RootsBooster Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 I really think you should stop highjacking this thread with your off topic remarks.Its only out of sheer politeness that the OP hasn't taken you to task about it. Hahah ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 To go back to the OP... Snipped for brevity This reminds me a thread over at the now closed UKSkeptics forum, and in particular this post by Mulder: ... The important point is to realise that there are two kinds of ghost. There is the (sic) popular, fictional kind which is a spirit. I agree there is no convincing evidence for it. However, there is also the other kind, the one that I study. If someone sees a human figure that cannot be physically present eg. because the witness is alone in a locked room, that is a ghost. It is a valid experience caused either by an internal mental stimulus (hallucination) or an external sensory stimulus (misperception). Either way it is a perfectly valid experience. Most witnesses would agree, without hesitation, that it is a ghost. It would be very convenient to say 'ghosts are spirits', there is no evidence for spirits, so ghosts don't exist. It is, however, an example of logic based on a wrong assumption, namely that a ghost is a spirit (an idea normally confined to believers). People undoubtedly experience ghosts. Indeed, it is highly likely that such real experiences actually first led to the idea that ghosts are spirits. If you see a perfectly solid normal-looking human figure disappear in front of your eyes, you are quite likely to think it might be a spirit (or at least they probably would have thousands of years ago when people first reported ghosts). You undoubtedly saw something which a great many people would call a ghost in the sense of the spirit of a dead person. This, as the above thread details, is based on the false assumption that spirits actually exist when there is in fact no solid evidence to indicate that they do. All you can actually say is that you saw something which could not possibly be there that had the appearance of a person. A real world example which I come across quite frequently goes along the lines of dead relatives appearing to the bereaved shortly after they have died. The false assumption is that it is their spirit come for one last farewell where in fact all that can be said is that you think you saw something which resembled your dead relative. jb http://www.ukskeptics.com/forum/showthread.php/3110-I-wouldn-t-start-from-here?p=47133&viewfull=1#post47133 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Any thoughts? Maybe they were ghosts... Your rational mind, is only looking for a rational explanation that will fit in with the model of reality it holds to be true. How do you know which aspect of your mind to trust? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeby Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 makes sence.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Maybe they were ghosts... Your rational mind, is only looking for a rational explanation that will fit in with the model of reality it holds to be true. How do you know which aspect of your mind to trust? In lieu of any further corroborating evidence I would go with the explanation which makes the fewest assumption. In this case that would be that it was a misperception or being half asleep. Why would anyone leap to the assumption that they were the spirits of dead people? jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 makes sence.. Pareidolia anyone? jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xenia Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 I really think you should stop highjacking this thread with your off topic remarks.Its only out of sheer politeness that the OP hasn't taken you to task about it. OK sorry, Do Ghosts dance to Soul music? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 In lieu of any further corroborating evidence I would go with the explanation which makes the fewest assumption. In this case that would be that it was a misperception or being half asleep. Why would you leap to the assumption that they were the spirits of dead people? jb I'm not leaping to any assumption. Hence, I just said 'maybe'... I have no explanation of events; whatever it was that happened, is what happened. Probably, the OP accurately reflected upon what happened. I would suggest however, that there is a 'rationalising process' to our minds. When we experience events we cannot explain, our minds automatically go to work, trying to best fit our experience, in to the model of reality we currently hold to be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 I'm not leaping to any assumption. Hence, I just said 'maybe'... I have to explanation of events; whatever it was that happened, is what happened. Probably, the OP accurately reflected upon what happened. I would suggest however, that there is a 'rationalising process' to our minds. When we experience events we cannot explain, our minds automatically go to work, trying to best fit our experience, in to the model of reality we currently hold to be true. OK, edited to direct the question to anyone. jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 OK, edited to direct the question to anyone. jb Maybe it's the same dynamic I mention in my previous post? Namely, that people try and fit whatever they experience, in to the model of reality they currently hold to be true (that model may contain ghosts, and oozy-spooky stuff, or it may be more scientific, but the mental process of rationalisation is the same). My take on it, is that we perceive the universe through the lens of our senses and minds. Often times the lens becomes dirty or distorted and we do not have clear and accurate picture of what's going on. In fact, you could say, we never have an accurate picture of what's going on, there is always some level of distortion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.