ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags ghosts

Reply
Old 23rd October 2015, 08:54 PM   #321
Jodie
Philosopher
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,176
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
This is a misrepresentation of science. Conclusions are always subject to revision. The idea of something being 'absolutely correct' is a religious one, not a scientific one.
In any case, it surely has to be better than basing your world view on what you've seen in films.
Then no one can absolutely say that my visitation wasn't exactly what it was. It's inappropriate to say that something definitively didn't happen based on conclusions from research, that at best, represent an indirect way of addressing the question, and then say those very same conclusions are up for revision.
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd
Jodie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2015, 09:02 PM   #322
Jodie
Philosopher
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,176
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
One of the great advantages science has over dogmatic religion is that it doesn't ever presume to have arrived at the accurate, complete answer once and for all. Scientific conclusions are forever tentative. That doesn't meant they aren't usefully predictive. It means that when they stop being predictive, we fix the conclusion so that it regains predictive value. We study and discover, for example, that hitherto unimportant variations in the variables have effects we didn't see at first.

While an individual human mind is prone to error, collections of minds working critically over many years are less susceptible to error. Science does not rely heavily on "eureka!" discoveries so much as plodding, methodical investigation from different angles.

In contrast, a dogmatic religious view is purely propositional. The propositions are accepted axiomatically as true. The epistemology is foisted, albeit in a way that invites blind acceptance. Religion proposes a broad scope, which it touts as a great strength. But the foisted epistemology makes this scope illusory. As long as one has accepted that propositions in religion are dispensed from on high by an all-knowing deity, one doesn't question whether the scope is appropriate, testable, or useful. This means the charge that science is myopic (the cave analogy) is true only in a blustery sense. Religion has a broader vision only in the same sense that mythology or science fiction does.

Science changes its conclusions to conform to new observations. Dogmatic religion does not. There is no palatable resolution to a conflict between a religious "truth" and an empirical observation. Adherents generally try to spackle over the dissonance with suppositional platitudes such as "It's a trial of my faith." The culture of dogmatic religion promises rewards for maintaining belief over observation. Sadly, many adherents to dogmatic religion project their epistemology onto science, noting that it doesn't measure up in this respect or another. Skeptics don't hold to the scientific method the way religious adherents profess a faith. Skeptics don't hold to scientific conclusions the same way religious adherents hold to doctrine. The chief failure among religious critics of science is in the belief that science is just a different kind of religion. It is, in all respects, the anti-religion precisely because it can change its mind to accept new fact.
I don't adhere to any organized religion. You are confusing spiritual belief with religion and those are completely different things. Religion is a man made construct where as spiritual belief is faith that we are not limited by our current surroundings even if we don't completely understand what that might be. This is not just supposition on my part, there is empirical evidence to suggest that I'm correct about a multidimentional universe. The only thing up for debate here is if I correctly interpreted what I think I experienced. If you have the time, let me link a show for you to watch that better explains what I believe.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyH2D4-tzfM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN24Sv0qS1w
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd

Last edited by Jodie; 23rd October 2015 at 09:58 PM.
Jodie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2015, 09:22 PM   #323
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,191
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
Religion is a man made construct where as spiritual belief is faith that we are not limited by our current surroundings even if we don't completely understand what that might be.
Both are made up and presumptively foisted as "truth." Dressing up subjective belief to look like science doesn't separate it from religion.

Quote:
This is not just supposition on my part, there is empirical evidence to suggest that I'm correct about a multidimentional universe.
Science attempted without the science. You are preconceiving a cause for your observation.

Quote:
If you have the time, let me link a show for you to watch that better explains what I believe.
What part of my post suggested I wanted you to witness to me? Lots of lava-lamp cinematography doesn't compensate for a lack of falsifiability.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd October 2015, 09:25 PM   #324
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,191
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
Then no one can absolutely say that my visitation wasn't exactly what it was.
Your claim, your burden of proof.

Quote:
...then say those very same conclusions are up for revision.
No. A conclusion doesn't have to be absolute in order to reject a preposterous proposition presented without foundation. Yours is the standard straw-man woo response to the scientific method.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 02:01 AM   #325
Cosmic Yak
Master Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 2,320
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
Then no one can absolutely say that my visitation wasn't exactly what it was. It's inappropriate to say that something definitively didn't happen based on conclusions from research, that at best, represent an indirect way of addressing the question, and then say those very same conclusions are up for revision.
Just to add to the ever-reliable JayUtah's well worded and pertinent points, there is still no justification for saying it actually was your mother, in some form or other, that visited you. If you think it was, you really need to explain how you think this works. This is another huge difference between your spiritual beliefs and science. Scientists put forward testable, repeatable propositions that others can replicate. You, on the other hand, content yourself with saying "It did SO happen! You can't prove it didn't!" This, while it may be very comforting for you, is of no use to anyone else. If these things are real, how are the rest of us supposed to experience them? What comfort or benefit does the rest of the world get from your supposed ability to interact with your deceased loved ones, an ability that you cannot (or will not) help us to develop? If you won't suggest a mechanism (beyond "there was this cool film I saw once"), or any means of verifying what you claimed happened, and resist the very idea of so doing, then what you have is essentially useless.
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 02:02 AM   #326
Cosmic Yak
Master Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 2,320
Originally Posted by Jodie;10944430 If you have the time, let me link a show for you to watch that better explains what I believe.

[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyH2D4-tzfM"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyH2D4-tzfM[/url]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN24Sv0qS1w
I don't have the time. Could you summarise, please?
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 03:24 AM   #327
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
 
Mashuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,855
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
I don't have the time. Could you summarise, please?
One is a Channel 4 doc by astrophysicist and former President of the Royal SocietyMartin_ReesWP, the other is a random assortment of made-up gibberish about travelling in the fifth dimension.
__________________
I’d rather be a rising ape than a falling angel. - Sir Terry Pratchett
Mashuna is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 07:05 AM   #328
Cosmic Yak
Master Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 2,320
Originally Posted by Mashuna View Post
One is a Channel 4 doc by astrophysicist and former President of the Royal SocietyMartin_ReesWP, the other is a random assortment of made-up gibberish about travelling in the fifth dimension.
Nice. That simplifies my choice if I do decide to watch one of them.
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 08:10 AM   #329
Jodie
Philosopher
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,176
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Both are made up and presumptively foisted as "truth." Dressing up subjective belief to look like science doesn't separate it from religion.
Sure it does if there is empirical evidence to suggest that we are metaphorically chained and living in a cave where we can't turn our heads to see the source of the shadows.

Quote:
Science attempted without the science. You are preconceiving a cause for your observation.
I'm interpreting my experience as literally being my mother's disembodied consciousness as reaching out to me to take care of unfinished business. My interpretation of that might be incorrect but to say it was all a memory or imagination isn't an accurate assessment either if we lack the ability to perceive other dimensions indicated by math and simulations of life.

Quote:
What part of my post suggested I wanted you to witness to me? Lots of lava-lamp cinematography doesn't compensate for a lack of falsifiability.
I didn't witness to you, I linked a show that demonstrated the empirical evidence for other dimensions that mathematics indicates does exist. It provided circumstantial evidence that there is more to reality than our 3 dimensional existence and ties in nicely with my example of the Allegory of the Cave. The anthropic principle isn't any less falsifiable than the suggestion that we don't exist in some form after we die.
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd

Last edited by Jodie; 24th October 2015 at 08:14 AM.
Jodie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 08:21 AM   #330
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
 
Mashuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,855
The higher dimensions in mathematics are in no way similar to the concept of fifth dimensional travel as described by your second youtube link.
__________________
I’d rather be a rising ape than a falling angel. - Sir Terry Pratchett
Mashuna is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 08:30 AM   #331
Jodie
Philosopher
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,176
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
Just to add to the ever-reliable JayUtah's well worded and pertinent points, there is still no justification for saying it actually was your mother, in some form or other, that visited you. If you think it was, you really need to explain how you think this works. This is another huge difference between your spiritual beliefs and science. Scientists put forward testable, repeatable propositions that others can replicate. You, on the other hand, content yourself with saying "It did SO happen! You can't prove it didn't!" This, while it may be very comforting for you, is of no use to anyone else. If these things are real, how are the rest of us supposed to experience them? What comfort or benefit does the rest of the world get from your supposed ability to interact with your deceased loved ones, an ability that you cannot (or will not) help us to develop? If you won't suggest a mechanism (beyond "there was this cool film I saw once"), or any means of verifying what you claimed happened, and resist the very idea of so doing, then what you have is essentially useless.
For one thing, I don't think it's my ability. If my mother chose to reach out then the intent was her's, not mine, since I was unaware of any problems my siblings might encounter later in life. The visit was disturbing, rather than comforting, considering what she said would happen. I've tried to do as she asked but there was nothing that I could really do to alter the future if my siblings were unable to identify what series of choices they would make that would result in the inevitable. Without prescience here, it's useless to know what the future holds if you don't have the proverbial GPS co-ordinates to get there.

I don't have any explanation for my visitation other than our consciousness must exist in some form, or either there is some form of consciousness that observes us, that can see the totality of time rather than the "freeze frame" horizontal way that we process our existence. There is empirical evidence that indicates that these dimensions do exist,and can work that way. However, there is nothing that indicates there is some form of consciousness inhabiting these dimensions, whether that is something individual or an extension of our own consciousness. At best, it provides circumstantial evidence that our perception of reality is limited.

If I had to guess I would say that our consciousness would exist in all dimensions simultaneously. If the perception of the 5th dimension is everything at once then physical birth and death would have no meaning there. What isn't clear to me is how one could perceive that part of yourself while focusing on the here and now in 4th dimensional time. If there is a way to train this perception, similar to a blind person learning to see, my guess is it must have something to do with the levels of consciousness that we have here such as the superego, ego, and id.
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd

Last edited by Jodie; 24th October 2015 at 09:03 AM.
Jodie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 09:39 AM   #332
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,191
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
Sure it does if there is empirical evidence to suggest that we are metaphorically chained and living in a cave where we can't turn our heads to see the source of the shadows.
No, that's just the incompleteness argument cast in different words. You're making specific affirmative claims and pretending you've made them rational by appealing to vague ambiguity and insinuating that your proof must live in it. It's pure handwaving.

Quote:
My interpretation of that might be incorrect but to say it was all a memory or imagination isn't an accurate assessment either if we lack the ability to perceive other dimensions indicated by math and simulations of life.
It's a more parsimonious assessment because it doesn't rely on things you suppose might exist and magically have just the right properties to make your beliefs work.

Quote:
I didn't witness to you...
Yeah, you really did. Today's woo is couched in pseudo-scientific terminology. It's just modern religion.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 09:57 AM   #333
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,191
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
Scientists put forward testable, repeatable propositions that others can replicate. You, on the other hand, content yourself with saying "It did SO happen! You can't prove it didn't!" This, while it may be very comforting for you, is of no use to anyone else.
Agreed. Simply put, religion is normative. Science is at worst descriptive and at best predictive. Affirming a cause for an observation simply because it's been part of our mythology for millennia, and because it's too poorly formulated to be tested, is simply normative. There is no difference between saying "I saw the ghost of my mother" and "Jesus is your Lord and Savior." Vague protests that there is more in heaven and earth than is dreamt of in our philosophies do little. And yes, the normative aspect is important when people make decisions about how to treat others based on these norms: "Jesus is your Lord and Savior, so I'm going to imprison you until you agree to obey his laws," or "I saw the ghost of my mother and it told me to quit my job and live on the streets."

Science lets us reason reliably about the world around us. Propositions in science let us cure diseases, lead safer lives, reach our potential. Esoteric predictive laws allow GPS to work. There is much yet to be discovered, described, and tested. That doesn't mean we can cram everything and the kitchen sink into that gulf. There is still a qualitative difference between imagination and fact, even if the facts in question are yet unknown. That's why you can't rationally just imagine something and say that because it purports to derive from the unknown, it's beyond rational criticism.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 11:04 AM   #334
dlorde
Philosopher
 
dlorde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,853
Originally Posted by Mashuna View Post
The higher dimensions in mathematics are in no way similar to the concept of fifth dimensional travel as described by your second youtube link.
That video about the '5th dimension' is a speculative and rather confused mix of ideas about spatial dimensions, String Theory, Everettian Many Worlds, etc., but there's nothing in it to justify the idea of some place from which other entities can communicate with us.

It's not the Twilight Zone or some comic book 'alternate dimension' - that part appears to be Jodie's concoction, a mix of Marvel Comic fantasy and lack of understanding of the science mentioned in the video.

That same science tells us that not only can there be no communication between the 'Many World' universes, but that consciousness, or any structured remnant of an individual, being processes, or maintained by processes, of the living body, cannot persist beyond death without some comic-book futuristic technology to supply the complex active substrate to copy, support, and maintain it (although, arguably, we're working on it).

I've dreamed about deceased relatives and friends, and I've found such dreams can be vivid and either comforting or disturbing, but they're just dreams, constructed from memory and imagination. Dreaming of a deceased relative and invoking fantasy pseudoscience to bolster the wishful thinking that this was a real communication from a dead person, is about as absurd as excusing writing off a borrowed car by claiming someone from the planet Zog suspended Newton's Laws of Motion just to see you crash - then justifying the claim by saying Newton's Laws are known to be just an approximation, and we've discovered lots of planets, so who's to say there isn't an inhabited planet Zog where malicious individuals can do magic? You can't prove there isn't can you?

E.T.A. On the other hand, perhaps it's just rather sad...
__________________
Simple probability tells us that we should expect coincidences, and simple psychology tells us that we'll remember the ones we notice...

Last edited by dlorde; 24th October 2015 at 11:09 AM.
dlorde is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 02:58 PM   #335
Daylightstar
Philosopher
 
Daylightstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: hic.
Posts: 8,035
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
... but to say it was all a memory or imagination isn't an accurate assessment ...
It was only a memory of your mother, instigated by your desire to take care of unfinished business.

Nothing more.

You've been too argumentative with your mother in the past, you can not fix it anymore, other than accept what has been, learn from it and use it to improve yourself.

That's the only way your desire to take care of unfinished business with your arguments with your mother while she was alive, can have any positive meaning.
__________________
homeopathy homicidium
Daylightstar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 03:00 PM   #336
Daylightstar
Philosopher
 
Daylightstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: hic.
Posts: 8,035
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
...
I don't have any explanation for my visitation other than our consciousness must exist in some form, or either there is some form of consciousness that observes us, that can see the totality of time rather than the "freeze frame" horizontal way that we process our existence. ...
It was only the memory of your mother.
See above.
__________________
homeopathy homicidium
Daylightstar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 05:50 PM   #337
Jodie
Philosopher
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,176
Originally Posted by Mashuna View Post
One is a Channel 4 doc by astrophysicist and former President of the Royal SocietyMartin_ReesWP, the other is a random assortment of made-up gibberish about travelling in the fifth dimension.
The second youtube video was a visual demonstration of how the other dimensions intersected our own, how they would work, and was based on the mathematics that demonstrate the existence of other dimensions. It wasn't made up gibberish.
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd
Jodie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 06:03 PM   #338
Jodie
Philosopher
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,176
Originally Posted by dlorde View Post
That video about the '5th dimension' is a speculative and rather confused mix of ideas about spatial dimensions, String Theory, Everettian Many Worlds, etc., but there's nothing in it to justify the idea of some place from which other entities can communicate with us.
I don't know that other entities would be there, that's simply my idea. Actually , I don't think it's "other entities" but an extension of our own consciousness/existence/being or whatever tag you'ld like to use to describe yourself.

Quote:
It's not the Twilight Zone or some comic book 'alternate dimension' - that part appears to be Jodie's concoction, a mix of Marvel Comic fantasy and lack of understanding of the science mentioned in the video.
I understand the science but the rest is strictly my idea.

Quote:
That same science tells us that not only can there be no communication between the 'Many World' universes, but that consciousness, or any structured remnant of an individual, being processes, or maintained by processes, of the living body, cannot persist beyond death without some comic-book futuristic technology to supply the complex active substrate to copy, support, and maintain it (although, arguably, we're working on it).
If you are working from the premise that consciousness originates in the brain then I would agree with you but if the brain only functions as a type of receiver or lens to enable you to perceive the world here then I would say you were wrong. That's just my opinion.

Quote:
I've dreamed about deceased relatives and friends, and I've found such dreams can be vivid and either comforting or disturbing, but they're just dreams, constructed from memory and imagination. Dreaming of a deceased relative and invoking fantasy pseudoscience to bolster the wishful thinking that this was a real communication from a dead person, is about as absurd as excusing writing off a borrowed car by claiming someone from the planet Zog suspended Newton's Laws of Motion just to see you crash - then justifying the claim by saying Newton's Laws are known to be just an approximation, and we've discovered lots of planets, so who's to say there isn't an inhabited planet Zog where malicious individuals can do magic? You can't prove there isn't can you?
In my case, what was said in the dream actually came true. This is why I think it was some kind of genuine communication from either my mother or something that looked like her when she was in her 30's. As I said, the future wasn't altered because I had no idea what choices or decisions to warn anyone about to prevent the outcomes. I never had this kind of thing happen again whether or not it was real.

Quote:
E.T.A. On the other hand, perhaps it's just rather sad...
Sad in the sense that I couldn't honor my mother's request but on the other hand it was partly responsible for why I believe the way I do, for that I'm thankful. Even if you don't agree with me I can't see why my belief would inspire pity of any kind.
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd

Last edited by Jodie; 24th October 2015 at 06:07 PM.
Jodie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 06:12 PM   #339
Jodie
Philosopher
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,176
Originally Posted by Daylightstar View Post
It was only a memory of your mother, instigated by your desire to take care of unfinished business.

Nothing more.

You've been too argumentative with your mother in the past, you can not fix it anymore, other than accept what has been, learn from it and use it to improve yourself.

That's the only way your desire to take care of unfinished business with your arguments with your mother while she was alive, can have any positive meaning.
No, if it had been about me, maybe, but she didn't have anything to say about my future.
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd
Jodie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 07:05 PM   #340
Jodie
Philosopher
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,176
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Agreed. Simply put, religion is normative. Science is at worst descriptive and at best predictive. Affirming a cause for an observation simply because it's been part of our mythology for millennia, and because it's too poorly formulated to be tested, is simply normative. There is no difference between saying "I saw the ghost of my mother" and "Jesus is your Lord and Savior." Vague protests that there is more in heaven and earth than is dreamt of in our philosophies do little. And yes, the normative aspect is important when people make decisions about how to treat others based on these norms: "Jesus is your Lord and Savior, so I'm going to imprison you until you agree to obey his laws," or "I saw the ghost of my mother and it told me to quit my job and live on the streets."

Science lets us reason reliably about the world around us. Propositions in science let us cure diseases, lead safer lives, reach our potential. Esoteric predictive laws allow GPS to work. There is much yet to be discovered, described, and tested. That doesn't mean we can cram everything and the kitchen sink into that gulf. There is still a qualitative difference between imagination and fact, even if the facts in question are yet unknown. That's why you can't rationally just imagine something and say that because it purports to derive from the unknown, it's beyond rational criticism.
I don't have a problem with rational criticism. To me, it isn't rational saying something isn't possible even when there is empirical evidence to suggest that we live in a much richer universe than we can observe. Am I right or wrong about how we exist or if my mother truly tried to warn me about something in the future? I have no idea, but neither does anyone else.

I might not completely understand the concept of reality as described by the multiverse theory but I believe I'm on the right track. I'm not the only one.

http://www.robertlanza.com/do-we-hav...ntific-answer/

Hans Peter Durr was another one who gave credence to the existence of a soul independent of mind.

http://www.nuclear-free-future.com/e...ker-physicist/
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd
Jodie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 07:50 PM   #341
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,191
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
It wasn't made up gibberish.
It is if you're using it to support the proposition that your dead mother's ghost appeared to you in a dream and told you the future.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 07:54 PM   #342
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,191
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
I might not completely understand the concept of reality as described by the multiverse theory but I believe I'm on the right track.
Convince me that you are.

Quote:
Hans Peter Durr was another one who gave credence to the existence of a soul independent of mind.
Does he have an empirically-sound, falsifiable, hypothetico-deductively valid argument? No, he doesn't. Therefore it's not science. He may have been a scientist in other respects, but stapling woo to irrelevant science doesn't validate the woo.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 08:10 PM   #343
Jodie
Philosopher
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,176
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
It is if you're using it to support the proposition that your dead mother's ghost appeared to you in a dream and told you the future.
I have no idea. Identity theft exists in the 4th dimension, I don't see that being something we'ld stop doing just because we don't have bodies anymore.....I'm being facetious, but I hope you get my point.
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd
Jodie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2015, 08:35 PM   #344
Jodie
Philosopher
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,176
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Convince me that you are.



Does he have an empirically-sound, falsifiable, hypothetico-deductively valid argument? No, he doesn't. Therefore it's not science. He may have been a scientist in other respects, but stapling woo to irrelevant science doesn't validate the woo.
If Durr concluded something from physical laws that we know about then it is his hypothesis, a hypothesis grounded in empirical data. Therefore it is a hypothetical argument that does have merit since neither side of the debate regarding whether a soul exists is falsifiable at this time. The existence of other dimensions doesn't fall into the woo category, it's based on mathematics. Neither does the disembodied "I" that makes you who you are depending on what research results you accept. To say these hypotheses/concepts are woo based is inaccurate.

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1...id-but-quantum
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd
Jodie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 12:58 AM   #345
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 10,586
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
In my case, what was said in the dream actually came true. This is why I think it was some kind of genuine communication from either my mother or something that looked like her when she was in her 30's.
Your own (mostly unconscious) insight, fallible memory/unintentional confabulation and sheer coincidence are all much more plausible explanations than an entity capable of seeing the future communicating with you through your dreams.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 01:51 AM   #346
Cosmic Yak
Master Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 2,320
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
I don't know that other entities would be there, that's simply my idea. Actually , I don't think it's "other entities" but an extension of our own consciousness/existence/being or whatever tag you'ld like to use to describe yourself.



I understand the science but the rest is strictly my idea.



If you are working from the premise that consciousness originates in the brain then I would agree with you but if the brain only functions as a type of receiver or lens to enable you to perceive the world here then I would say you were wrong. That's just my opinion.



In my case, what was said in the dream actually came true. This is why I think it was some kind of genuine communication from either my mother or something that looked like her when she was in her 30's. As I said, the future wasn't altered because I had no idea what choices or decisions to warn anyone about to prevent the outcomes. I never had this kind of thing happen again whether or not it was real.



Sad in the sense that I couldn't honor my mother's request but on the other hand it was partly responsible for why I believe the way I do, for that I'm thankful. Even if you don't agree with me I can't see why my belief would inspire pity of any kind.
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
"It did SO happen! You can't prove it didn't!"
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 02:02 AM   #347
Daylightstar
Philosopher
 
Daylightstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: hic.
Posts: 8,035
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
No, if it had been about me, maybe, but she didn't have anything to say about my future.
Of course not, she wasn't there. You need to learn, on your own, from your situation with your mother while she was still alive and the impossibility to learn from her now.

In some way, you are raping your memory of your mother.
__________________
homeopathy homicidium
Daylightstar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 04:41 AM   #348
Donn
Philosopher
 
Donn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In my head.
Posts: 7,758
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
…My interpretation of that might be incorrect but to say it was all a memory or imagination isn't an accurate assessment either if we lack the ability to perceive other dimensions indicated by math and simulations of life.
If we lack the ability to perceive other dimensions <blah blah> then how do you manage to perceive them?

You want to cross the bridge from here to some endlessly impenetrable mystery but you don't want to think about what the bridge is made of.
__________________
"If I hadn't believed it with my own mind, I would never have seen it." - thanks sackett
"If you stand on a piece of paper, you are indeed closer to the moon." - MRC_Hans
"I was a believer. Until I saw it." - Magrat
Donn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 04:48 AM   #349
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,118
Originally Posted by Donn View Post
If we lack the ability to perceive other dimensions <blah blah> then how do you manage to perceive them?
'Cause we're big mean skeptics and close our minds to the wonders of the world around us.

But yeah I'd like Jodie to explain how she acquired these special mental powers to see ghosts and cougars and remember past lives that the rest of us mere mortals don't possess.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 04:49 AM   #350
Donn
Philosopher
 
Donn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In my head.
Posts: 7,758
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
I don't have any explanation for my visitation…
What you mean is you don't accept any other explanations.
__________________
"If I hadn't believed it with my own mind, I would never have seen it." - thanks sackett
"If you stand on a piece of paper, you are indeed closer to the moon." - MRC_Hans
"I was a believer. Until I saw it." - Magrat
Donn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 04:51 AM   #351
dlorde
Philosopher
 
dlorde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,853
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
I understand the science but the rest is strictly my idea.
If you understood the science you wouldn't make such leaps of fantasy. If you want to base your speculations on extrapolations of known science, fine; but this means not making speculative leaps that contradict that science.

Quote:
If you are working from the premise that consciousness originates in the brain then I would agree with you but if the brain only functions as a type of receiver or lens to enable you to perceive the world here then I would say you were wrong.
It doesn't, and it can't, and if you understood the science you'd know this.

Quote:
That's just my opinion.
Scientifically it's incorrect. You can't have it both ways - either drop the pretence at science and go with the magical fantasy, or base your speculation on scientific foundations.

Quote:
In my case, what was said in the dream actually came true. This is why I think it was some kind of genuine communication from either my mother or something that looked like her when she was in her 30's.
You think you had a real communication from something that looked like your mother in her late 30's - in a dream... Seriously, listen to what you're saying; in the real world, your mother is dead and she's not in her late 30's.

Quote:
As I said, the future wasn't altered because I had no idea what choices or decisions to warn anyone about to prevent the outcomes. I never had this kind of thing happen again whether or not it was real.
I've had dreams where what I dreamed later came true; it's no big deal. There are two obvious ways it can happen, one is partly what makes us such a successful species - anticipating and predicting the future by modeling possible scenarios; the other, not so beneficial, involves priming, confirmation bias, and memory distortion.

I don't know what your dream prediction involved, so I can't assess which seems the more likely explanation, but on past performance here, I suspect the latter.

Quote:
Even if you don't agree with me I can't see why my belief would inspire pity of any kind.
I didn't say I pitied you; I think it's sad that you could think that science might support your belief in any way. It's the Dunning-Kruger effect writ large.
__________________
Simple probability tells us that we should expect coincidences, and simple psychology tells us that we'll remember the ones we notice...
dlorde is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 05:07 AM   #352
dlorde
Philosopher
 
dlorde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,853
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
I might not completely understand the concept of reality as described by the multiverse theory but I believe I'm on the right track. I'm not the only one.

http://www.robertlanza.com/do-we-hav...ntific-answer/

Hans Peter Durr was another one who gave credence to the existence of a soul independent of mind.

http://www.nuclear-free-future.com/e...ker-physicist/
The first link is pure quantum woo. Quantum mechanics provides no support whatsoever for the idea of a soul. Robert Lanza is a woo merchant.

The second link doesn't even mention a soul. Professor Dürr seems to have had a rather new-agey outlook, and what he says about his death (at the end of the article), "When I die, I have no more consciousness, but all that I have thought has been added to the background. As information it has mixed with the world mind, has influenced the whole and become part of it", is a rather romantic view, but not unreasonable if you take 'world mind' as a metaphor. It's quite a stretch to suggest it means he thought he had a soul.
__________________
Simple probability tells us that we should expect coincidences, and simple psychology tells us that we'll remember the ones we notice...
dlorde is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 05:16 AM   #353
dlorde
Philosopher
 
dlorde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,853
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
So please explain how Tegmark's mathematical model of consciousness based on the mathematics of quantum mechanics and information theory, has anything to do with concepts of a soul?
__________________
Simple probability tells us that we should expect coincidences, and simple psychology tells us that we'll remember the ones we notice...
dlorde is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 05:27 AM   #354
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,118
Originally Posted by dlorde View Post
So please explain how Tegmark's mathematical model of consciousness based on the mathematics of quantum mechanics and information theory, has anything to do with concepts of a soul?
It's the Deepak Chopra Theorem.

Woo Slinger's love quantum mechanics because no matter how well explained to them it is all they can hear is "Hey this part of science says weird and/or unlikely events can happen, therefore I can say any weird and/or unlikely event is quantum mechanics!"
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 08:36 AM   #355
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,191
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
If Durr concluded something from physical laws that we know about then it is his hypothesis, a hypothesis grounded in empirical data.
No. He speculated something. That's a hypothesis. A hypothesis becomes a theory (i.e., a useful thing) when it is tested empirically and shown by that means to be the best predictor. None of that happened. But thanks for confirming you really don't know at all how science works.

Quote:
Therefore it is a hypothetical argument that does have merit since neither side of the debate regarding whether a soul exists is falsifiable at this time.
Nonsense. You can falsify the dream hypothesis by showing evidence inconsistent with a dream. Such as proof of the alleged prescience of the ghost. There's a difference between something that is falsifiable and something you can't falsify because the evidence doesn't swing that way.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 11:00 AM   #356
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,329
If anybody cares, this thread is a prime example of why I don't waste time investigating ghosts or the paranormal any more.

In my experience, people who've seen a ghost fall into one of two categories:

1. I saw something weird that freaked me out. Don't know what it was, don't want to see it again.

2. I saw something weird that confirms my personal beliefs about the afterlife, and I will ignore all evidence to the contrary.

The second group is larger than the first. There is no point in talking to them, they feed off of each other's delusions - and that is really what they are.

The first group is open to rational explanations, and most of the time the thing(s) they saw can be explained, and they're happy to be a little wiser about how their 5 senses work in conjunction with the world outside.

Since the OP was about floor boards I'll share with you guys a strange incident I experienced this week at work. A guest came to the front desk asking to be moved to a different room due to a strange noise. I went to his room and heard what sounded like an electrical conduit on the verge of overload - a nasty hum. From where I stood it seemed to come from behind the bed, so I went to pull it away from the wall, but when I moved the sound shifted to the opposite wall. I go over there and the sound concentrated on the first wall behind the bed again.
I moved the guest out of the room so I could investigate (thinking I had an electrical problem). I was unable to pinpoint the sound's origin. When I went outside I noticed that a man was putting air in his tires at the gas station about 30 meters away.

That was the source of the hum.

Perfect atmospherics, low traffic flow, and an unobstructed fetch from the pump to the air conditioner intake grill of the effected room. When the air pump shut down I returned to the room and all was quiet. Case solved.

Sound is weird.

I think before ghost hunters and paranormal investigators can start talking about other dimensions they should learn more about this one because it's amazing to me.

Thanks for letting me rant.
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 06:20 PM   #357
Jodie
Philosopher
 
Jodie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,176
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
It is if you're using it to support the proposition that your dead mother's ghost appeared to you in a dream and told you the future.
No, I'm simply trying to figure out how it might be possible. There are a lot "if's" and "maybe's" before I could state that it was true such as:

1. If the mathematics is correct and other dimensions exist.
2. If they exist, would they function the way we think they would.
3. If these other dimensions do function the way we anticipate how does that affect our existence.
4. Does our consciousness reside in these other dimensions?
5. Is our conscious simply a function of the brain or does the brain exist because our consciousness needs a lens to focus on 4th dimensional reality?

I choose to believe that we exist in all dimensions at the same time and that our brain provides the focus to process our existence here on Earth. I also choose to believe that physical life and death have little meaning in the grand scheme of things, it's more of a type of phase of existence.

Seeing ghosts is definitely all in our heads because without our brain, assuming the person actually experienced something, the "ghost" couldn't manifest without the person being there to observe it's presence IMO. Belief that such things exist would probably have to play a part in ghost sightings because you probably wouldn't see the manifestation without it. Seeing what you want to believe probably determines who you see if these sightings actually happen. So if the prophetic dream wasn't my mother, it was definitely something IMO, simply because what she/he/it said came true, but there wasn't enough information given to avoid the outcome.

That plays into the theory of mind and how we understand consciousness from a psychological point of view. You have the superego, the ego, and the id. The id is concrete, it needs to see to believe, which might explain why the placebo effect works for a short while. The person believes that the fake treatment will help, so the body co-operates. Religion probably functions in the same role, to propagate belief so that individual's id will be convinced that there is more to reality than what we see. My guess is that the more we learn about the universe, and our place in it, the less we will need formal religion to cultivate a belief that we are more than just these material bodies relying on the chemical reactions in our brains to make sense of our reality.
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd

Last edited by Jodie; 25th October 2015 at 06:35 PM.
Jodie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th October 2015, 07:23 PM   #358
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,191
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
No, I'm simply trying to figure out how it might be possible.
So you've already given up wondering whether your preferred explanation is the right one. You're simply dumping various concepts and speculation into a nonsensical mulligan stew and pretending that "somehow" it means you get to keep believing what you want to believe, and that "somehow" science shouldn't have any qualm with it. I say again, you have absolutely no idea how science works. By all means believe what you want, but don't pretend it's rational.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2015, 01:39 AM   #359
Donn
Philosopher
 
Donn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In my head.
Posts: 7,758
Jodie cooks her woo stew with no heed to complaints about its sickly taint. She knows exactly how it goes down here, and enjoys stinking the place up.
__________________
"If I hadn't believed it with my own mind, I would never have seen it." - thanks sackett
"If you stand on a piece of paper, you are indeed closer to the moon." - MRC_Hans
"I was a believer. Until I saw it." - Magrat
Donn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2015, 01:49 AM   #360
Cosmic Yak
Master Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 2,320
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
My guess is that the more we learn about the universe, and our place in it, the less we will need formal religion to cultivate a belief that we are more than just these material bodies relying on the chemical reactions in our brains to make sense of our reality.
This has been pointed out before, but I think it's worth saying again.
Your basic assumption is that science is wrong, and that some day it will "catch up" with whichever of your numerous and contradictory beliefs you are espousing today.
Every step science has made so far has led more to the realisation that we really are just material bodies relying on electro-chemical reactions in our brains. Consciousness has been shown to be an emergent property of brains. There is no consciousness outside of our brains. The more we discover, the more evidence we have for this. If what you are saying is true, this would involve throwing out every single one of these steps- steps which have been thoroughly tested and validated. How could this possibly happen?
You have this apparently unshakeable belief that science is wrong, and your speculative beliefs are right and will one day be validated by science. Given that this is highly unlikely, have you considered revising your assumptions? Do you not think that is is just faintly possible that what you saw was just a dream?
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:55 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.