›

Do you believe in ghosts?

1…1011131516…31

Comments

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    It s a paradox. Really stupid.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited October 2016 Posts: 17,845
    Paradox is why I'm here. And why I'm not here.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,606
    Experiment or experience? I fail to see why they would be mutually exclusive. Usually, the experience is the same as making an observation, which can lead to an idea, which can lead to a hypothesis, which can lead to experimentation, which can lead to a model, theory, ...
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    The known is the consciousness of the knower, nothing else.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,606
    I once had a discussion with a philosophy major about science. Led to interesting talks about "there is no objective truth, ergo..." That's where I draw the line. People can philosophise things to pieces but that doesn't divert the intention from the fact that science, not philosophy, spawned the many technological fruits we can't live without today, that science, not philosophy, allowed us to make all those invaluable contributions to the world of medicine, that science, not philosophy, has opened up a window on the universe, larger than any other ever presented to Man.

    It's fun talking about truth, wisdom, conscience, The Matrix, ... but in the end, none of those things put food on the table, pharmaceuticals in your blood or James Bond on the white cinema canvas. We owe all of that to the very same technology which exists as the appendix of science. I love me a bit of stoner philosophy as much as the next guy, I don't mind discussing Constructivism and such, I am very much into conversations about demarcation problems, Occam's razor, determinism versus indeterminism... In fact, I acknowledge, no doubt much to the surprise of some of you, the meaningfulness of all of these things. But science, no matter how cold, cerebral and unemotionally relying on logic and reasoning as many think it is, cannot be superseded by simple phrases which one philosopher came up with one day as the basis for a book and which nowadays gets printed on students' t-shirts more than anything else.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Just because some of us had experiences yet unexplained by science, doesn t mean we are against science. Just means we have a broader perspective. All for science, I am not religious after all, religion is the Devil.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,606
    You said it well, sir. "Experiences yet unexplained by science..." It's "yet" now, but as with so many other scientific achievements, it's only a matter of time. ;-)
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    edited October 2016 Posts: 45,489
    Quantum physics will get us there. Maybe.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I only see YOLO on t-shirts any more. Does that count as a philosophical statement? Not that these kids would know or care anyway, they're too busy shouting "YOLO" in response to anything and everything.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,606
    It seems the YOLO craze has run its course. I wonder what the next hype will be. The hashtag thing is still very much in vogue. Because we all want to know about their opinion on #Trump, #Miley, #...
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited October 2016 Posts: 28,694
    @DarthDimi, there needs to be a new phenomenon called slashtagging where we get to take out a sharp object and literally slash people on the face or arms whenever they make mention of hashtags. That would teach them not to be such insufferable twats. In this PC world you know the law found fight that and throw us in the slammer for assault, but sometimes you have to stand up for your principles (namely trying to keep the English language alive) and die on the hill you've made your home on. You with me on this? I'm sharpening a razor at the moment in anticipation of this thing kicking off.

    If these clowns running amok prove more of a nuisance, you lot may find yourself carrying sharp objects too just in case some lessons need to be learned by those Joker wannabes.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    #War on hashtags.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,845
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    #War on hashtags.

    Oh, the #irony!
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,854
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    For those who haven t experienced conclusive evidence personally, I guess it boils down to what you believe regarding another matter.

    Does mind make matter or does matter make mind?

    It boils down to have enough evidence to hold something as true. Not personal belief or experience. Your personal experience is completely worthless to determine such matter.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Isn t evidence an experience?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,854
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Isn t evidence an experience?

    No.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Then how do you know it s there?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,854
    Who has experience of black holes? Of atoms? Of speed of light?

    But in any case... How do you define a ghost and why do you think ghosts exist?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    edited October 2016 Posts: 45,489
    Ghosts are spirits of the deceased. I have had various experiences, sometimes not alone. If you don t trust the senses of yourself and others, then you can t really trust anything, and there is no such thing as evidence either.

    And you misunderstood my question. You have an experience of the evidence, don t you? How do you know you are not imagining it?
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,602
    Machines are the best way of capturing evidence. We dont trust the police to judge if drivers are speeding, we use radar guns and cameras, and the results are kept so that others may review the evidence and come to their own conclusion.
    If ghost hunters used the same methodology as traffic police, things would be much clearer.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,606
    Timendi causa est nescire - Seneca
    "Ignorance is the cause of fear."
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,854
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Ghosts are spirits of the deceased. I have had various experiences, sometimes not alone. If you don t trust the senses of yourself and others, then you can t really trust anything, and there is no such thing as evidence either.

    And you misunderstood my question. You have an experience of the evidence, don t you? How do you know you are not imagining it?

    That's a cop out: no such thing as evidence? As @patb said there's data that we can record and gather and that exists beyond personal perception/experiences. You are defending your claims that you saw ghosts by... claiming you saw ghosts. That's called a circular argument.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Ludovico wrote: »
    That's a cop out: no such thing as evidence? As @patb said there's data that we can record and gather and that exists beyond personal perception/experiences.

    How do you know it exists if you don t perceive it?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,854
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    That's a cop out: no such thing as evidence? As @patb said there's data that we can record and gather and that exists beyond personal perception/experiences.

    How do you know it exists if you don t perceive it?

    I never saw an atom yet I know for a fact they exist. There are stars in the sky that don't exist anymore yet you can still see their light. Perception and evidence are two different things. But we're far from the ghosts you saw or think you saw... and apparently could even define their nature.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    So you know about atoms. Isn t it just hearsay? Have you personally studied their nature?
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,602
    The star thing is a really good example of the difference between facts and our perceptions. Our eyes receive light, that is fact. The existance of the original scource of the light is not proven. Our intuition is that we are looking at a star but that would not be correct
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,854
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    So you know about atoms. Isn t it just hearsay? Have you personally studied their nature?

    Why would I even need to? We have proof of the existence of the atom. We can even split them! So now since this is about ghosts what evidence can you bring that they exist?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I have no evidence to present here. And you have presented no evidence for the existence of atoms.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,854
    I don't need to show any evidence for the atom: their existence was demonstrated already. Not so much for ghosts. If you have no evidence to produce you could say what made you think you saw ghosts and you know about their nature (souls of dead people).
  • Master_DaharkMaster_Dahark
    Posts: 4,813
    What determines if you become a ghost or a zombie?
    And can you be both at the same time?

    mind-blown.gif
Sign In or Register to comment.