NationStates Jolt Archive

So, what are ghost. Are they human spirit/soul trapped in this world due to unfinished business, are they demons here to take us away from the lord, or are they just a figment of our imagination? If you have more than one answer, please explain.

I believe in both human soul hauntings and demonic hauntings. I believe that the difference is that a human soul haunting will generally not harm the living. In my time as an investigator, I've noticed that more often than not, the human ghost doesn't even know it's dead. Now, this does not mean that the human ghosts won't create mischiefs, they will, but they're generally harmless.

Now, if a haunting is harming the living, scratches, succubus/incubus sex, your basic Poltergeist activities, and if the haunting has a negative psychological effect on the living, then I'd say, more often than not, it's a demonic haunting.

Discuss!

In a word, imaginary.

The imaginations of the desperate attention seekers?

i dont believe in any kind of haunting.

its a construct of our minds.

A figment of your imagination.

Where are the believers? :(

I have personally seen some pretty freaky shit. I've had objects in my basement move while I was down there. Heavy stuff, not paper on the floor, but like a 2-liter bottle of coke sitting upright flip upside down. Care to explain that?

Note: I am an Athesist, but stuff like makes you wonder.

I have personally seen some pretty freaky shit. I've had objects in my basement move while I was down there. Heavy stuff, not paper on the floor, but like a 2-liter bottle of coke sitting upright flip upside down. Care to explain that?

Note: I am an Athesist, but stuff like makes you wonder.

Ever researched the history of your house? You know, look for murders, suicides, basically any tragic stories tied to the property?

Ever researched the history of your house? You know, look for murders, suicides, basically any tragic stories tied to the property?

No. Its too new(as in last 20 years or so). But the house I spent the first 7 years of my life was built around 90-100 years ago.

Any ideas on where I can do that?

I've seen/experienced my fair share of unexplainable.

I think it might be like electro-magnetic disturbances that cause our brains to fill in the blanks wrongly though.

I'm pretty sure that there aren't ghosts, just enviornments that fuck with your brain.

No. Its too new(as in last 20 years or so). But the house I spent the first 7 years of my life was built around 90-100 years ago.

Any ideas on where I can do that?

Either the town archives, library, or the Court house. The Archives and library will be your best bet though.

The age of the house has no bearing on it being haunted or not. Hell I've been to house that was about five years old and it's haunted because the couple has lost a child and the ghost was that child.

As yet unexplained phenomena. One or more of the poll options may apply to any given case.

I've seen/experienced my fair share of unexplainable.

You need to lay off the moonshine.

As yet unexplained phenomena. One or more of the poll options may apply to any given case.

Which is why it's multiple choice! :D

You need to lay off the moonshine.

How does you explain my experince then.

I'm not on any drugs, or drink any alcohol.

Wishful thinking and a despiration to hope for an afterlife.

Basicly a way to escape the fear of death.

How does you explain my experince then.

You're imaginative, and so much so you don't just try delude others into believing you've seen something you invented, you delude yourself. It's quite common.

You need to lay off the moonshine.

:eek: For shame!

I'm rather sober 80% of the time.

How does you explain my experince then.

I'm not on any drugs, or drink any alcohol.

I do have to ask you this though. Has anyone in your family messed with the following?


Ouija Board
seances
Blood Mary (or any variation of it)


Basically what I'm asking is, has anyone in your family has tried to communicate with the other side?

I have personally seen some pretty freaky shit. I've had objects in my basement move while I was down there. Heavy stuff, not paper on the floor, but like a 2-liter bottle of coke sitting upright flip upside down. Care to explain that?

Note: I am an Athesist, but stuff like makes you wonder.

because you think there is a big chance that some dead guy is hanging around your house so he can knock over your coke bottles?

Wilgrove, not that I know of.

It's all summed up by the Fox Mulder catchphrase: "I want to believe." Well, if you want to believe, guess what?

How does you explain my experince then.

I'm not on any drugs, or drink any alcohol.

It's called "Paranoia" and "Overactive imagination". Both are usually triggered by unknown surroundings, and or isolation.

I've seen/experienced my fair share of unexplainable.

I think it might be like electro-magnetic disturbances that cause our brains to fill in the blanks wrongly though.

I'm pretty sure that there aren't ghosts, just enviornments that fuck with your brain.

Bingo. We'll airbrush in what we can't determine for certain.

I do have to ask you this though. Has anyone in your family messed with the following?


Ouija Board
seances
Blood Mary (or any variation of it)


Basically what I'm asking is, has anyone in your family has tried to communicate with the other side?

There is no "other side", and if there were I doubt you could talk to them via candles, board games, mirrors or chanting.

because you think there is a big chance that some dead guy is hanging around your house so he can knock over your coke bottles?

Maybe he had a coke habit...

Wilgrove, not that I know of.

Ok, that's good. I always try to advise people to NOT communicate with the other side unless you know what you are doing.

Trying to contact the other side to talk to your dead grandma is like being a 13 year old girl chatting online. You may think you're chatting with another 13 year old girl, but in reality, you're chatting with a 40 year old overweight, hairy, truck driver who's a pedophile.

I do have to ask you this though. Has anyone in your family messed with the following?


Ouija Board
seances
Blood Mary (or any variation of it)


Basically what I'm asking is, has anyone in your family has tried to communicate with the other side?

My mother used to have an Ouija board. She and her sister would use it, and she'd move the little thingy. They'd ask questions like "Who's smarter" and that sort of thing. My poor aunt.:D

Ok, that's good. I always try to advise people to NOT communicate with the other side unless you know what you are doing.

Trying to contact the other side to talk to your dead grandma is like being a 13 year old girl chatting online. You may think you're chatting with another 13 year old girl, but in reality, you're chatting with a 40 year old overweight, hairy, truck driver who's a pedophile.

Except for the fact that you really cannot talk with th other side.

There is no "other side", and if there were I doubt you could talk to them via candles, board games, mirrors or chanting.
It's all in the mind.

In a word, delusions.

It's called "Paranoia" and "Overactive imagination". Both are usually triggered by unknown surroundings, and or isolation.

Yes, the unknown surroundings of my finished basement in a house I've lived in for years. :rolleyes:

And I'm not isolated.

Except for the fact that you really cannot talk with th other side.

There is no "other side", and if there were I doubt you could talk to them via candles, board games, mirrors or chanting.

While I respect both of ya'lls opinion and you are entitled to believe that there is no other side. All I can say is that I'm going off of my experiences, and trying to contact the other side is bad juju.

How does you explain my experince then.

I'm not on any drugs, or drink any alcohol.

you understand that that is a silly question, right?

no one who wasnt there could possibly explain falling coke bottles. we could guess but that would be kinda useless eh?

you understand that that is a silly question, right?

no one who wasnt there could possibly explain falling coke bottles. we could guess but that would be kinda useless eh?

It didn't fall. It was flipped upside down.

I probably would think ghosts were imaginary, but I've had a few weird experiences of my own. One day when I was about sixteen I was taking a shit and I heard a noise to my right, where the sink was. I looked and saw the faucet handle turn by itself. I very hastily finished what I was doing and got up to turn off the faucet, but as I did so it turned itself off. This happened twice more in the following year or so, and all three times occurred before I ever used any mind-altering substance, to include alcohol and tobacco.

People under bedsheets. :)

At the end of the day sir, you are free to believe what you choose, for free will is the right of all sentient beings.

*Damn, I can't believe I just quoted transformers...*

Ok, that's good. I always try to advise people to NOT communicate with the other side unless you know what you are doing.

Yeah *snicker* otherwise *giggle* you might *titter* get hurt

It didn't fall. It was flipped upside down.

it doesnt matter. no one here has been in your basement. there is no way for us to know what happened.

are human souls trapped here b/c they worked for the devil in life so they work as demons in death and are accessed through our imaginations like The Polar Express' bell, fairies, Santy Clause....

Yeah *snicker* otherwise *giggle* you might *titter* get hurt

*shrugs* Believe what you want to believe man.

I don't know why people believe a ghost can only come from a tragic circumstance. Someone pretty much just has to die with regrets or unfinished business to become a ghost...right?

Ever researched the history of your house? You know, look for murders, suicides, basically any tragic stories tied to the property?

The victim of a brutal murder, doomed to walk the Earth and take revenge on mortals/communicate messages from beyond the grave by, erm... upending a bottle of coke? That's one dull afterlife. I guess we could strap a magnet to the bottle and create free energy.

Anyway, to answer the question, they represent the synthesis of two deeply human qualities: fear of the unknown (in this case, death) and a love of story telling. They don't really exist.

Which is why it's multiple choice! :D
That doesn't help at all. One instance of a ''ghost' could be a figment of someone's imagination. Another could be a drug induced hallucination. Trying to categorise all these different events as some combination of human souls, demons and/or figments of imagination is pointless.
People under bedsheets. :)
That's the KKK.
Yeah *snicker* otherwise *giggle* you might *titter* get hurt

Hey, you might! One too many bloody marys and you could end up spending the next day talking on the porcelain telephone.

I don't know why people believe a ghost can only come from a tragic circumstance. Someone pretty much just has to die with regrets or unfinished business to become a ghost...right?

Yea, pretty much. Something is tying them to this world. Whether it's be an untimely death or unfinished business.

Yes, the unknown surroundings of my finished basement in a house I've lived in for years. :rolleyes:

And I'm not isolated.

Temporary isolation tends to do it for me (Ex. The attic that I sleep in that I've lived in for years) Also, darkness is unknown. You DON'T know what's in it. So on some level, most people fear it, consciously or not.

*shrugs* Believe what you want to believe man.

I do. And primarily I believe that even if such a thing as a "spirit" existed in another universe, if you wanted to talk to something that has no physical form, doesn't obey any laws of physics that we are aware of, and exists in an alternate reality, sitting around a table with candles holding hands and chanting isn't gonna cut it.

Hey, you might! One too many bloody marys and you could end up spending the next day talking on the porcelain telephone.

oh those kind of bloody marys. That's the kind of communing with the dead I can get behind.

It didn't fall. It was flipped upside down.

Strap a magnet to it and you'll be a billionaire.

oh those kind of bloody marys. That's the kind of communing with the dead I can get behind.

It's common in my circle of friends to refer to anyone who hasn't been seen since a night out as dead. Communicating with the dead is often difficult, as they tend to turn off their phones, or just plain ignore them.

Hey, you might! One too many bloody marys and you could end up spending the next day talking on the porcelain telephone.

But that's just kathartic. I honestly don't know why people fight it so. Vomit, people! It makes you feel better.

In my time as an investigator...
Derek Acorah, is that you?


I have personally seen some pretty freaky shit.
Same here.

I've seen strange fluorescent lights in the sky, red hot liquid spew from the ground, hailstones the size of golfballs fall from a clear sky and lights flicker on and off in my house.

But there's nothing to warrant me jumping to the odd conclusions that, (a) there is an afterlife, and (b) that residents of said afterlife are trying to contact me.

Why would you assume 'ghosts' or 'the afterlife' are suitable explanations?

But that's just kathartic. I honestly don't know why people fight it so. Vomit, people! It makes you feel better.
Twice the flavour and none of the calories!
Why would you assume 'ghosts' or 'the afterlife' are suitable explanations?

Because he wants to believe, clearly.

It could be the machinations of the Mothmen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mothman), for all you know.

I don't know. There is insufficient evidence either way. (Agnostic)

Because he wants to believe, clearly.
Hmm.

The history of humanity's (flawed) tendency for assigning agency to natural phenomena should be at the forefront of the mind of those who wish to talk about ghosts and ghoulies.

Hmm.

The history of humanity's (flawed) tendency for assigning agency to natural phenomena should be at the forefront of the mind of those who wish to talk about ghosts and ghoulies.

Many such people have already concluded that such things exist, and are now searching for evidence to support their conclusion. In a nutshell, they are doin it rong.

Many such people have already concluded that such things exist, and are now searching for evidence to support their conclusion. In a nutshell, they are doin it rong.

So are you. :p

So are you. :p

It was intentional. :rolleyes:

So are you. :p

so you say...

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/funny-pictures-cat-surfing-net-wrong.jpg

This is the only type of spirit I see. :D (http://www.arenaflowers.com/product_image/large/1253-smirnoff_premium_vodka.jpg)

I probably would think ghosts were imaginary, but I've had a few weird experiences of my own. One day when I was about sixteen I was taking a shit and I heard a noise to my right, where the sink was. I looked and saw the faucet handle turn by itself. I very hastily finished what I was doing and got up to turn off the faucet, but as I did so it turned itself off. This happened twice more in the following year or so, and all three times occurred before I ever used any mind-altering substance, to include alcohol and tobacco.

Worn out washer, maybe.

Worn out washer, maybe.

My grandads a plumber, I asked him and he agrees.

Worn out washer, maybe.

Clearly a ghost wore it out. Because his wife killed him with a washer when she caught him cheating on her.

I voted for human soul before I noticed it was a multiple choice poll. Given that it varies from case to case, I should have voted for 1 and 3, with 2 being something I sincerely hope is not the case.

I voted for human soul before I noticed it was a multiple choice poll. Given that it varies from case to case, I should have voted for 1 and 3, with 2 being something I sincerely hope is not the case.

Don't want to be kill by demons, eh?

...and if it wasn't for you pesky kids I would have got away with it.

...and if it wasn't for you pesky kids I would have got away with it.

Don't forget the stupid dog!

...and if it wasn't for you pesky kids I would have got away with it.
Beautiful :D

I'm totally loving reading all of this pop psychology crap, not that I believe in ghosts of course.

There is no "other side", and if there were I doubt you could talk to them via candles, board games, mirrors or chanting.

well if they are the disembodied minds of people who originally walked the earth, it would not be unreasonble to think that mental activity directed towards invoking them would work, given that you would be sending out mental energy signals to a mental energistic entity.:D

So, what are ghost.

Ghost
climate/terrain: any
frequency: very rare
organization: solitary
active time: night
diet: none
intelligence: highly (13-14)
treasure: E,S
alignment: lawful evil
no.appearing: 1
armor class: 0 or 8 (see below)
movement: 9
hit dice: 10
thAC0: 11
no.of attacks: 1
damage/attack: age 10-40 years
special attacks: see below
special defenses: see below
magic resistance: nil
size: M (5'-6' tall)
morale: special
xp value: 7000

Ghosts are the spirits of humans who were either so greatly evil in life or whose deaths were so unusually emotional they have been cursed with the gift of undead status. Thus, they roam about at night or in places of darkness. These spirits hate goodness and life, hungering to draw the living essences from the living.

Combat: As ghosts are non-corporeal (ethereal), they are usually encountered only by creatures in a like state, although they can be seen by non-ethereal creatures. The supernatural power of a ghost is such, however, that the mere sight of one causes any humanoid being to age 10 years and flee in panic for 2-12 (2d6) turns unless a saving throw versus spell is made. Priests above 6th level are immune to this effect, and all other humanoids above 8th level may add +2 to their saving throws.
Any creatures within 60 yards of a ghost is subject to attack by magic jar. If the ghost fails to magic jar its chosen victim, it will then semi-materialize in order to attack by touch (in which case the ghost is Armor Class 0). Semi-materialized ghosts can be struck only by silver (half damage) or magical weapons (full damage). If they strike an opponent it ages him 10-40 (1d4x10) years. Note that ghosts can be attacked with spells only by creatures who are in an ethereal state. Any human or demi-human killed by a ghost is drained of its life essence and is forever dead.
If the ghost fails to become semi-material it can only be combatted by another in the Ethereal plane (in which case the ghost has an Armor Class of 8).
Ghosts can be turned by clerics after reaching 7th level and can be damaged by holy water while in their semi-material form.

Habitat/Society: In most cases, a ghost is confined to a small physical area, which the ghost haunts. Those who have heard stories of a haunted area can thus attempt to avoid it for their own safety.
A ghost often has a specific purpose in its haunting, sometimes trying to ``get even'' for something that happened during the ghost's life. Thus a woman who was jilted by a lover, and then committed suicide, might become a ghost and haunt the couple's secret trysting place. Similarly, a man who failed at business might appear each night at his storefront or, perhaps, at that of a former competitor.
Another common reason for an individual to become a ghost is the denial of a proper burial. A ghost might inhabit the area near its body, waiting for a passerby to promise to bury the remains. The ghost, in its resentment toward all life, becomes an evil creature intent on destruction and suffering.
In rare circumstances, more than one ghost will haunt the same location. The classic example of this is the haunted ship, a vessel lost at sea, now ethereal and crewed entirely by ghosts. These ships are most often encountered in the presence of St. Elmo's fire, an electrical discharge that causes mysterious lights to appear in the rigging of a ship.
In many cases, a ghost can be overcome by those who might be no match for it in combat simply by setting right whatever events led to the attainment of the ghost's undead status. For example, a young woman who was betrayed and murdered by someone who pretended to love her might be freed from her curse if the cad were humiliated and ruined. In many cases, however, a ghost's revenge will be far more demanding, often ending in the death of the offender.

Ecology: The dreadful fear caused by the ghost, which ages a victim 10 years, is not well understood by the common man, who often ascribes it to the fact that a ghost is ``dead.'' If this were the case, then certainly skeletons and zombies would have the same effect, which they do not. Common folklore further confuses this fact by relating details of the ghost's physical form: the classic example of which is the headless horseman, thought by many to be particularly frightening simply because he had no head. Under this belief, one could face a ghost if only one had the courage to stand up to him. Such a mistaken impression has cost many lives over the years. Actually, the fear is caused by the supernatural power of the ghost, and has nothing whatsoever to do with courage.

ALL HAIL GARY GYGAX, THE CREATOR OF THE MULTIVERSE!

I voted "Figment of Imagination", because you didn't include "failure to apply critical thinking" (http://skepdic.com/skeptimedia/skeptimedia6.html).

How does you explain my experince then.

I'm not on any drugs, or drink any alcohol.

Without knowing a lot more details, it's impossible to say exactly what phenomenon was behind it.

it doesnt matter. no one here has been in your basement. there is no way for us to know what happened.

It might be possible, if there was sufficient detail.

Worn out washer, maybe.

A worn-out washer might make the faucet run on its own, but it wouldn't make the faucet handle turn, much less turn back.

No one knows what ghosts are, but they pretty damn scary.

So, what are ghost. Are they human spirit/soul trapped in this world due to unfinished business, are they demons here to take us away from the lord, or are they just a figment of our imagination? If you have more than one answer, please explain.

I believe in both human soul hauntings and demonic hauntings. I believe that the difference is that a human soul haunting will generally not harm the living. In my time as an investigator, I've noticed that more often than not, the human ghost doesn't even know it's dead. Now, this does not mean that the human ghosts won't create mischiefs, they will, but they're generally harmless.

Now, if a haunting is harming the living, scratches, succubus/incubus sex, your basic Poltergeist activities, and if the haunting has a negative psychological effect on the living, then I'd say, more often than not, it's a demonic haunting.

Discuss!

Like demons, gods, faeries, werewolves, and abducty aliens, 'ghosts' are just another figment dreamed up to explain away whatever might still remain beyond the common consciousness' ability to explain.

Like demons, gods, faeries, werewolves, and abducty aliens, 'ghosts' are just another figment dreamed up to explain away whatever might still remain beyond the common consciousness' ability to explain.

Nonsense.

You go too far.

Nonsense.

You go too far.

I don't think so. There's no evidence - except anecdote - for any of them. And anecdote is worth almost as much as whatever paper it's written on.

http://www.mouseextra.com/wp-content/uploads/figment_1_07.jpg


Maybe he had a coke habit...

Oh man...I actually laughed at that. I do need sleep after all...

I think ghost stories are fascinating, I love reading various accounts. I've visited a lot of purportedly haunted locations in my area, with this country having more than its fair share of ghouls and spectres.

I don't believe in them though, and I've never experienced anything that can't be explained fairly easily by something less exciting. I've noticed that a lot of ghost stories tend to happen at night, in the dark, to people who are alone (often in bed). There are so many easy explanations for these stories - ranging from the mind playing tricks in the dark, to simply being asleep without even realising - that it's hard to accept any of them.

So, what are ghost. Are they human spirit/soul trapped in this world due to unfinished business, are they demons here to take us away from the lord, or are they just a figment of our imagination? If you have more than one answer, please explain.

I believe in both human soul hauntings and demonic hauntings. I believe that the difference is that a human soul haunting will generally not harm the living. In my time as an investigator, I've noticed that more often than not, the human ghost doesn't even know it's dead. Now, this does not mean that the human ghosts won't create mischiefs, they will, but they're generally harmless.

Now, if a haunting is harming the living, scratches, succubus/incubus sex, your basic Poltergeist activities, and if the haunting has a negative psychological effect on the living, then I'd say, more often than not, it's a demonic haunting.

Discuss!

I more or less agree with you. My experiance has been that many ghosts simply do not know they are dead, although some do and are sticking around out of mischife. Not sure about demons, although I'm positive that some enterties are not the souls of dead people.

I don't think so. There's no evidence - except anecdote - for any of them. And anecdote is worth almost as much as whatever paper it's written on.

The thing with that of course is those withthe anecdotal evidance do not see it as worthless. And when it boils down to it, isn't that exactly what 'my word against yours' is ina court room type scenerio? So if the legal system see's some worth in it huh!

The thing with that of course is those withthe anecdotal evidance do not see it as worthless. And when it boils down to it, isn't that exactly what 'my word against yours' is ina court room type scenerio? So if the legal system see's some worth in it huh!

I have anecdotal evidence of my own, I just don't immediately leap to something beyond stretches of the imagination to find answers.

Weird patches of light are probably optical effects. Scratching noises in the dark are probably bugs, or vermin. If you were almost asleep when you saw it, you probably WERE asleep.

etc.

The thing with that of course is those withthe anecdotal evidance do not see it as worthless. And when it boils down to it, isn't that exactly what 'my word against yours' is ina court room type scenerio? So if the legal system see's some worth in it huh!

The legal system does not like anecdotal evidence. There's a reason why it doesn't give a fuck about eyewitness accounts.

i'm highly skeptical that ghosts exist.it's all in the head.

I have anecdotal evidence of my own, I just don't immediately leap to something beyond stretches of the imagination to find answers.

Weird patches of light are probably optical effects. Scratching noises in the dark are probably bugs, or vermin. If you were almost asleep when you saw it, you probably WERE asleep.

etc.


Yeah yeah I get that, but some evidance is almost beyond questioning.

I once lived in a house in which the previous tenant hung himself in the master bedroom, now bearing in mind I didn't find out about this until much much latter, what would be your 'non imaginative' answer to the following ocourances.

The TV in the master bedroom, would suddenly change channel to channel 4, at random times.

Although there where only me and my wife in the house, we would hear footsteps throughout the house at most times of the day.

The kitchen had mirrored tiles, and every so often whilst in the kitchen we would see the reflected figure of a man pass by behind us, but when we turned around there was nobody there.

At least once a week at roughtly 3:00 AM we would hear a crashing noise in the kitchen, coming downstairs we would find the contents of the kitchen bin strewn all over the floor, there are no animals in the house, no cat flap, all doors secure and locked.

The radio in the kitchen would turn up or down in volume, in fact this become such a frequant occourance we could shout 'turn this one up' or 'turn this one down' and it would.

One evening my and the wife had a row, and as I passed the arch leading into the bathroom, the clock on the wall dropped and just missed my head.

Things went missing, or where moved from one locatin to the other, once I even saw a bottle of wine move along the kitche side(5-6 feet) on its own.

We had our wedding reception party in that house, and about half a doz guests stayed over night, all of them reported strange occourances.

Yeah yeah I get that, but some evidance is almost beyond questioning.

I once lived in a house in which the previous tenant hung himself in the master bedroom, now bearing in mind I didn't find out about this until much much latter, what would be your 'non imaginative' answer to the following ocourances.


The problem here is - you're assuming they're all connected.


The TV in the master bedroom, would suddenly change channel to channel 4, at random times.


The TV is glitched. I had an old black-and-white portable with push buttons. You'd use the remote to change channels, most of the time, but every so often, the mechanism connected to one of the buttons would 'flip' and the tv would spontaneously change channel.

Or, maybe even simpler... your Tv operates on the same frequency on certain oeprations as... your neighbours infra-red controlled ceiling fan. Or something.


Although there where only me and my wife in the house, we would hear footsteps throughout the house at most times of the day.


Boards shifting. Pipes expanding or contracting. Or - most likely - vermin.


The kitchen had mirrored tiles, and every so often whilst in the kitchen we would see the reflected figure of a man pass by behind us, but when we turned around there was nobody there.


You would see reflected light. The 'of a man' aprt is an artifact of imagination.


At least once a week at roughtly 3:00 AM we would hear a crashing noise in the kitchen, coming downstairs we would find the contents of the kitchen bin strewn all over the floor, there are no animals in the house, no cat flap, all doors secure and locked.


Rats. Supported by the 'noises moving around'.


The radio in the kitchen would turn up or down in volume, in fact this become such a frequant occourance we could shout 'turn this one up' or 'turn this one down' and it would.


Some form of inetrference. Cell tower? How long ago...? Radio transmitter... geographic... meteorological. A whole load of reasons why sound might intensify and fade on radios. You assumed there was a pattern where really there was none. Stopped clocks, and all that.


One evening my and the wife had a row, and as I passed the arch leading into the bathroom, the clock on the wall dropped and just missed my head.


The clock on my wall actually fell down a few nights ago, about scaring the shit out of me. Similarly to your situation, I was walking near the clock at the time. You'd just had a row, you were probably even stamping a bit. Vibrations made your clock fall - the gradual attrition of motions against a fitting.


Things went missing, or where moved from one locatin to the other, once I even saw a bottle of wine move along the kitche side(5-6 feet) on its own.


Hard to answer this one, not knowing anything about geography (near a faultline, maybe?), or the nature of the motion.

A thought does occur, though - the bottle was fresh out of the fridge, and there was wetness on the side. I've seen bottles and glasses, etc (especially cups, for some reason - which makes me think temperature might affect it) 'sucked' along a trail of wetness. You can actually make it repeat the motion by placing it back at the start point.


We had our wedding reception party in that house, and about half a doz guests stayed over night, all of them reported strange occourances.

Well they may. Or, just as possibly, tiny details got magnified into fullblown stories after the first two or three 'tales' got told.

The problem here is - you're assuming they're all connected.

Well you where not there so I can forgive any lame answers, no problem though assuming I mean. When we assume that does not nesicarily mean a problem, many assumptions are valid and correct, yes?


The TV is glitched. I had an old black-and-white portable with push buttons. You'd use the remote to change channels, most of the time, but every so often, the mechanism connected to one of the buttons would 'flip' and the tv would spontaneously change channel.

Or, maybe even simpler... your Tv operates on the same frequency on certain oeprations as... your neighbours infra-red controlled ceiling fan. Or something.

Yep thought of that, changed TV's and of course infrared does not go through walls, and we latter found that the suicides fave TV channel was, yep Channel 4.


Boards shifting. Pipes expanding or contracting. Or - most likely - vermin.

Nope you would need some change in temprature for that and you would expect such a thing at regular times of the day, or the year. Vermin, hardly. You know as do I, the differeance in sound between mice scrathiching inthe walls and adult footfalls up and down stairs. They sounded like somebody walking, and at times running. Not only up and down the stairs, but in other places of the house, there really was no pattern to it.


You would see reflected light. The 'of a man' aprt is an artifact of imagination.

It is true that I have hallucinated in the past, but always because of drugs, never sober and becuase of my drug usage I am well aware when something is real and not. This did not happen just once, and again there was no pattern to it, it did happen all sorts of times.


Rats. Supported by the 'noises moving around'.

Nope, there were no rats or mice, in the house, no holes, no visible way for them to get in. And I have kept and bred rats, so I know their wiley ways. Besides the kitchen in was one of those that was in the cupard, it would have taken a clever rat indeed to open the door.


Some form of inetrference. Cell tower? How long ago...? Radio transmitter... geographic... meteorological. A whole load of reasons why sound might intensify and fade on radios. You assumed there was a pattern where really there was none. Stopped clocks, and all that.

Now that is a viable one. It was 19 years ago. How would you explain the apparent volume change on demand?


The clock on my wall actually fell down a few nights ago, about scaring the shit out of me. Similarly to your situation, I was walking near the clock at the time. You'd just had a row, you were probably even stamping a bit. Vibrations made your clock fall - the gradual attrition of motions against a fitting.

Well yeah I am propeard to call this coincedance, we where by this time well aware of the strange things going on, an I am properd to say that I may have let my imagination make more of this than there actualy was.


Hard to answer this one, not knowing anything about geography (near a faultline, maybe?), or the nature of the motion.

Heh what in Catford SE London? Naaa mate.


A thought does occur, though - the bottle was fresh out of the fridge, and there was wetness on the side. I've seen bottles and glasses, etc (especially cups, for some reason - which makes me think temperature might affect it) 'sucked' along a trail of wetness. You can actually make it repeat the motion by placing it back at the start point.

Nope a bottle of red, unopend.



Well they may. Or, just as possibly, tiny details got magnified into fullblown stories after the first two or three 'tales' got told.

Perhaps, or perhaps not. The point of this one, was just to show that me and my wife were not the only ones to notice strange happenings.

Well you where not there so I can forgive any lame answers, no problem though assuming I mean. When we assume that does not nesicarily mean a problem, many assumptions are valid and correct, yes?


And many aren't,yes. :)


Yep thought of that, changed TV's and of course infrared does not go through walls, and we latter found that the suicides fave TV channel was, yep Channel 4.


Infrared might not be particularly good through walls, but it's not bad at reflecting off surfaces, even over quite a distance.

And, to be honest, hitting the same channel over and over again on different TVs lends itself pretty strongly to the idea of some kind of interference, but not necessarily the sort that involves dead people.


Nope you would need some change in temprature for that and you would expect such a thing at regular times of the day, or the year. Vermin, hardly. You know as do I, the differeance in sound between mice scrathiching inthe walls and adult footfalls up and down stairs. They sounded like somebody walking, and at times running. Not only up and down the stairs, but in other places of the house, there really was no pattern to it.


Houses shift all the time. ANd not just because of hot or cold days. Although, with the walking and running, I'm suspecting pipes... maybe central heating?


It is true that I have hallucinated in the past, but always because of drugs, never sober and becuase of my drug usage I am well aware when something is real and not. This did not happen just once, and again there was no pattern to it, it did happen all sorts of times.


You saw light, reflected. You assume it was a man walking behind you. I'm not saying it was an acid flashback, I'm saying you jump to a conclusion about what you are seeing, that probably isn't what you were seeing.

One night, I had to get out of bed and turn the light back on, because my jacket thrown over a chair looked exactly like someone sitting watching me, with a hand on one knee.


Nope, there were no rats or mice, in the house, no holes, no visible way for them to get in. And I have kept and bred rats, so I know their wiley ways. Besides the kitchen in was one of those that was in the cupard, it would have taken a clever rat indeed to open the door.


You think you know there were no vermin in your house? In all probability, then - you have absolutely no idea what was in your house.

There were vermin in your house. Maybe not all the time, all year round. But, unless you live in a bubble, you've got pests.


Now that is a viable one. It was 19 years ago. How would you explain the apparent volume change on demand?


I don't think it did. I think it faded in and out, and that - from time to time - it matched what you were 'telling it' to do.


Well yeah I am propeard to call this coincedance, we where by this time well aware of the strange things going on, an I am properd to say that I may have let my imagination make more of this than there actualy was.


Stuff falling rarely needs supernatural stories to explain it. Stuff has a deminstrable tendency towards falling.


Heh what in Catford SE London? Naaa mate.


Ah. Maybe rail-lines then. Or HGV.


Nope a bottle of red, unopend.


The phenomenon still works, even so. If the bottle was glass or plastic (and, we can probably assume it was), and the surface on which it rests was of a low enough fraction coefficiency (varnished wood, maybe? plastic counetr top? Glass?) then the only thing you'd NEED would be wetness on the surface.


Perhaps, or perhaps not. The point of this one, was just to show that me and my wife were not the only ones to notice strange happenings.

But it works just as well as an example of the story entering a feedback loop. You and your wife provide feedback to one another, and - when others are there - the feedback loop expands.

In the end, we're all going to believe what we want to believe. I prefer the simpler, more logical explanation. But hey, everyone gets their thrills their own way.

In the end, we're all going to believe what we want to believe. I prefer the simpler, more logical explanation. But hey, everyone gets their thrills their own way.

Agreed... but it feels like a cop-out. I agree that some people believe in ghosts (or whatever) but I can't bring myself to just let it stand when it's raised for debate. If someone is going to tell me ghosts, goblins, or gods, are evidence of something beyond our ken... well, I feel like I should point out that the things attributed to ghosts, goblins and gods, are also evidence of things well within our ken.

I have a bunch of "ghost" stories:

I was alone in the house one night (we didn't have pets either) and I decided that I wanted to write my thoughts down before I went to sleep.

I found a pen and my journal and laid the pen on top of the journal on the floor next to my bed (the bed was just a mattress on the floor). After going to the restroom, I returned to my bedroom to find the pen missing. I looked and looked for that pen and couldn't find it, so I looked around the house for another pen or pencil and couldn't find a single one, which was odd as I was sure there were plenty.

I gave up and went to sleep. When I awoke I saw the missing pen sitting on top of my journal, right where I had left it.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I had moved back with my mom to go to junior high in Los Angeles. A strange thing started to happen when I got my room set up there. Whenever I would lie my head down on the pillow (right ear down only) I would hear my name being whispered in a soft female voice, over and over. At first it really freaked me out.

I didn't tell anyone (i got ridiculed enough as a kid) except to ask my mom if the house was haunted. She said that actually it was (my mom wasn't trying to joke around with me - she never does). They even named the ghost Claurice and told me a few of their own ghost stories connected to that house, explaining that it's a playful ghost that likes to play games.

With that in mind I started to listen to the voice and soon it became something to help me get to sleep. It was very soothing actually. It happened until we moved out of the house


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When I lived with a couple of friends in some hills near Burbank, CA - all of us and most anyone that visited our house experienced strange phenomenon.

One night my roomate and I were down at the street picking up something someone dropped off for us. The garden was huge and you had to go thru it to get to the street from the front door, so we were quite a ways away from the house.

As my roomie talked to the person in the car, I had noticed something a bit unnerving. A large shadow that wasn't connected to anything jumped away from me.

When my friend was done and we were ready to go back to the house, I told her what I saw. She screamed and started running for the front door and I was right behind her. Just before we reached the door, it started shaking violently. She grabbed the handle and went in and turned around and asked me if I just saw that. No one was inside at the time. if it was an earthquake it was a 7.0 and localized to just my front door.


~~~~~~~~~

I have a ton of these

once while sitting on the beach with my gf we both heard a woman whisper "hey" in our ears at the same time.

maybe I'll share more later - I'm going home

Agreed... but it feels like a cop-out. I agree that some people believe in ghosts (or whatever) but I can't bring myself to just let it stand when it's raised for debate. If someone is going to tell me ghosts, goblins, or gods, are evidence of something beyond our ken... well, I feel like I should point out that the things attributed to ghosts, goblins and gods, are also evidence of things well within our ken.

Oh, I completely agree. I just think it's wasted breath trying to convince those who want to suck in the smoke of delusion and get high on superstition that they're only believing what they want to believe. I figure, let 'em. SOMEbody has to keep buying lottery tickets and trying out for American Idol.

Ghosts, it´s what´s for dinner.

Ghost stories? I could tell a few that had happened to me, like Sumamba did, but I don´t have the time to right now.

I have a ton of these

once while sitting on the beach with my gf we both heard a woman whisper "hey" in our ears at the same time.

maybe I'll share more later - I'm going home

Over the last few years, I have - on several occassions, been aware of one of my children crying or yelling, fairly clearly and distinctly - even though I've been hundreds of miles away on some of those occassions.

On calling my wife, I've found out that one of the babies was hurt.

Coincidence? Could be. Inexplicable? Yes... based on what I know.

But that doesn't mean there are ghosts or goblins.

Sheer bollocks created by people still in denial that people they used to know and love are dead and gone.

I am a spirit of the dead! I have chosen this forum to reveal the secrets of the AFTERLIFE!

1. We aren't really trying to communicate - we just like screwing with your minds.

2. Murder victims and the like just enjoy the publicity from hanging around near where they died - attention whores, I say.

3. Max Barry is - hold that thought, he just walked in.

I find supernatural phenomena of any description to be inconsistent with the observed laws of science, and have never in my lifetime encountered anything that I have not been able to explain using those observed laws. It is, of course, possible that "ghosts" in whatever sense you may describe them do exist and I have not been able to observe them, but I feel that it is rather unlikely that, even should they exist, they could be explained as the spirits of dead people, the anthromorphic personifications of inanimate objects such as buildings, or evil beings seeking to wage cosmic war against a benevolent deity.

But I think it would be really cool if the Cthulhu Mythos was real.

If you want to believe in Ghosts then you also have to buy into Zombies as well.

But I think it would be really cool if the Cthulhu Mythos was real.
"Cool" is not the word I would choose. And who says they aren't. *Sits in a corner, fetal position, rocking back and forth*


Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

Residual emotional energy, perhaps?

I dont profess to be 'sensitive' or 'psychic' in any way, but some places have a certain sort of 'presence', you could say. The Colosseum in Rome is a good example. It managed to shut up even the most idiotic kids in our tour group to some degree. Many people who visit places where great battles or, in general, horrible events involving lots of trauma, took place note a general sense of unease or just 'strangeness'.
My mother visited Auschwitz and was rather unsettled by the whole thing.

Might just be a psychological thing, but then, the human mind is a probably the weirdest organ ever invented. I personally wont pass judgment either way until one side provides something solid.

But that's just kathartic. I honestly don't know why people fight it so. Vomit, people! It makes you feel better.

I can't help wondering... have you ever met my mom? Cause that there sounds pretty much like a piece of her philosophy.
Her favourite hangover cure (to hand out to other people, that is) is a glass of warm salt water. She says it'll make you feel better, or throw up and then feel better.
I've never seen anyone feeling better straight away, though... ;)

well if they are the disembodied minds of people who originally walked the earth, it would not be unreasonble to think that mental activity directed towards invoking them would work, given that you would be sending out mental energy signals to a mental energistic entity.:D

*scratches head*

Now, if they are "mental energy", and they can play around with coke bottles, then we should be able to play around with coke bottles without touching them, too, shouldn't we?

Science teaches that our thoughts are random electrical impulses flowing through our nervous systems-but Science also teaches that energy is neither created nor destroyed.
Most ghosts are heat of the moment deals-a particular event inflames the passions adequately that it plays and replays until it is used up. Few and far between are the full-blown entity hauntings, where an entire personality makes the transition from random impulses to self-perpetuating wavelengths of energy.
Let me state, we don't use nearly enough of our brains to ascertain exactly what a ghost is, and more than we can say what it isn't. Some are just psychic impressions left in an area, others are...more. I believe in the immortality of the human soul, so my theory would be biased by this principle, just as the nonexistance principle applies-this is an event which occurs, and thus must be studied further-dismissal is as obviously wrong as acceptance whole-cloth.

Now, if a haunting is harming the living, scratches, succubus/incubus sex, your basic Poltergeist activities, and if the haunting has a negative psychological effect on the living, then I'd say, more often than not, it's a demonic haunting.


Succubus/incubus sex isn't demonic, it's godly. Especially when it involves scratches.

But seriously, there are a lot of different things that we refer to as "ghosts". Some are said to be human spirits, but I cannot confirm their existence. Some are definitely produced by the mind (for example if you're in your bed, you cannot move, there is bright light, and something is giving you an anal probe or touching your privates, that's definitely not real but a really messed up state of half-sleep). Some are apparently evil and deceptive, and some are definitely neutral or benevolent.

A few words of advice: if you don't already have benevolent "contacts" to help you when shit happens, don't mess around. Seriously. Whether it's just your imagination getting out of control or "real", you will need a way to get things back under control when they're not.

And, to be honest, hitting the same channel over and over again on different TVs lends itself pretty strongly to the idea of some kind of interference, but not necessarily the sort that involves dead people.

And this is the problem huh, we both show our bias here. You don't belive in ghosts so you come up with equaly uncertian ideas of what the cause could be, based on your own bias. except I of course was there, and so my experiances of just what happend in that house must trump your guess.

Houses shift all the time. ANd not just because of hot or cold days. Although, with the walking and running, I'm suspecting pipes... maybe central heating?

And again. I presume you know the differance in sound that a creaking house makes, and somebody walking around in your house? Well it sounded like the latter, image waking up in the middle of the night and you can hear footsteps coming up the stairs, they sound like footsteps, you know this because you know the sound that somebody walking up your stairs makes. Would you think, ohhh creaky house, or vermin, or perhaps pipes, or would you think burgerlars? What I'm saying is that the sound was unmistakably somebody walking around the house.



You saw light, reflected. You assume it was a man walking behind you. I'm not saying it was an acid flashback, I'm saying you jump to a conclusion about what you are seeing, that probably isn't what you were seeing.

One night, I had to get out of bed and turn the light back on, because my jacket thrown over a chair looked exactly like someone sitting watching me, with a hand on one knee.

No what I saw was the figure of a man walking behind me into the bathroom. This too was unmistakable, it happend more than once, it was not a trick of the light, and it was not just reflected light.



You think you know there were no vermin in your house? In all probability, then - you have absolutely no idea what was in your house.

There were vermin in your house. Maybe not all the time, all year round. But, unless you live in a bubble, you've got pests.

Fair point, and you are probably right, all houses have their pests. But I do know what a mousey house smells like, ours didn't, I do know the signs of infestation, ours didn't have them.



I don't think it did. I think it faded in and out, and that - from time to time - it matched what you were 'telling it' to do.

Wrong plain and simply wrong.


The phenomenon still works, even so. If the bottle was glass or plastic (and, we can probably assume it was), and the surface on which it rests was of a low enough fraction coefficiency (varnished wood, maybe? plastic counetr top? Glass?) then the only thing you'd NEED would be wetness on the surface.

Okay the surface was like a a mosaic surface, plenty of friction there and as for wet! Damn me but my wife is clean and houseproud, she would not allow a wet surface.




But it works just as well as an example of the story entering a feedback loop. You and your wife provide feedback to one another, and - when others are there - the feedback loop expands.


That too is another fair point.

Science teaches that our thoughts are random electrical impulses flowing through our nervous systems-but Science also teaches that energy is neither created nor destroyed.
Most ghosts are heat of the moment deals-a particular event inflames the passions adequately that it plays and replays until it is used up. Few and far between are the full-blown entity hauntings, where an entire personality makes the transition from random impulses to self-perpetuating wavelengths of energy.
Let me state, we don't use nearly enough of our brains to ascertain exactly what a ghost is, and more than we can say what it isn't. Some are just psychic impressions left in an area, others are...more. I believe in the immortality of the human soul, so my theory would be biased by this principle, just as the nonexistance principle applies-this is an event which occurs, and thus must be studied further-dismissal is as obviously wrong as acceptance whole-cloth.
If I am reading this correctly, you are suggesting that this brain energy can get left behind after something like death. No, that does not happen.
The "we don't use our entire brain" thing is also false. Why won't it die?
About the brain, we do have neurons that can fire randomly, I think. However, our thoughts aren't exactly random, as specific areas of the brain get fired, depending on what we're thinking of.

However, our thoughts aren't exactly random, as specific areas of the brain get fired, depending on what we're thinking of.


Or even specific areas of the brain get fired which governes what we are thinking of?

And this is the problem huh, we both show our bias here. You don't belive in ghosts so you come up with equaly uncertian ideas of what the cause could be, based on your own bias. except I of course was there, and so my experiances of just what happend in that house must trump your guess.


Not a bias. I'm offering possible explanations based on not having been there, and only knowing the sata I get off you - which is why my offerings occassionally change.

If I'd been there, my explanations would be better.

The point isn't that my explanations have to be right - just that there might be explanations that don't involve the living dead.


And again. I presume you know the differance in sound that a creaking house makes, and somebody walking around in your house? Well it sounded like the latter, image waking up in the middle of the night and you can hear footsteps coming up the stairs, they sound like footsteps, you know this because you know the sound that somebody walking up your stairs makes. Would you think, ohhh creaky house, or vermin, or perhaps pipes, or would you think burgerlars? What I'm saying is that the sound was unmistakably somebody walking around the house.


We lived in a house built in 1889, and retrofitted for central heating. Several times, I awoke to the absolutely clear and unmistakable sound of someone walking along the downstairs hall, all the way up the stairs, and along the upper hall to the first bedroom.

But, if you actually stood on the stairs when it happened (which might mean getting out of a nice warm bed, admitted), the sound wasn't coming from the stairs. Eventually, I tracked it to the central heating.


No what I saw was the figure of a man walking behind me into the bathroom. This too was unmistakable, it happend more than once, it was not a trick of the light, and it was not just reflected light.


Errr... the 'reflected light' thing, I'm pretty sure, came from your opening words on the matter. I'll have to check.


Okay the surface was like a a mosaic surface, plenty of friction there and as for wet! Damn me but my wife is clean and houseproud, she would not allow a wet surface.


Mosaic of tile, though, right? The bottom of the bottle might have been the wet surface...

Yum! Fresh figments! *munch*

except I of course was there, and so my experiances of just what happend in that house must trump your guess.
Nope.

That simply doesn't follow; especially when you're making such huge logical leaps. Why does no other, non-supernatural, explanation suffice? Ignoring vast number of metaphysical issues brought up by the idea of 'ghosts' (problems with a separation of mind and body; how a non-physical entity affects the physical world; the physical whereabouts of both 'ghosts' and those 'non-ghost' dead folk; etc.), why, of all the people who have died in terrible circumstances in the tens of thousands of years near your home, does this one person 'haunt' you? Etc. Etc.

Don't conflate correlation and causation, my friend.

Science teaches that our thoughts are random electrical impulses flowing through our nervous systems-but Science also teaches that energy is neither created nor destroyed.Electrical impulses in our brains are generated by our brain cells, powered, ultimately, by what we eat and drink and by breathing in oxygen. If our brain cells die then they can't generate those electrical impulses any more, so our personalities are gone. The energy would most likely dissipate as heat.
Most ghosts are heat of the moment deals-a particular event inflames the passions adequately that it plays and replays until it is used up.
How?
Few and far between are the full-blown entity hauntings, where an entire personality makes the transition from random impulses to self-perpetuating wavelengths of energy.
How can the electrical impulses exist independent of a human brain? How can any kind of electrical energy just remain, unchanging, in the exact same form as it was when it was in a human brain?
Let me state, we don't use nearly enough of our brains
http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percent.asp
to ascertain exactly what a ghost is, and more than we can say what it isn't. Some are just psychic impressions left in an area, others are...more.
Is this what you believe to be true, or can you prove it to be so?
I believe in the immortality of the human soul, so my theory
hypothesis at best
would be biased by this principle, just as the nonexistance principle applies-this is an event which occurs, and thus must be studied further-dismissal is as obviously wrong as acceptance whole-cloth.
Indeed, the various phenomena attributed to ghosts do warrant investigation. Though it seems you have made several conclusions already, so I'm not sure any investigation would change your mind.

What Are Ghost? What You Say? Mean "gosts"?

Goatse?

Goatse?

Casper, the friendly goatse.

Casper, the friendly goatse.

:hail:

Wishful thinking and a despiration to hope for an afterlife.

Basicly a way to escape the fear of death.

^ This.

No one knows what ghosts are, but they pretty damn sexy.

Fixed.

Fixed.

A real ghost would possess his computer to edit the post directly. *nods*

Ghosts are memories. They're not spirits or demons. When they are not figments of the imagination, they are memories.

I have personally seen some pretty freaky shit.Ayup. Me too. More often than not, with witnesses.

Wilgrove, et al.,

With the invention of the printing press, and later the internet, knowledge on how to do something, including talking to the dead, can be found. If it is a different language, there is more then likely a translation that can be found, or likely a person you know can translate it for you.

Personally I look up wikipedia for whatevers, looking for words and phrases used only by that hobby/profession/etc. I then search internets using those words and phrases, and come across non-wiki professional articles, after enough digging, I know more or less if I am doing it correctly, based on how much my result is similar to other people who did the same.

Consider it,
-Rafe

Whilst I have never had an experience with ghosts or such beings, I have a number of friends who report having seen ghosts (or experienced freaky shit, concluding that a ghost or some such being was its cause). I have no reason to suspect they are all lying to me (some of them are doing science with me), though I am suspicious that these same people invariably seem to exhibit some (or all) of the following characteristics in their daily life: jumping to conclusions, lack of investigation/critical thinking and active willingness to believe falsifiable or unprovable things only on 'faith'. Some examples of what I mean by 'daily life':
- "I was born in the year of the rabbit. I owned a turtle for some time, during which I seemingly had an incredibly bad stretch of luck. Someone suggested it may have been due to the fact I owned a turtle, because of the 'tortise and the hare' children's story. When I got rid of the turtle, my bad luck ended".
This person has a belief in the supernatural that I could only describe as fundamental to their identity. But they also do science (though don't seem to enjoy it).
- "I went on a school camp to an old maximum security prison complex. While on the tour, some groups reported hearing chains moving and other such sounds. Upon investigation, nobody was in the room from where the sound came. It must have been a ghost. I have personally excised a few, too".
This person is deep into 'new age' religion (like crystals n stuff) and hypnosis.

So, although I don't think they're lying, it seems very probable to me based on their other behaviour that they're reporting nothing more than a wishful / easily obtained figment of their imagination. No offence to other people who have these beliefs, I'm just reporting my own experience :p

Not a bias. I'm offering possible explanations based on not having been there, and only knowing the sata I get off you - which is why my offerings occassionally change.

If I'd been there, my explanations would be better.

The point isn't that my explanations have to be right - just that there might be explanations that don't involve the living dead

Yeah of course there is a bias there, you can see it by your last words in the above senatnce. You don't belive in ghosts so your expliantions are going to be biased to included things 'that don't include teh living dead'.



We lived in a house built in 1889, and retrofitted for central heating. Several times, I awoke to the absolutely clear and unmistakable sound of someone walking along the downstairs hall, all the way up the stairs, and along the upper hall to the first bedroom.

But, if you actually stood on the stairs when it happened (which might mean getting out of a nice warm bed, admitted), the sound wasn't coming from the stairs. Eventually, I tracked it to the central heating.

Fair enough.



Errr... the 'reflected light' thing, I'm pretty sure, came from your opening words on the matter. I'll have to check.

Please do so.


Mosaic of tile, though, right? The bottom of the bottle might have been the wet surface...

Yeah with a good half a centimeter of grout around them, not ya smooth tiled surface by any means.

Nope.

That simply doesn't follow; especially when you're making such huge logical leaps. Why does no other, non-supernatural, explanation suffice? Ignoring vast number of metaphysical issues brought up by the idea of 'ghosts' (problems with a separation of mind and body; how a non-physical entity affects the physical world; the physical whereabouts of both 'ghosts' and those 'non-ghost' dead folk; etc.), why, of all the people who have died in terrible circumstances in the tens of thousands of years near your home, does this one person 'haunt' you? Etc. Etc.

Don't conflate correlation and causation, my friend.

Tell ya what if you can find in any of my posts anywhere that I have ignored all of the 'non-supernatural explanations' then I'll bow down before you and call you king!

The thing with the physical and the non physical is.... just what are you talking about? Can you point me out anything that we are sure exists, that is non physical?

So, although I don't think they're lying, it seems very probable to me based on their other behaviour that they're reporting nothing more than a wishful / easily obtained figment of their imagination. No offence to other people who have these beliefs, I'm just reporting my own experience :p

There is of course much truth in this, and it is what I mean when I say bias.

Tell ya what if you can find in any of my posts anywhere that I have ignored all of the 'non-supernatural explanations' then I'll bow down before you and call you king!
You're not ignoring them, you're simply dismissing them as inadequate, before jumping to the conclusion of 'it must be a ghost!!!'. Why that conclusion? Why not a non-supernatural conclusion? Or, if you truly believe it can't be a 'normal' reason for these events, why ghosts? Why not aliens, or god, or witches, or any other of the long list of claimed supernatural beings?

Where's your reasoning behind your thinking that the events are ghost-related, and not related to some other, natural or supernatural entity/event?

The thing with the physical and the non physical is....just what are you talking about?
If you're positing that ghosts exist, and that, in some form, they are 'mental energies' or 'souls' or some similar thing, then you're indirectly making a number of other large claims that have massive metaphysical ramifications. You're essentially saying that the mind and the body are separate, that the mind can exist independently of the body, that the mind 'travels' to another 'place', that minds can be prevented from 'travelling', that the non-physical mind can effect the physical world without a body, and other such problematic positions.

If you want to say that a ghost moved your wine bottle, you've got some hard questions to answer.

You're not ignoring them, you're simply dismissing them as inadequate, before jumping to the conclusion of 'it must be a ghost!!!'. Why that conclusion? Why not a non-supernatural conclusion? Or, if you truly believe it can't be a 'normal' reason for these events, why ghosts? Why not aliens, or god, or witches, or any other of the long list of claimed supernatural beings?

Where's your reasoning behind your thinking that the events are ghost-related, and not related to some other, natural or supernatural entity/event?

That is more like the truth of the matter yes. Being the one to witness these things for the year or so that we lived in the house I reached the conclusion that a ghost was responsible, why this one and not another? Because of what I witnessed, and because of my own bias I guess.

All of it could have had a non 'supernatural' reason, I honestly do not think so, but yes of course it could have.


If you're positing that ghosts exist, and that, in some form, they are 'mental energies' or 'souls' or some similar thing, then you're indirectly making a number of other large claims that have massive metaphysical ramifications.

For the record I don't know exaclty what a ghost is, I have some ideas, I belive that some of the things we call 'ghosts' are connected with people who are no longer living.


You're essentially saying that the mind and the body are separate, that the mind can exist independently of the body, that the mind 'travels' to another 'place', that minds can be prevented from 'travelling', that the non-physical mind can effect the physical world without a body, and other such problematic positions.

Again not at all, I don't actualy belive that, the mind unconnected with the body, able to go on after the bodies death, shit whoever belives that is clearly an idiot. Ahhh the soul though, well that may be a diffeant matter, indeed if such a thing exists.


If you want to say that a ghost moved your wine bottle, you've got some hard questions to answer.

I belive that ghost moved my wine bottle yes, and I belive that this particular ghost was in ways as yet unknown connected with the suicide of the man who lived in the house prior to me and my wife.

Now give me your hard questions. In all honesty though the way I see it is this:

I have seen, done, participated in, much weirdness in my life, I don't claim to know the causes or the answers to much of this weirdness but I do claim that it hass all been real. Essentialy then, I know that there are things that we do not yet have an answer for, and my mind is not closed to certian avenuse of research.

It could be that the creaking in the house, was pipes, or vermin, or just the movement of the house, it could also be that the house was 'haunted' by the 'ghost' of the man who killed himself there. I don't know for certian, do you?

Figment of Imagination .

Science teaches that our thoughts are random electrical impulses flowing through our nervous systems-but Science also teaches that energy is neither created nor destroyed.

Just as an FYI, the law of conservation of energy? Flat-out wrong. Been known for years.

I belive that some of the things we call 'ghosts' are connected with people who are no longer living.

Because the previous tenant of your house watched Channel 4 a lot before he killed himself?

All of it could have had a non 'supernatural' reason, I honestly do not think so, but yes of course it could have.
Then what, if you'd be so kind, made you come to that conclusion?

I'm not trying to berate you, or to laugh at you; I genuinely would like to know.

Ahhh the soul though, well that may be a diffeant matter, indeed if such a thing exists.
So what would differentiate between a 'soul' and a 'mind' (acknowledging that you haven't a firm position on the issue)?

I have seen, done, participated in, much weirdness in my life, I don't claim to know the causes or the answers to much of this weirdness but I do claim that it hass all been real.
And I'm not denying that you experienced something, just what that 'something' was.

Essentialy then, I know that there are things that we do not yet have an answer for, and my mind is not closed to certian avenuse of research.
An admirable position, but one that must not be confused with the position of accepting (or not discounting) every cock-and-bull story that comes along.

We, as humans, are highly susceptible to assigning agency when no agent is present. It's a survival mechanism that helped a great deal in the past (that rustling in the bushes could be a sabre-tooth tiger or it could just be the wind; it's better to make a false-positive, assume there is a tiger and look foolish in front of your cave-man mates running from the wind, rather than making a false-negative, assume it's the wind and be eaten by a tiger!) but unfortunately in the modern world that mechanism often deceives us; seeing the face of Jesus in a tortilla, hearing a tapping at the window when it's just a tree blowing against the pane, etc.

It could be that the creaking in the house, was pipes, or vermin, or just the movement of the house, it could also be that the house was 'haunted' by the 'ghost' of the man who killed himself there. I don't know for certian, do you?
No, I don't. But I don't see any reason to jump to the conclusion that the house is haunted. There are a myriad of explanations apart from 'vermin' or 'ghosts', and the latter doesn't seem a satisfactory explanation.

Because the previous tenant of your house watched Channel 4 a lot before he killed himself?

Hey, I've watched Channel 4, too. It's not the best of reasons to off oneself, but I can kind of understand where he was coming from.

(Although, based on the timeframe of the 'hauntings', this guy must have suicided during the time Channel 4 was still showing French porn at 4 in the morning... it must have been murder!)

*shrugs* Believe what you want to believe man.

I never understood this.

Are there actually people who can CHOOSE what they believe?

Yeah of course there is a bias there, you can see it by your last words in the above senatnce. You don't belive in ghosts so your expliantions are going to be biased to included things 'that don't include teh living dead'.


Objectivity is a bias?


Yeah with a good half a centimeter of grout around them, not ya smooth tiled surface by any means.

It doesn't have to be smooth. I've watched a wet bowl migrate across our old kitchen counter, which was pretty rough tile.

None of the above.

I never understood this.

Are there actually people who can CHOOSE what they believe?

Sometimes, yes. Think about cultists (the Heaven's Gate people come to mind first), and New Agers who spout off about chakra alignment and the power of double-terminated crystals.

I never understood this.

Are there actually people who can CHOOSE what they believe?
I believe (ha!) we can, on a sort of near-concious level, irrationally dismiss evidence contrary to our beliefs, or at least form a disconnect between belief x and evidence a. Thus, in effect choosing what to believe.

If you so determinedly believe something, especially if that something forms a core part of your belief in the world, you can view evidence to the contrary in an automatically bad light.

I believe (ha!) we can, on a sort of near-concious level, irrationally dismiss evidence contrary to our beliefs, or at least form a disconnect between belief x and evidence a. Thus, in effect choosing what to believe.

If you so determinedly believe something, especially if that something forms a core part of your belief in the world, you can view evidence to the contrary in an automatically bad light.

Not only can you view contrary evidence that way, you must. Otherwise the whole thing falls down around you.

Not only can you view contrary evidence that way, you must. Otherwise the whole thing falls down around you.
Quite.

That's why, I believe, we see so many highly sophisticated rebuttals to intelligible evidence; see the whole 'Intelligent design' fiasco, flagellum and all that.

Sometimes, yes. Think about cultists (the Heaven's Gate people come to mind first), and New Agers who spout off about chakra alignment and the power of double-terminated crystals.

But they get to choose to believe that? I don't buy it.

Sure, people believe all kinds of stuff. I once heard about a cult that believed their leader died, and got better 3 days later. People will believe all kinds of crazy shit.

But, to choose to believe it?

How would you even do that?

I believe (ha!) we can, on a sort of near-concious level, irrationally dismiss evidence contrary to our beliefs, or at least form a disconnect between belief x and evidence a. Thus, in effect choosing what to believe.

If you so determinedly believe something, especially if that something forms a core part of your belief in the world, you can view evidence to the contrary in an automatically bad light.

Ah, but that means the belief shapes how you view the objective facts... it doesn't explain how you could 'choose' to believe it in the first place.

Does it?

But they get to choose to believe that? I don't buy it.

Sure, people believe all kinds of stuff. I once heard about a cult that believed their leader died, and got better 3 days later. People will believe all kinds of crazy shit.

But, to choose to believe it?

How would you even do that?

I'm not sure I understand the question. I choose to believe that for which I find credible evidence to support/document. If I believe there's a spaceship behind a comet that's coming to carry my soul away but I have to be castrated to avoid corrupting my soul and kill myself to free it, that's something I started to choose the minute I began to listen to the crackpot who posited that scenario with anything more than pure skepticism.

If I presume that demonic beings are real (which is not the question here, and I claim to be agnostic in that respect), then I would call all three options "true", since
a) is true, because I presume that it is likely that some form of "shadow" of the former consciousness remains in this world. Too many cultures tell us about it, and too many personal accounts match this description better than they match the concept of a purely malevolent creature.
b) is true too, because were there demons, they would likely appear in that way. Also, some spirits have no goal other than to cause mischief, and that, IMO, even if they are human souls, qualifies them as demons - a supernatural being bent on doing evil stuff is doing the bidding of the devil, wether knowingly or not, so it's a demon. If there was a human that was bent on causing only ravage and destruction, the only thing that seperateth that person from a demon is his or her mortality. So, a supernatural being that is evil, is a demon. Were we to talk of the origin of demons, or the motivation of the being, we would find that, in a religious sense, since presuming the existence of demons true, the devil has a hand in any evil deed, so that we can say, ghosts that do evil are servants of satan (in a religious approach).
c) is also true, because nothing speaks against people having hallucinations that take the form of ghosts.

Anyway, I think to remember that before I was born, I wished I would not be, for my mind clings to every moment past, yet now that I am born, I wish not to die. So it would be kinda cool to be a ghost. Ya know, stay up all night, playing tricks on people, and you cannot even be caught for that.

I'm not sure I understand the question. I choose to believe that for which I find credible evidence to support/document. If I believe there's a spaceship behind a comet that's coming to carry my soul away but I have to be castrated to avoid corrupting my soul and kill myself to free it, that's something I started to choose the minute I began to listen to the crackpot who posited that scenario with anything more than pure skepticism.

If someone tells me there is a spaceship behind a comet, etc... I think I'm unlikely to believe it. There's no reason to.

I can't MAKE myself believe it.

If that someone presents a convincing enough argument - either through use of evidence, or he (or she) is just a particularly gifted speaker - they might manage to get me believing them - but again, not by my choice.

I'd like to believe in angels and vampires. They're two of my favourite mythical concepts. But, I can't. Simple desire is not enough. I can't 'choose'.

If someone tells me there is a spaceship behind a comet, etc... I think I'm unlikely to believe it. There's no reason to.

I can't MAKE myself believe it.

If that someone presents a convincing enough argument - either through use of evidence, or he (or she) is just a particularly gifted speaker - they might manage to get me believing them - but again, not by my choice.

I'd like to believe in angels and vampires. They're two of my favourite mythical concepts. But, I can't. Simple desire is not enough. I can't 'choose'.

I'm afraid I don't understand. There comes a point where the evidence convinces you. You choose that point and what to do with it when it arrives. You could easily believe in vampires and angels if you wanted to. But someone with a mind as critically trained as yours would need more evidence coupled with a voluntary level of self-deception to go ahead and buy the okey-doke on the supernatural brigade.

If this were not at least partially true, there would be nobody who continued to believe in some of the odd things they believe in despite masses of evidence to the contrary. They choose to ignore or be unreasonably suspicious of the evidence. Examples are conspiracy theorists, UFO buffs, Biblical literalists, and the like.

Ah, but that means the belief shapes how you view the objective facts... it doesn't explain how you could 'choose' to believe it in the first place.

Does it?
I think the language here is confusing.

To say we 'choose' to believe some things may imply something that doesn't go on; we simply believe something or not, depending on evidence, previous beliefs, etc. I suppose one could say that the above act is 'choosing' to believe, but that implies a concious decision (and an opportunity to 'choose' to believe the opposite side), and in that respect I'd agree with you that 'choosing' is too strong.

I'm afraid I don't understand. There comes a point where the evidence convinces you. You choose that point and what to do with it when it arrives. You could easily believe in vampires and angels if you wanted to. But someone with a mind as critically trained as yours would need more evidence coupled with a voluntary level of self-deception to go ahead and buy the okey-doke on the supernatural brigade.

If this were not at least partially true, there would be nobody who continued to believe in some of the odd things they believe in despite masses of evidence to the contrary. They choose to ignore or be unreasonably suspicious of the evidence. Examples are conspiracy theorists, UFO buffs, Biblical literalists, and the like.

That's the thing, though - I can't believe in vampires or angels, and I have wanted to. It would take some pretty good evidence - but that's not my 'choice'.

The post I replied to, back up there, said something like "you believe what you like". I don't think that's true, and I think it was a flippant attempt to dismiss something by implying the other poster was choosing to believe something that they really knew was wrong.

I hear the same logic bounced at me on an almost daily basis - my punishment for living in the Bappy heartland, I guess - about my 'choice' to turn my back on god. It doesn't matter that there's just no good evidence. It doesn't even matter that - for the sake of an easy life, I WOULD believe, if I could. No - me not belieiving is my choice. Apparently.

I think the language here is confusing.

To say we 'choose' to believe some things may imply something that doesn't go on; we simply believe something or not, depending on evidence, previous beliefs, etc. I suppose one could say that the above act is 'choosing' to believe, but that implies a concious decision (and an opportunity to 'choose' to believe the opposite side), and in that respect I'd agree with you that 'choosing' is too strong.

Right. The 'choice' isn't a 'choice'. People aren't just believing x, y or z because they wanted to.

That's the thing, though - I can't believe in vampires or angels, and I have wanted to. It would take some pretty good evidence - but that's not my 'choice'.

The post I replied to, back up there, said something like "you believe what you like". I don't think that's true, and I think it was a flippant attempt to dismiss something by implying the other poster was choosing to believe something that they really knew was wrong.

I hear the same logic bounced at me on an almost daily basis - my punishment for living in the Bappy heartland, I guess - about my 'choice' to turn my back on god. It doesn't matter that there's just no good evidence. It doesn't even matter that - for the sake of an easy life, I WOULD believe, if I could. No - me not belieiving is my choice. Apparently.

Aha -- amazing what a little back-story can do for my comprehension. I've always been a fan of context. You cannot consciously turn your back on what, for you, isn't really there. People's belief in religion makes them feel comfortable, somewhat in control even (by virtue of associating with He Who Is In Control), and those are powerful emotions and motivators.

It couldn't be that those in charge of convincing you have done a poor job, given that believing, in your situation, is the easier path.

I see what you mean now. However, it seems to me that we choose, if not directly as in "either/neither/both", in some way to believe what we do or don't. We "choose" through where our threshold for credibility lies. That is a complicated line to draw, and for some that line is blurry, if ever drawn at all.

Sometimes I think that not believing any religious or spiritual ideals is the easy road because it means not having to wake up early on Sunday (among other things). I choose not to ascribe that which I cannot understand to the supernatural. Surely that is a choice, isn't it?

EDIT: Man, do I love the back-and-forth with you. Would that all discourse could be so civil and enlightening. Thanks.

Aha -- amazing what a little back-story can do for my comprehension. I've always been a fan of context. You cannot consciously turn your back on what, for you, isn't really there. People's belief in religion makes them feel comfortable, somewhat in control even (by virtue of associating with He Who Is In Control), and those are powerful emotions and motivators.

It couldn't be that those in charge of convincing you have done a poor job, given that believing, in your situation, is the easier path.

I see what you mean now. However, it seems to me that we choose, if not directly as in "either/neither/both", in some way to believe what we do or don't. We "choose" through where our threshold for credibility lies.


Ah, but do we?

Why am I so demanding? I can think of a number of reasons - Aspergers, OCD, a natural tendency towards the sciences, an unusual grasp of math. A whole lot of factors that MIGHT influence a hard-and-fast view of the world. I'm sure there are a hundred factors I've not even thought about... the Catholic/Anglican marriage of my parents? Who knows?

What it means though, is that other people seem to accept as 'evidence', things that I just can't. But I didn't choose that cut-off.


That is a complicated line to draw, and for some that line is blurry, if ever drawn at all.


Exactly - I don't think I drew a line at all. As I've suggested, if I could draw the line, it would be somewhere else.


Sometimes I think that not believing any religious or spiritual ideals is the easy road because it means not having to wake up early on Sunday (among other things). I choose not to ascribe that which I cannot understand to the supernatural. Surely that is a choice, isn't it?


Okay... so, easy road. Imagine yourself in my position for a moment. My wife is a Baptist, my daughter is a Baptist, my in-laws are all Baptists. My employers are Baptists, and I live in one of those parts of the country where it wouldn't be too unreasonable to be 'let go' because of a religious orientation like mine.

Any time a discussion of religion comes up, it's me that's the one on defense. Banks are more likely to give me a loan if they think I'm Christian. I'm more likely to get a better deal if I come across as Christian. I've been turned down by adoption agencies because I'm not Christian.

In my situation, being able to choose to believe would be the absolutely best thing. But, I just can't. (It also doesn't help that - while I don't really bring the topic up, I'm too honest to lie if someone asks me).

Imagining yourself in my position -can you make yourself believe?


EDIT: Man, do I love the back-and-forth with you. Would that all discourse could be so civil and enlightening. Thanks.

Agreed. It's no less rewarding at this end. :)

Right. The 'choice' isn't a 'choice'. People aren't just believing x, y or z because they wanted to.
Not on a concious level, no, I don't believe they are. But I think we can hang on to some ideas (be they religious, political or otherwise) a long time after we've seen some conflicting evidence simply because we prefer the idea of the alternative; albeit this 'hanging on' is largely subconscious.

It's also important to point out this 'hanging on' isn't solely the prevail of believers in religion or the supernatural. Not by a long shot.

Ah, but do we?

Why am I so demanding? I can think of a number of reasons - Aspergers, OCD, a natural tendency towards the sciences, an unusual grasp of math. A whole lot of factors that MIGHT influence a hard-and-fast view of the world. I'm sure there are a hundred factors I've not even thought about... the Catholic/Anglican marriage of my parents? Who knows?

What it means though, is that other people seem to accept as 'evidence', things that I just can't. But I didn't choose that cut-off.

Didn't you? When others were swallowing the Baptist (or other -ist) line whole, where were you? It didn't make sense to you, so you stopped committing dogma to memory because that choice made more sense than taking to heart and mind things that "didn't compute". There's choice in that. Many people shoulder their "faith" like a burden, despite feeling that it's not either what it once was to them or never made any sense. However, they chose to go along to get along.

Exactly - I don't think I drew a line at all. As I've suggested, if I could draw the line, it would be somewhere else.

But you could, couldn't you? You're familiar enough with all the trappings to pass yourself off as a believer. You know what to say, how to say it, and the rest of it.

Okay... so, easy road. Imagine yourself in my position for a moment. My wife is a Baptist, my daughter is a Baptist, my in-laws are all Baptists. My employers are Baptists, and I live in one of those parts of the country where it wouldn't be too unreasonable to be 'let go' because of a religious orientation like mine.

Any time a discussion of religion comes up, it's me that's the one on defense. Banks are more likely to give me a loan if they think I'm Christian. I'm more likely to get a better deal if I come across as Christian. I've been turned down by adoption agencies because I'm not Christian.

In my situation, being able to choose to believe would be the absolutely best thing. But, I just can't. (It also doesn't help that - while I don't really bring the topic up, I'm too honest to lie if someone asks me).

If getting along, and everything else you mentioned was as important to you as your own personal integrity, you would choose to fake it. In a sense I'm both agreeing and disagreeing with you. I think there's more choice in active disbelief than there is in passive belief. If it truly benefitted you to the point of job security to toe the line, and you knew how to smooth everything over, AND you found it truly that much easier to get along, you would.

Imagining yourself in my position -can you make yourself believe?

I'm a Deist at best, with a little karma/golden rule thrown in. I taught for three years at a Catholic university. Yes. Yes I can.

Agreed. It's no less rewarding at this end. :)

Glad to hear it.

Didn't you? When others were swallowing the Baptist (or other -ist) line whole, where were you? It didn't make sense to you, so you stopped committing dogma to memory because that choice made more sense than taking to heart and mind things that "didn't compute".


Actually, I haven't stopped committing the dogma to memory. My memory of scripture, etc is higher now than it's ever been. I read more commentaries, now. I listen to more preachers, now. I'm better versed in the scripture, and getting better, day by day.

But I don't believe it.

To me, it doesn't compute - that's right. But I haven't chosen to stop hearing, or even listening. And that's why I can't buy the idea that I could 'choose' to believe.


But you could, couldn't you? You're familiar enough with all the trappings to pass yourself off as a believer. You know what to say, how to say it, and the rest of it.


I can easily pass myself off as a believer... but I don't. If a debate comes up, and I'm not asked what I believe, I'll argue it in whatever context we're debating. If that means debating within the assumption that x, y, or z is true - that's what I do. But then - if someone actually asks what I believe, I always admit to my atheism. :)


If getting along, and everything else you mentioned was as important to you as your own personal integrity, you would choose to fake it. In a sense I'm both agreeing and disagreeing with you. I think there's more choice in active disbelief than there is in passive belief. If it truly benefitted you to the point of job security to toe the line, and you knew how to smooth everything over, AND you found it truly that much easier to get along, you would.


If getting along were more important to me than my integrity, I would fake it - this is true. But, I just can't make myself be dishonest. I can't back down on this - if not for me, then for my kids who learn from my example.. or for all the other people for which my 'fight' is one more little light of support.

But, I could only FAKE it - I can't believe on demand. I just don't know... how?


I'm a Deist at best, with a little karma/golden rule thrown in. I taught for three years at a Catholic university. Yes. Yes I can.


So - you could chose, here and now, to be an atheist?


Glad to hear it.

I'm happy to learn, I'm happy to have civil conversation even where viewpoints differ. There is no bad, here. :)

Actually, I haven't stopped committing the dogma to memory. My memory of scripture, etc is higher now than it's ever been. I read more commentaries, now. I listen to more preachers, now. I'm better versed in the scripture, and getting better, day by day.

But I don't believe it.

To me, it doesn't compute - that's right. But I haven't chosen to stop hearing, or even listening. And that's why I can't buy the idea that I could 'choose' to believe.

Fair enough. Point conceded.

I can easily pass myself off as a believer... but I don't. If a debate comes up, and I'm not asked what I believe, I'll argue it in whatever context we're debating. If that means debating within the assumption that x, y, or z is true - that's what I do. But then - if someone actually asks what I believe, I always admit to my atheism. :)

Very honest of you.

If getting along were more important to me than my integrity, I would fake it - this is true. But, I just can't make myself be dishonest. I can't back down on this - if not for me, then for my kids who learn from my example.. or for all the other people for which my 'fight' is one more little light of support.

But, I could only FAKE it - I can't believe on demand. I just don't know... how?

Well, and here I'm really reaching, most of those who profess not to believe anything in the realm of religion can become very strong believers in times of crisis or imminent threat or danger. Some can even swing that in the heat of sexual climax.

So - you could chose, here and now, to be an atheist?

I know what to say and how to act in order to be thought an atheist. If I'm surrounded by them, and I feel the need to fit in, I can do exactly that. But you're right -- it's a performance that draws on the time in my life when I was indeed a die-hard atheist. I choose to believe that flying one's beliefs like a flag is kinda obnoxious unless those beliefs are under direct attack by someone even more obnoxious. I didn't always believe that. I came to that conclusion and decided to act on that conclusion when the situation presented itself. I don't know if that's a full-on, light-switch choice, but I don't think decisions of a philosophical, cosmological or religious nature can be that way...at least not for me, and so it seems, for you.

However, I am not the only actor. Those receiving the pentecostal-style sudden gift of faith at revivals and foursquare evangelical churches seem to be making a light-switch decision on the spot. It makes me wonder how many of those conversions are genuine, and how many last.

Very honest of you.


Heh. I can't take any credit for it, I just can't seem to get the hang of that lying thing. :)


Well, and here I'm really reaching, most of those who profess not to believe anything in the realm of religion can become very strong believers in times of crisis or imminent threat or danger. Some can even swing that in the heat of sexual climax.


Lipservice? I think a lot more people protest faith than really have it, per se.


I know what to say and how to act in order to be thought an atheist. If I'm surrounded by them, and I feel the need to fit in, I can do exactly that. But you're right -- it's a performance that draws on the time in my life when I was indeed a die-hard atheist. I choose to believe that flying one's beliefs like a flag is kinda obnoxious unless those beliefs are under direct attack by someone even more obnoxious. I didn't always believe that. I came to that conclusion and decided to act on that conclusion when the situation presented itself. I don't know if that's a full-on, light-switch choice, but I don't think decisions of a philosophical, cosmological or religious nature can be that way...at least not for me, and so it seems, for you.

However, I am not the only actor. Those receiving the pentecostal-style sudden gift of faith at revivals and foursquare evangelical churches seem to be making a light-switch decision on the spot. It makes me wonder how many of those conversions are genuine, and how many last.

Couldn't tell you. :) I think a lot of people make broad gestures that are what they think they SHOULD do, or to replicate something they wish they really felt. I can't speak to how real those things are. When I lost my faith, it was a realisation that something had slipped, not a lightswitch going on. What had been enough, just wasn't any more. I really don't 'get' the idea of sudden transitions - even less, by choice.

many things, none of them 'demonic'. some/most amount to a kind of recordings. now demonicness, THAT is a figment of the imagination. an imagination itself poisoned by hatred and coerciveness.

unfair as it may seem and often is, we do, individually reap, what we collectively sow. and mysterious forces beyond our comprehension ain't got a damd thing to do with it.

=^^=
.../\...

Because the previous tenant of your house watched Channel 4 a lot before he killed himself?

Naaa man, for many many reasons. Mostly coz I was there for a year.

Objectivity is a bias?

Bwhahah are you trying to tell me that only participating in beliefs backed up by rational data is objective? In which case I would ask what rational data has lead yo to this belife? No you think like this, because this is a core subjective belife of yours, in other words a bias that you have towards empiriclism.

But they get to choose to believe that? I don't buy it.

Sure, people believe all kinds of stuff. I once heard about a cult that believed their leader died, and got better 3 days later. People will believe all kinds of crazy shit.

But, to choose to believe it?

How would you even do that?

There was a thing in the paper the other day about a school that banned little cheese snacks in the kids pack lunches on health grounds, claiming that it is unhealthy to eat cheese.

I belive that mostly everything in moderation is fine, and that this school is wrong. What do you belive about eating cheese?

Bwhahah are you trying to tell me that only participating in beliefs backed up by rational data is objective?
Or participating in beliefs backed up by rational reasoning.

You leave the two behind, evidence and reasoning, and you set off down a rather strange path indeed.

In which case I would ask what rational data has lead yo to this belife?
The observance of the difficulty in attempting to convince another of a belief which cannot be proven via evidence nor reasoning.

Or participating in beliefs backed up by rational reasoning.

You leave the two behind, evidence and reasoning, and you set off down a rather strange path indeed.

Heh yeah and the strange paths are often the most interesting. Can you not see though that even via the path of evidance and reason one can reach a strange conclusion?


The observance of the difficulty in attempting to convince another of a belief which cannot be proven via evidence nor reasoning.

In other words, your own observations. Well then I guess that makes us more or less the same as the rest of the world huh.

Heh yeah and the strange paths are often the most interesting.
Well, dragons are interesting, but that's no reason to believe in them.

Can you not see though that even via the path of evidance and reason one can reach a strange conclusion?
Of course I can, which is partly why I don't see the need to abandon either one.

EDIT: Though an unhealthy 'worshipping' of reason is going too far the other way. We shouldn't dismiss intuition, emotion, and the like.

Well, dragons are interesting, but that's no reason to believe in them.

Theres a lot to be said for dragon, what do you mean when you use the word?


Of course I can, which is partly why I don't see the need to abandon either one.

And by that I do hope you are not suggesting that I do?

EDIT: Though an unhealthy 'worshipping' of reason is going too far the other way. We shouldn't dismiss intuition, emotion, and the like.

And that's really the point I am making.

And that's really the point I am making.
I'd agree that we need to be careful in our use, and promotion, of 'reason', it has lead to some dodgy positions (for a good example, see how behaviourism expelled subjective experience from psychology; a move from which we are still recovering), but that certainly doesn't mean we should (a) abandon reason altogether, or (b) accept any position opposed to 'traditional rational thought'.

There's a big difference between not ignoring our subjective selves and accepting every crackpot theory that rears its ugly head.

I'd agree that we need to be careful in our use, and promotion, of 'reason', it has lead to some dodgy positions (for a good example, see how behaviourism expelled subjective experience from psychology; a move from which we are still recovering), but that certainly doesn't mean we should (a) abandon reason altogether, or (b) accept any position opposed to 'traditional rational thought'.

There's a big difference between not ignoring our subjective selves and accepting every crackpot theory that rears its ugly head.

Yes quite right and that is not a thing I'd advocate.

Bwhahah are you trying to tell me that only participating in beliefs backed up by rational data is objective? In which case I would ask what rational data has lead yo to this belife? No you think like this, because this is a core subjective belife of yours, in other words a bias that you have towards empiriclism.

Uh.. eh?

Why do I accept objective data? Because of my subjective bias?

I don't choose to only accept data I can verify... it's that bias of reality, at work.

Uh.. eh?

Why do I accept objective data? Because of my subjective bias?

I don't choose to only accept data I can verify... it's that bias of reality, at work.

Heh perhaps I am not clear huh.

There are few things that we can say are objectivly factual. That the Earth revolves around the sun is one such thing.

That the only valid approach is one of rational, evidance based empriclisim, is not.

So if this is your approach to life, it is based on a subjective belife of yours. That being that this approach is the only valid one.

Heh perhaps I am not clear huh.

There are few things that we can say are objectivly factual. That the Earth revolves around the sun is one such thing.

That the only valid approach is one of rational, evidance based empriclisim, is not.

So if this is your approach to life, it is based on a subjective belife of yours. That being that this approach is the only valid one.

I'm still not getting it.

Why do you think the Earth revolves around the sun?

How do you know that's not some optical effect? Or an alien illusion?

I'm still not getting it.

Why do you think the Earth revolves around the sun?

How do you know that's not some optical effect? Or an alien illusion?

Ahhh well I tried.

Coz it just does, alright!

Ahhh well I tried.

Coz it just does, alright!

The point I was trying to make there is that we ALL have a 'bias' towards the objective... because objective evidence holds up under examination, and doesn't really require accepting any more assumptions than just what 'is'.

I'm 'biased' towards objectivity, because we all are. Some of us are also able to accept 'subjective' evidences. Some of us will (can?) follow that subjective evidence even when it runs parallel to (or, in some cases, contradicts?) objective evidence.

The point I was trying to make there is that we ALL have a 'bias' towards the objective... because objective evidence holds up under examination, and doesn't really require accepting any more assumptions than just what 'is'.

I'm 'biased' towards objectivity, because we all are. Some of us are also able to accept 'subjective' evidences. Some of us will (can?) follow that subjective evidence even when it runs parallel to (or, in some cases, contradicts?) objective evidence.



Ahh then what are we doing here, it seems that we are both using differant words to convey the same thing. I am in agreement.

Ahh then what are we doing here, it seems that we are both using differant words to convey the same thing. I am in agreement.

Then I don't get this: "Bwhahah are you trying to tell me that only participating in beliefs backed up by rational data is objective? In which case I would ask what rational data has lead yo to this belife? No you think like this, because this is a core subjective belife of yours, in other words a bias that you have towards empiriclism."

Because I don't see a 'bias' that we don't all have... and I'm not sure what the 'subjective belief' is supposed to be?