mindphuk
Well-Known Member
Our experiences are useful for many things but not as empirical evidence for extraordinary claims. You have created a false dilemma.
[video=youtube;16E-4avtddE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16E-4avtddE[/video]
Do You Believe In Ghosts?
- Thread starter borntoshine
- Start date
[video=youtube;16E-4avtddE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16E-4avtddE[/video]
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
If you find me utilizing fallacies I would invite you to point them out. I am interested in my flaws and always strive to, at the very least, be aware of them. Here I grouped together ghosts, bigfoot, and gravity. You find them all to be ridiculous topics? It would indeed be erroneous to group together claims, which essentially have no bearing on each other, for the sake of guilt by association. If you think this was my motivation, you missed the point. My intent was to point out the we must be consistent with all claims, and that defense of pseudoscientific claims always contain two things, common reasoning mistakes and requests to be excused for failing standards of evidence. If I lump together ridiculous conclusions, it is because the errors involved in reaching those conclusions, and the defense of those errors, are the same. As for unicorns and leprechauns, I was pointing out that anecdotal evidence exists for ALL claims, true or not.
Carne Seca
Well-Known Member
Not to stir the pot or anything but I had an unexplainable experience when I was in my early twenties that I cannot figure out to this day. I do believe in ghosts.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
Although this is indeed suggesting a false dilemma (if you are against me, you are against yourself), it is valid to wonder why anecdotal evidence is not given more value.
We do not hold anecdotal information in contempt, indeed it is the first step of the scientific method (observation). Notice that the word evidence is right there in the term. It's just that this evidence has no value in determining the probability of a claim being true. The reason is that the human experience is prone to mistakes of perception, logic, and memory. Anecdotal evidence is likely to be contaminated by memory drift, feedback, confirmation bias, unknown factors, selective perception, misinterpretation, exaggeration, delusion, ect ect. Most people are not aware of or likely to spot deception or hoax. At best, anecdotal information is prone to problems and impossible to test or verify. It is enough to start an investigation, to raise interest, and should not be ignored, but should also only be seen for what it is.
So why then does anecdotal information seem so convincing? Stories usually contain a lot of detail, especially after they have been told a few times. Details make a story seem credible, even though they may not be accurate. The person giving the account often seems honest and would have no motivation to deceive us, but we can't be sure they aren't deceiving themselves. Anecdotes told by authority figures seem especially credible, for no logical reason. There is also the bias of wanting to believe.
So should we listen to and examine closely anecdotal information? Absolutely! How else does a doctor decide to treat a patient if not by listening to his story? We simply must be careful that we are objective and consider all evidence, giving anecdotal evidence the proper weight it deserves.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
You are welcome to express your beliefs without fear of stirring the pot. The worst that will happen is that I will ask you to explain how you went from unexplained to explained by ghosts.
karri0n
Well-Known Member
Stir it if you must, I prefer to smoke it
. I'm interested in hearing the story if you'll share
thump easy
Well-Known Member
i beleive in spirits i do. but i dont let it bother me. or do i concentrate on it, but i think it might be true
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
"Thinking is skilled work. It is not true that we are naturally endowed with the ability to think clearly and logically—without learning how, or without practicing… People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists."
- Alfred Mander
- Alfred Mander
bobbypyn
Well-Known Member
"No, no... you're not thinking; you're just being logical." Neils Bohr 
"Physics is to be regarded not so much as the study of something a priori given, but rather as the development of methods of ordering and surveying human experience. In this respect our task must be to account for such experience in a manner independent of individual subjective judgement and therefor objective in the sense that it can be unambiguously communicated in ordinary human language." same source
come on Werner, I'm waiting for you to use Bohr's own words against me... you know the one....
"Physics is to be regarded not so much as the study of something a priori given, but rather as the development of methods of ordering and surveying human experience. In this respect our task must be to account for such experience in a manner independent of individual subjective judgement and therefor objective in the sense that it can be unambiguously communicated in ordinary human language." same source
come on Werner, I'm waiting for you to use Bohr's own words against me... you know the one....
bobbypyn
Well-Known Member
"It is a great pity that human beings cannot find all of their satisfaction in scientific contemplativeness" Guess who....? 
gee Werner, it almost seems like we've had these conversations before... LMAO!!! and for you to imply that I am lacking in deductive reasoning skills at this point in the discussion is a bit on the disengenuous side, wouldn't you say?
"I remember discussions with Bohr which went through many hours till very late at night and ended almost in despair…Can nature possibly be so absurd as it seemed to us in these atomic experiments?" ~ Werner Heisenberg
gee Werner, it almost seems like we've had these conversations before... LMAO!!! and for you to imply that I am lacking in deductive reasoning skills at this point in the discussion is a bit on the disengenuous side, wouldn't you say?
"I remember discussions with Bohr which went through many hours till very late at night and ended almost in despair…Can nature possibly be so absurd as it seemed to us in these atomic experiments?" ~ Werner Heisenberg
GoldenGanja13
Well-Known Member
Yes I am a born again christian. I speak to the Lord our father Jesus on a daily basis, sometimes all day long. I pray for my family, or I just talk to Jesus and say thank you, for everything. It does say in the bible something about not going to Soothsayers. But I also believe Soothsayers where using man made tools to divine information, i,e, bones, runes,chicken blood, tarot, etc. Good question by the way. It is my belief that God gives gifts and I am honored to have received one.
Carne Seca
Well-Known Member
So basically because you have a certain belief system it's o.k. for you to be a soothsayer but a Navajo crystal gazer or hand-trembler is going to Hell for doing the same thing?
I always did have a problem with that. I believe God gives gifts to all not just to a select few. It's up to the individual how they intend to use it.
GoldenGanja13
Well-Known Member
Keep guessing.......
Omg, " born again cristian" let me guess your going to spend the rest of your life trying to "save others" and be extremely judgmental along the way?.
GoldenGanja13
Well-Known Member
I didn't write the bible, and I have no idea what will happen to those whose throw bones, read tarot, etc. My gifts from God need no tools what soever. So I do not qualify as a Soothsayer. Yes I do believe that God gives us all gifts, like life and free will just from start. When you read the bible you will read about many many gifts God gives to people, that others will claim fraudulent.
bobbypyn
Well-Known Member
ya'll stop picking on the poor gifted woman; pick on me. I'll be your huckleberry. and to answer the smartass' question- The original Septuagint Text (what the Bible was bastardized into via the Council Nicea and the subsequent Vatican Councils) contains much information on divine interaction with spirits. Read the book of Enoch. This was once part of the Bible, as were the gnostic gospels. As I have said before, all mystical aspects of the Bible have been removed by Rome (the catholic church.) Get your hands on an Ethiopian Orthodox Bible; it's the closest you will find today.
GoldenGanja13
Well-Known Member
Over the years of translation and what is mentioned above, yeah it's diluted and changed abit.
forgetfulpenguin
Active Member
Yes I do and for only three small payments of $29.99 I'll sell you a BSometer that can detect them, along with UFOs, big foot, and the very much alive Elvis Presley impersonator. Don't forget to browse my selection BSliterature that is currently on sale buy 3 get a pen that I stole from a bank teller.
Sorry I'm stoned and feeling sarcastic.
aka If this post offended you then you are not high enough.
Sorry I'm stoned and feeling sarcastic.
aka If this post offended you then you are not high enough.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
So being subjected to reasonable doubt qualifies as being picked on? If a person steps up and makes an extraordinary claim, they shouldn't be expected to explain and defend that claim? You think any of these qualify as a 'smartass' question? They seemed quite reasonable and presented politely enough.
^ reasonable question
^ reasonable question
Again you respond with disproportional hostility to the most basic and understandable criticism of your belief.
bobbypyn
Well-Known Member
so the defense of one who has shared my experience is now viewed as hostility? that's a bit of a reach... all I did was provide historical accounts of why the Bible is lacking, in it's current most popular form, the information about divination. perhaps what you are misinterpreting as hostility is just my brusque persona; I'm not much for decorum; sue me.