Ghosts galore

[jeremyp]

Noone has any definitive idea IF ghosts are, let alone what.

I'm pretty sure they are products of the human imagination.

[Sriram]

The phenomena undoubtedly exist, but they may not be what they purport, or are assumed, to be.

Yes.....and only if its existence is acknowledged  can it be examined. Blanket denial and relegating everything to imagination or fantasy, is not progressive.

[jeremyp]

Yes.....and only if its existence is acknowledged  can it be examined. Blanket denial and relegating everything to imagination or fantasy, is not progressive.

Give me some evidence that ghosts are anything other than imagination and I will acknowledge that.

The trouble is you have got nothing and blaming the disbelievers for the inadequacy of your own position is not progressive.

[Outrider]

Yes.....and only if its existence is acknowledged  can it be examined. Blanket denial and relegating everything to imagination or fantasy, is not progressive.

No, the possibility needs to be acknowledged, but it needs to be also put in context - it's less likely than some things, more likely than others.  There is no 'blanket denial' of the possibility, but at the same time some of us are requiring a higher burden of proof than you're currently offering to accept it as likely, let alone fact.

O.

[SweetPea]

Hello Sriram, hope all is well with you in these strange 'virus times'.

My grandmother was someone that twice encountered something strange. She used to love to walk round a lake near her home. On two occasions she noticed a lady dressed in Edwardian clothes standing at the edge of the lake. The lady was known as 'the blue lady' as her dress was blue. After making enquiries she discovered that this lady had once lived in a local stately home and that other folk had seen her by the lake.

I have never questioned my grandma's story as she was a very down-to-earth person.

[Sriram]

Hello Sriram, hope all is well with you in these strange 'virus times'.

My grandmother was someone that twice encountered something strange. She used to love to walk round a lake near her home. On two occasions she noticed a lady dressed in Edwardian clothes standing at the edge of the lake. The lady was known as 'the blue lady' as her dress was blue. After making enquiries she discovered that this lady had once lived in a local stately home and that other folk had seen her by the lake.

I have never questioned my grandma's story as she was a very down-to-earth person.

Hi SweetPea,

Its been quite a while.    I am fine out here and hope the virus is not troubling you or your loved ones.

Yes...I have heard of many  instances where people have seen and encountered such ghosts. As I have said earlier, it is difficult to come to any simple conclusion as to what these experiences can be.  It could be far more complex than what we imagine, involving many layers of the mind and consciousness.

As usual, our habitually skeptical friends are happy within their comfort zone.   

[Sriram]

No, the possibility needs to be acknowledged, but it needs to be also put in context - it's less likely than some things, more likely than others.  There is no 'blanket denial' of the possibility, but at the same time some of us are requiring a higher burden of proof than you're currently offering to accept it as likely, let alone fact.

O.

What 'context' can we put it in....given that we have no clue as to what it is?  We should not descend into scientism and attempt to explain everything only in terms of what we know already.   

[Outrider]

What 'context' can we put it in....given that we have no clue as to what it is?  We should not descend into scientism and attempt to explain everything only in terms of what we know already.

We shouldn't presume 'scientism' from any sort of ideological standpoint, no, but until someone comes up with an equally reliable system of gathering knowledge then at a practical level that which can't be demonstrated empirically can be presumed not to exist.

O.

[Enki]

Typical of you, Sriram. It seems whenever you encounter views and arguments at odds to your own, all you seem to be able to do is accuse others of having limited vision, not thinking outside the box or, as in this case, staying within their comfort zone and/or descending into scientism. I suppose all this bolsters your ego but it isn't exactly conducive to advancing your views.

In my case, for instance, I grew up in a spiritualist household, although no pressure was put on me to believe anything). I was used to the idea of spirit guides, ectoplasm, and seances linking to those who were supposedly deceased. Later, as I earlier made reference to, three of us investigated at least eight local ghost stories  by examining the locations, interviewing the people concerned and spending time to see whether we could experience anything out of the ordinary. We did this with as open a mind as possible. In fact we would have been thrilled if we had been able to discover something that couldn't possibly be explained except by some sort of ghostly/supernatural happening. We even got a mention on the local radio, but, alas, we found zero evidence for any sort of ghostly activity. Comfort zone? You don't know what you are talking about.

In fact almost all investigated 'ghost' stories can be put down to things like deliberate hoaxes, natural events, brain activity and mistaken assumptions. All sorts of things can be challenged quite easily? For instance, if the ghost is some sort of disembodied person, how come they are usually wearing clothes? What is it about the clothes they wear which makes the clothes 'ghostly'?

I leave you to your ghostly deliberations. 

[ippy]

You people don't trust the word of your queen?!

Well Sriram, for one thing I don't consider her my Queen, it's just a part of a ridiculous anachronistic system we have to put up with somebody that by chance of birth alone has ended up as head of sate, aren't we lucky?

If the Queen, as you call her, believes in ghosts, so what? She also believes she has an invisible friend in the sky, ghosts and gods too, all without a single shred of evidence that she or anyone else has ever been able to substantiate. 

ippy.

[Robbie]

What an unpleasant and unnecessary post ippy. Do you have to be so scathing?

I've never seen a ghost but have been aware of presence or atmosphere in certain situations sririam. I think where dramatic events have occurred some people will pick up on the shades of those departed, even if they didn't know about them.

It doesn't surprise me, considering the ancient buildings they occupy and the happenings there, that the royal family have encountered similar but I have never read that they have.

[ippy]

What an unpleasant and unnecessary post ippy. Do you have to be so scathing?

I've never seen a ghost but have been aware of presence or atmosphere in certain situations sririam. I think where dramatic events have occurred some people will pick up on the shades of those departed, even if they didn't know about them.

It doesn't surprise me, considering the ancient buildings they occupy and the happenings there, that the royal family have encountered similar but I have never read that they have.

Sriram knows I'm OK with him and he also knows we only have differing ideas again like yourself I don't dislike you but again our ideas differ quite a bit.

I prefer people that call a spade a spade because I know where I stand with them, as a matter of fact I generally like most that regularly post on this forum, even that 'Robbie' person but that doesn't mean I always have to agree with her.

ippy.

[Sriram]

We shouldn't presume 'scientism' from any sort of ideological standpoint, no, but until someone comes up with an equally reliable system of gathering knowledge then at a practical level that which can't be demonstrated empirically can be presumed not to exist.

O.

Not necessarily. Multiverses have not been demonstrated empirically. As also Strings and Dark Matter. Do you therefore presume that they don't exist?  You merely take them as hypotheses and then work along those lines integrating them within your theories.

I am suggesting that phenomena such as NDE's, ghosts and other such things that people commonly experience and which are fairly consistent across the world, should also be taken as hypotheses and integrated with our larger world view. Lateral thinking and an open mind could help  sort out many of our present dilemmas and present a more meaningful picture of our universe and our lives. 

[Sriram]

What an unpleasant and unnecessary post ippy. Do you have to be so scathing?

I've never seen a ghost but have been aware of presence or atmosphere in certain situations sririam. I think where dramatic events have occurred some people will pick up on the shades of those departed, even if they didn't know about them.

It doesn't surprise me, considering the ancient buildings they occupy and the happenings there, that the royal family have encountered similar but I have never read that they have.

Hi Robbie,

Yes. It probably requires a certain frame of mind to  'see' or interact with ghosts and other non physical forms of existence.  Our mind is the biggest mystery we have and taking a simplistic view of it (as just chemical and electrical activity in the brain) is regressive.   

[Sriram]

Typical of you, Sriram. It seems whenever you encounter views and arguments at odds to your own, all you seem to be able to do is accuse others of having limited vision, not thinking outside the box or, as in this case, staying within their comfort zone and/or descending into scientism. I suppose all this bolsters your ego but it isn't exactly conducive to advancing your views.

In my case, for instance, I grew up in a spiritualist household, although no pressure was put on me to believe anything). I was used to the idea of spirit guides, ectoplasm, and seances linking to those who were supposedly deceased. Later, as I earlier made reference to, three of us investigated at least eight local ghost stories  by examining the locations, interviewing the people concerned and spending time to see whether we could experience anything out of the ordinary. We did this with as open a mind as possible. In fact we would have been thrilled if we had been able to discover something that couldn't possibly be explained except by some sort of ghostly/supernatural happening. We even got a mention on the local radio, but, alas, we found zero evidence for any sort of ghostly activity. Comfort zone? You don't know what you are talking about.

In fact almost all investigated 'ghost' stories can be put down to things like deliberate hoaxes, natural events, brain activity and mistaken assumptions. All sorts of things can be challenged quite easily? For instance, if the ghost is some sort of disembodied person, how come they are usually wearing clothes? What is it about the clothes they wear which makes the clothes 'ghostly'?

I leave you to your ghostly deliberations. 

You don't attach any value to the experiences of thousands of peoples across the world....and you expect me to take you little failed 'experiment' as conclusive....??! 

[Maeght]

Yes.....and only if its existence is acknowledged  can it be examined. Blanket denial and relegating everything to imagination or fantasy, is not progressive.

People experience things and interpret the experiences as ghosts, that isn't denied. I have never had such experiences and think there are other more likely explanations for the experiences than them having encountered dead people.

[Stranger]

Not necessarily. Multiverses have not been demonstrated empirically. As also Strings and Dark Matter.

You really should learn some science if you're going to keep wibbling on about it. There are many multiverse ideas that range from the extremes of conjecture to reasonable assumptions, given the current evidence. String theory (why on earth do you keep referring to it as capitalised "String"?) is a work in progress hypothesis, and there is empirical evidence for dark matter (we know it's there, we don't know what it is).

I am suggesting that phenomena such as NDE's, ghosts and other such things that people commonly experience and which are fairly consistent across the world, should also be taken as hypotheses and integrated with our larger world view.

They aren't hypotheses, they are (alleged) phenomena. A hypothesis would have to seek to explain them in some way that stood some chance of being tested. NDEs are being investigated and ghosts have been investigated for a long time without uncovering any solid evidence on which to even base a hypothesis.

Lateral thinking and an open mind could help  sort out many of our present dilemmas and present a more meaningful picture of our universe and our lives.

But you're not doing any lateral thinking, you're just clinging to old superstitions that you happen to like.

[Outrider]

Not necessarily. Multiverses have not been demonstrated empirically.

And they aren't accepted as probably the case, but there are logical reasons for considering them possibilities and people are looking at ways of detecting if they are actually there.  There are no logical reasons to think that ghosts exist, and it's therefore difficult to come up with any method for accurately determining if they really are there or not.

As also Strings and Dark Matter.   Do you therefore presume that they don't exist?

Strings are a stronger possibility than ghosts or a multiverse, but they are still only an hypothesis awaiting confirmation.  Dark matter, almost by definition, is presumed not to exist; it's a holding term for something where we have a currently incomplete explanation and 'Dark Matter' is the name for whatever the unexplained bit is.  It's the exact opposite of ghosts, it's data without an explanation rather than an explanation looking for data to justify its  existence.

You merely take them as hypotheses and then work along those lines integrating them within your theories.

Ghosts, though, don't fit in with any other hypotheses.

I am suggesting that phenomena such as NDE's, ghosts and other such things that people commonly experience and which are fairly consistent across the world, should also be taken as hypotheses and integrated with our larger world view.

But there are explanations for these that are more in keeping with the well-established theories of how the world works.

Lateral thinking and an open mind could help  sort out many of our present dilemmas and present a more meaningful picture of our universe and our lives.

Lateral thinking is lovely if you're writing a story, but it's an unreliable basis for trying to determine what's actually happening in reality - that's why science is the most robust methodology we currently have.

O.

[ekim]

I don't know if anybody else has tried using a Ouija Board situation.  I tried it with 4 family members each lightly resting their fingers on a drinking glass surrounded by all the letters of the alphabet arranged in a disorderly fashion so that it was impossible to remember their position.  Questions were asked and gradually the glass moved to spell out answers which suggested a deceased personality.  One such 'personality' indicated that he had been in a German prison of war camp where he had died.  The glass moved so fast that it seemed impossible that any of us were deliberately answering the questions.  However, we thought that if that 'person' has spent so long in that prison he would be able to speak some German.  My brother was the only one of us who could speak German and so he took his finger off the glass and asked a question in German.  The reply came back in German.

[Enki]

You don't attach any value to the experiences of thousands of peoples across the world....and you expect me to take you little failed 'experiment' as conclusive....??! 

No, I simply brought my upbringing and limited investigations to counter your rather silly point about being in some sort of 'comfort zone'. Incidentally how many 'ghost' stories have you personally investigated?

There have been plenty of investigations into a whole range of 'ghost' stories over many years, both by amateurs and professionals, and none have produced anything of substance. The evidence for ghosts is almost exactly the same as it was a century ago, a big fat zero.

As usual you remain hung up on the countless thousands of anecdotal accounts. Why not read about the 'Miracle of the Sun'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_Sun
it might just change your mind.

Although on second thoughts I doubt that as you seem particularly embroiled in your own prejudices.

[jeremyp]

Not necessarily. Multiverses have not been demonstrated empirically. As also Strings and Dark Matter. Do you therefore presume that they don't exist? 

Multiverses and strings are just hypotheses. I acknowledge them only as possibilities within the framework of what we know about the Universe - but only possibilities. There's no evidence of either yet and if you say you don't believe in them, I can't argue against your point of view. What I will not do is call you blinkered or narrow minded for not believing in either.

Dark matter is different. We can't see dark matter but we can see its effect on stars in galaxies, so there is some evidence that dark matter exists. If you say you don't believe in dark matter, I can say you are wrong (probably) and point to the evidence. You are then free to point to an alternative explanation, but the only one I know of is that we have somehow got the law of gravity wrong. There is, however, a mountain of evidence that says we have got the law of gravity right so you have to balance "new form of matter" against "rewrite the laws of physics". Consensus at the moment favours the former, but, if it were the latter, scientists would be wetting themselves with excitement.

I am suggesting that phenomena such as NDE's, ghosts and other such things that people commonly experience and which are fairly consistent across the world, should also be taken as hypotheses and integrated with our larger world view. Lateral thinking and an open mind could help  sort out many of our present dilemmas and present a more meaningful picture of our universe and our lives.

The trouble with ghosts is that people see them. That means they interact with photons. That would mean something completely unknown to science having an influence over particles whose behaviour we completely understand. Either there is some quite powerful force completely undetected by us or ghosts are products of the human imagination. We know humans hallucinate things that aren't really there and they are capable of fooling themselves pretty convincingly. Why do we need to go any further?

[jeremyp]

Hi Robbie,

Yes. It probably requires a certain frame of mind to  'see' or interact with ghosts and other non physical forms of existence.  Our mind is the biggest mystery we have and taking a simplistic view of it (as just chemical and electrical activity in the brain) is regressive.

Why do you think viewing the mind as an emergent property of the brain and chemistry and electricity is simplistic?

If the mind is a mystery (and I agree with you to an extent), how can you confidently say ghosts are not products of its imagination?

[ippy]

Hi Robbie,

Yes. It probably requires a certain frame of mind to  'see' or interact with ghosts and other non physical forms of existence.  Our mind is the biggest mystery we have and taking a simplistic view of it (as just chemical and electrical activity in the brain) is regressive.

In your unsupported opinion Sriram, any chance of something that's realistic and at the same time supports this gods and ghosts idea of yours.

Yes as you say the brain is an electro-chemical devise, what does that say or mean in relation to gods and ghosts? Very little, I would say.

ippy

[Sriram]

The reason I am citing phenomena such as multiverses etc....is that these are just possibilities that are acknowledged by science. That is all that is required for NDE's and ghosts etc. also.

They cannot be regarded as imagination because they happen regularly across the world, across different groups  and have many consistent details. Dismissing them as imagination is foolish.

As to what they may be...we don't know. So what if we don't know what they are or are unable to provide evidence of them or are unable to investigate them? They are real phenomena that real, honest and intelligent people experience, that is all. 

Denying them or calling them hoaxes doesn't help. Lumping them together with religious beliefs and mythology is also a mistake. Accepting NDE's and ghosts as real is not the same as accepting the six day creation or Adam & Eve or stories of different gods.

Secular but exotic phenomena exist and they have to be accepted as real regardless of our ignorance of them. Atheism should not be habitual denial of anything that is not yet a part of mainstream science.

[ippy]

The reason I am citing phenomena such as multiverses etc....is that these are just possibilities that are acknowledged by science. That is all that is required for NDE's and ghosts etc. also.

They cannot be regarded as imagination because they happen regularly across the world, across different groups  and have many consistent details. Dismissing them as imagination is foolish.

As to what they may be...we don't know. So what if we don't know what they are or are unable to provide evidence of them or are unable to investigate them? They are real phenomena that real, honest and intelligent people experience, that is all. 

Denying them or calling them hoaxes doesn't help. Lumping them together with religious beliefs and mythology is also a mistake. Accepting NDE's and ghosts as real is not the same as accepting the six day creation or Adam & Eve or stories of different gods.

Secular but exotic phenomena exist and they have to be accepted as real regardless of our ignorance of them. Atheism should not be habitual denial of anything that is not yet a part of mainstream science.

Again Sriram, all in your opinion and without any supportable evidence that would make your ideas viable.

ippy