If you're in a bad mood, we can continue another time. All you've replied with is personal attacks and a reiteration of your original post.Quote:
Originally Posted by buriedmonsters
Printable View
If you're in a bad mood, we can continue another time. All you've replied with is personal attacks and a reiteration of your original post.Quote:
Originally Posted by buriedmonsters
Nah, I'm not in a bad mood at all. Infact, you're my entertainment for the evening. I was kind of bored before.
Please, do tell me what exactly you would like clarified/explained? I obviously cannot prove to you with tangible evidence that I have had contact with a ghost, so what exactly would you like me to say on the subject to make my opinion less "ignorant"? I'm not following you, you'll have to dumb it down a little for me. ;)
For one, I'm calling out a fallacy in your post. It's called the argument from ignorance. I'm not calling it ignorant in the sense that it was full of stupidity or backwardness, as you may have interpreted me.
Like I said, your post presents a false dichotomy, reiterated here:
IN MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, I have found ghosts/spirits to be real due to the fact that I have had experiences with things that cannot be expained naturally, and from what I know about spirits, they are a good fit as an explaination to the things that I have seen/heard/felt.
Essentially you've created two realms of explanation: natural and supernatural. You started off by saying that not all experiences can be explained naturally, and used your own experiences as an example. It boils down to "if a natural explanation cannot be found, then the supernatural explanation must be true." You exclude the third position of insufficient evidence/investigation to prove "ghost are absolutely real" true or false.
Apart from the logical side, you've yet to show that a supernatural explanation is an explanation at all.
My fingers just somehow managed to stay on course. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by gameoverlord345
This happened over 3 months ago...i barely even remember the expierience now. I bet it was my cat the whole time LOL!!! damn cat trying to scare me pretending he's a ghost! >.<
Because I have seen things with my own eyes, heard things with my own ears, and felt things with my own body, there is no third position in my personal opinion. Do I have tangible evidence that I can show you? No I don't, but that does not take away the absolute certainty in my own mind of the things that I have experienced. If you want to consider a third position of insufficient evidence because you have not had a personal experience, that's understandable and I won't argue that. My intention of posting in this thread in the first place was not to attempt to convince anyone of the existence of ghosts. You either believe or don't. It's pretty pointless to argue it, because I can't prove what I experienced was true, and you can't prove that it wasn't.
Sorry, that was me.Quote:
Originally Posted by buriedmonsters
Damnit Flanders! I told you to stop that. :furious:Quote:
Originally Posted by LucidFlanders
Have you ever wondered why personal experiences/testimonies usually aren't taken seriously when trying to prove something is true/false?Quote:
Originally Posted by buriedmonsters
Of course I don't wonder why. I am very aware that most people will not believe something unless they have experienced it for themselves or have solid, tangible proof. I am uninterested in trying to convince you or anyone else that ghosts are real and I never attempted to do such a thing. Honestly, I don't really know what we're arguing about. :?
The reason why personal testimony isn't taken serious in scientific analysis is because it isn't trustworthy. The brain has a tendency to be a giant hallucination factory. No matter how real something may be to a person, there is usually no way to duplicate the event. Most often, the person was having some sort of hallucination, whether visual or audible. False memories play a part as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by buriedmonsters
Now, you can say that your goal was not to convince anyone, yet why claim with certainty that ghosts are real and give reasons to back it up?
Well...the OP was talking about ghosts in his house. I have an opinion on ghosts, so I posted it. That's basically the idea of a forum, right? Someone says something on a topic, you throw your two-cents in, so on and so forth? The statement of my opinion was not an attempt at convincing anyone to agree with me. It was simply a statement. Furthermore, I have certainly not given any explicit reasons to back it up. I simply said what I know personally to be true, and offered a word of advice. You were the one who jumped on me and made it into an issue. But you know, I'm beginning to think you just like arguing with me. :wink:
You made a claim and explained why you believe the claim to be true. I've pointed it out as fallacious and you really haven't addressed it at all. You said something on a topic and I'm throwing my two cents in.Quote:
Originally Posted by buriedmonsters
Nah. I've never said why I think the claim to be true, other than I have a personal experience that makes me believe it. I gave no real details, no convincing argument, nothing. The reason I haven't addressed your argument that my statement is false, is because it is a pointless thing to do. We are, in essence, arguing about nothing. I have an opinion that you cannot prove as false, and you have an opinion that I cannot prove as false. So...this leaves us, where? I enjoy a good debate, I really do, but I don't even get what the point is on this one.
So then you did say why you think it's true...Quote:
Originally Posted by buriedmonsters
While you can't prove my "opinion" false, I can at least show that your opinion is lacking. And I have as far as I know.Quote:
I gave no real details, no convincing argument, nothing. The reason I haven't addressed your argument that my statement is false, is because it is a pointless thing to do. We are, in essence, arguing about nothing. I have an opinion that you cannot prove as false, and you have an opinion that I cannot prove as false. So...this leaves us, where? I enjoy a good debate, I really do, but I don't even get what the point is on this one.
Because, I was making a statement about the subject. Such as saying, "The sky is blue". It's a statement that I believe to be true, and that I wanted voiced. Unless you have seen the blue sky, I have no way of convincing you that it is, infact, blue. You either believe it, or you don't.
So...you find my opinion "lacking". That's cool. Do you feel better now? You still can't prove it false, which is my entire point. God...do you ever feel like we've just been going around in circles here? :roll:
Or you could show the necessary conditions for having a blue sky and demonstrate that the sky possesses those conditions. Same goes for ghosts.Quote:
Originally Posted by buriedmonsters
I feel quite good, yes.Quote:
So...you find my opinion "lacking". That's cool. Do you feel better now? You still can't prove it false, which is my entire point. God...do you ever feel like we've just been going around in circles here? :roll:
Hahaha, glad I could make your day brighter!
And also...why would I try to convince you of the existence of ghosts? It is of no interest to me if you believe it or not. I've already stated that I have no tangible proof. Seems a little absurd to me.
rofl!Quote:
Originally Posted by buriedmonsters & blueline976
Now now, play nice children. At least until mother gets home.
Would someone please get this goddamn dragon out of my effing garage?Quote:
Originally Posted by buriedmonsters
I must have missed something...:?Quote:
Originally Posted by stormcrow
A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage (Sagan) :: Fire and Knowledge
Keypoint: "Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it is true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder."
Never got to that point in The Demon-Haunted World. Sadface.
EDIT: woops I was responding to the bottom of the first page, to burried monsters.
Actually, he's one of those people that goes around and whenever he sees someone making baseless assertions he points it out.
Blue and me are those kinds of people who will can't stand people making assumptions and assertions. We know the kind of suffering it causes and want to prevent others from experiencing it.
The fact that you cannot understand them with your knowledge of natural causes does not mean that they cannot be explained this way, it means that you don't fully understand how the natural universe works. Neither do I, but I don't pretend I do. Pretending that you know something ABSOLUTELY, or even as just a fact that you don't know is dangerous business, ar least if one is concerned with knowing the truth.
Blueline and Stonedape, making the world better one post at a time. Not being sarcastic btw :p