Do you believe in ghosts?

[mdwh]

BTW there are two major spurious anti-ghost arguments.

(1) It does not exist because we don't have an
agreed scientific explanation for it.

People were correct to believe in the sun for thousand years,
even though they had no ideas as to how it shines.


(2) Assuming that ghosts do not exist as an axiom,
and that all reports are therefore delusional or falsified.

This is called deciding on the answer and then selecting
the evidence to fit that pre-decision.

I can't say I've heard those arguments - sounds like you're making a strawman to argue against.

My reason for not believing is lack of evidence.

 

[mdwh]

So when a person says she was raped and their was no proof the police just stop that?

For a moment, I thought I'd wondered into the other thread

The police don't stop investigating, but no one is saying you shouldn't be allowed to investigate. For a conviction, we need proof beyond reasonable doubt - and often one person's word isn't sufficient.

There is another important difference. If someone says they are raped, it is plausible that they have been raped, in that we have evidence that such things happen. Usually the problematic rape cases are ones where the fact they had sex is a known fact, and you are arguing whether consent is given.

If someone says "I saw something that looked like a ghost", the question is then whether it really was a ghost. The problem is that you are now competing with other explanations for what happened, such as simple rational explanations, or perhaps some psychological effect.

And yes, a witness's claim of what they saw shouldn't be taken as 100% reliable in court either. Witnesses can be worryingly unreliable.

 

[Pannonius]

In Soviet Russia, the ghosts believe in YOU!

 

[Mirc]

Or they don't.

 

[Stylesjl]

I believe in ghosts, and apart from the Holy Ghost.

But I am not convinced that they are surviving spirits of the dead;
merely echoes of the living that have reflected back through
contracted dimensions or other multiverses or something like that.

BTW there are two major spurious anti-ghost arguments.

(1) It does not exist because we don't have an
agreed scientific explanation for it.

People were correct to believe in the sun for thousand years,
even though they had no ideas as to how it shines.


(2) Assuming that ghosts do not exist as an axiom,
and that all reports are therefore delusional or falsified.

This is called deciding on the answer and then selecting
the evidence to fit that pre-decision.

EdwardTking uses stawmen. It's super effective. Does 3 damage

Ghosts don't exist because there is no evidence that they even exist at all. When people think they see ghosts, they are rather seeing something that has a rational explanation ie. An illusion

 

[EdwardTking]

Just as it is in the case of religion. I am not spending any time trying to disprove either concept, the concept has to be proven to me.

Fair enough.

My reason for not believing is lack of evidence.

Fair enough.

Ghosts don't exist because there is no evidence that they even exist at all.

Lack of evidence that something exists is not proof of its non existence.

For instance, stars may have formed in galaxies so far away that the
expansion of the uninverse means that their separation from us is proceeding
at a rate faster than light. Now because of that, we will never see
those stars and have evidence that they exist. But the lack of evidence
of their existence is not proof that they do not exist.

Non belief is no more than a working assumption.

 

[b etor]

That was the weirdest reply I got recently. I believe it is sad for humanity that in this day people will look strange at you when claiming you don't believe in aliens.

the aliens will come, and will eat you because you didn't believe they were there.

 

[silver 2039]

the aliens will come, and will eat you because you didn't believe they were there.

Not just that. They will come and stick metal probes up your arse as well. After all having traveled millions of light years they have nothing better to do than investigate the intracies of our bowel functions.

 

[Eukaryote]

I dunno, I dont care either.

 

[mdwh]

For instance, stars may have formed in galaxies so far away that the
expansion of the uninverse means that their separation from us is proceeding
at a rate faster than light. Now because of that, we will never see
those stars and have evidence that they exist.

But we have evidence that stars do exist, and therefore can extrapolate from that. We wouldn't be able to make any specific claims about what stars these are, but we can believe that there are likely to be stars out there.

Just like it is reasonable for me to believe that there exist people out there I haven't yet met or seen evidence of.

There is no evidence along similar lines for ghosts. We don't have evidence for _any_ ghosts existing.

 

[b etor]

Not just that. They will come and stick metal probes up your arse as well. After all having traveled millions of light years they have nothing better to do than investigate the intracies of our bowel functions.

OMG you're right!

 

[Godwynn]

Simple question: Do you believe in ghosts?

No.

(10 characters)

 

[warpus]

For instance, stars may have formed in galaxies so far away that the
expansion of the uninverse means that their separation from us is proceeding
at a rate faster than light. Now because of that, we will never see
those stars and have evidence that they exist. But the lack of evidence
of their existence is not proof that they do not exist.

Yeah, but see, we have evidence that other stars exist - stars that we can see. To suggest that there are stars out there that we can't see isn't that far fetched.

Suggesting that the dead roam the world in see-through form, scaring little children? That is incredibly far fetched

It's an extraordinary claim, one which would require extraordinary evidence.

edit: xposted, sorta

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

I am rather on the fence. I'd like to believe there are, but as with religion, I'd like more proof. Though there are some shows like "A Haunting" that don't really try to explain, they just tell the story, and it does seem quite unexplainable.

Though when I was more of a believer in ghosts, I believed that obviously there must be something to them. I figured if the person was royally tormented in life, some part of the energy exerted from his/her pain, suffering, and massive outpouring of emotion would remain. But I don't honestly know.

------------------------

Off Topic:
Though sometimes reading detailed stories about them does make the hair on the back of my neck stand up. Especially at work for some reason (when I'm working the night shift and, as usual, I've finished all my work 4 hours before my shift ends).

I either read the "ghosts for dummies" or something along those lines, or sometimes for a good laugh, tabloids. Can't go wrong with reading about the end of the world happening at the end of every week

 

[warpus]

I am rather on the fence. I'd like to believe there are, but as with religion, I'd like more proof. Though there are some shows like "A Haunting" that don't really try to explain, they just tell the story, and it does seem quite unexplainable.

UNEXPLAINABLE!! Yes!!!!!

Unexplainable things happen all the time. What's annoying is when people jump to conclusions and immediately assume that it's Redbeard the pirate, coming back from the dead to reclaim is booty.

People.... unexplained means unexplained.. it doesn't mean pirate ghosts.

 

[holy king]

does that... mean.... no... pirate ghosts?

 

[Perfection]

They call me masta splatta!

 

[warpus]

does that... mean.... no... pirate ghosts?

Yes. And no ghost pirates either.