannot say that anything was established but rather, that neither have stated that the thoughts are their own by wording their witness in a way which makes it clear that they do not think that is the case.

So it's not been established that the thoughts are external.

I think that with Joey's cowardly voice, he has heard this as if from an external source, but he understands it more likely to be internal.
I am unaware as to how Tam hears the voice of her Lord.

In this case, just because someone makes a claim/claims and does provide the proof, does not mean that it has been established that demons or angels do not exist. What it does establish is that the 'claim/claims' are really just unsupported statements of belief/opinion.

Thus, more study is required...

Seems obvious to me that before you can even begin to wonder if the thoughts are from demons, you first need to establish that they are external to the person who has them. Once you've established that, then you can try and figure out their origin.

External or internal, it appears angels and demons can exhibit both internally and externally, according to statements folk make about these. More study would be required.

[Jose Fly]

The question you asked and that prompted my reply was "How has it ever been established that our thoughts do NOT come from demons or angels".

Okay. I would edit that question to now read ""How has it ever been established that our 'good' or 'evil' thoughts do NOT come from demons or angels?"

This because, some - perhaps most thoughts - may not be either 'good' or 'evil'...

That's still the fallacy of shifting the burden of proof.

In this case, just because someone makes a claim/claims and does provide the proof, does not mean that it has been established that demons or angels do not exist. What it does establish is that the 'claim/claims' are really just unsupported statements of belief/opinion.

I'm hoping that you meant "does not mean that it has been established that demons or angels do exist". If so, then yes....lack of support for the positive claim means it's simply an unsupported statement.

External or internal, it appears angels and demons can exhibit both internally and externally, according to statements folk make about these.

That's the claim, but since no support for it has been given, it can be summarily dismissed.

More study would be required.

How? What type of study can you conduct on magic?

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to OneWay in post #544]

Don't go backwards.

Moderator Comment

Please avoid unconstructive one-liner responses that don't add to the debate, as desrcibed in the forum Rules (#9).

______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics..

[William]

[Replying to Jose Fly in post #547]

"How has it ever been established that our 'good' or 'evil' thoughts do NOT come from demons or angels?"

This because, some - perhaps most thoughts - may not be either 'good' or 'evil'...

That's still the fallacy of shifting the burden of proof.

If that is a claim from you, rather than just an unsupported statement, you will have to show it to being the case.
[Your stating it twice, does not make it so.]

I have simply asked a question...

Q: "How has it ever been established that our 'good' or 'evil' thoughts do NOT come from demons or angels?"

...I did not make a claim which has to be supported with any proof, or even a statement of opinion/belief.

So there is no burden on me which I can commit the fallacy of trying to shift back onto you.

It may be, the fallacy being committed here is Strawman...even if you are not meaning to do so.

[I am happy to grant the grace that you are not purposefully committing fallacy - but fallacy it is.]

External or internal, it appears angels and demons can exhibit both internally and externally, according to statements folk make about these.

That's the claim, but since no support for it has been given, it can be summarily dismissed.

That's a fallacy in itself.

I wrote "according to statements" not "claims".

I will edit what I wrote, to now read;

External or internal, it appears angels and demons can exhibit both internally and externally, according to unsupported statements folk make about these.

Having given the statement maximum clarity, should we agree now that the statement needn't be summarily dismissed?

More study would be required.

How?

Hard to say.
Perhaps develop some way in which invisible and intelligent and intentional entitles [which is what we are told are an attributes of angels and demons] can communicate with us and explain their relationship to us?

Any ideas re that approach?

What type of study can you conduct on magic?

What do you mean by 'magic'? Tricks of illusion? Fairy farts?

I would have to know more, before I could attempt to answer your question.

[Diagoras]

[Replying to William in post #549]

It might be helpful to re-read posts 4, 8 & 9 (page 1) which already addressed questions similar to what you are asking.