|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4704 days) Posts: 283 From: Weed, California, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Movie Paranormal Activity | |||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
And I have said that I cannot imagine how it can happen in either scenario as long as I am alive. I have said, that since I have never been dead, I MIGHT, understand that word, be able to determine paranormal or supernatural after I am dead.
And I have said, that if I was given a way to determine or test reliably and repeatedly even while I was alive I would gladly my position. It really is that simple. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7 |
Tram law writes: My friend can't imagine the evidence for evolution either, so according to him there can't be any evolution. And according to him, he and only he has all the answers to evolution, and those answers are it can't be true under any circumstances because he can't understand or imagine it. So, wouldn't this be very poor reasoning? And wouldn't this be denial? Evolution and ghosts are in no way comparable. There is scientific evidence for evolution, there is no evidence for ghosts. Your friend is delusional. Jar seems to have an extremely literal view of things. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
jar writes: And I have said that I cannot imagine how it can happen in either scenario as long as I am alive. What does you (in)ability to imagine have to do with anything here?
jar writes: I have said, that since I have never been dead, I MIGHT, understand that word, be able to determine paranormal or supernatural after I am dead. Have you ever experienced divine revelation that revealed to you a definitive method of emphatically distinguishing between natural and supernatural? "MIGHT" this hypothetical scenario occur in the same way that your own hypothetical scenario "MIGHT" occur?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tram law Member (Idle past 4704 days) Posts: 283 From: Weed, California, USA Joined: |
Yes, ghosts and evolution are not the same, but the attitude is.
A tennis shoe that has shoe laces while another has Velcro are still tennis shoes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Again, no I have never experienced "divine revelation that revealed to you a definitive method of emphatically distinguishing between natural and supernatural".
And I will repeat yet again, if something did come along that allowed me to reliably and repeatedly identify something as paranormal or supernatural or even "Abi Normal" I would gladly reconsider my position. But so far no such critter has cum long. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2578 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 6.8 |
Straggler writes: jar writes: I have said, that since I have never been dead, I MIGHT, understand that word, be able to determine paranormal or supernatural after I am dead. "MIGHT" {Straggler's} hypothetical scenario occur in the same way that your own hypothetical scenario "MIGHT" occur? The difference is in how he experiences it. If, however unlikely (hence the emphasis on "MIGHT"), after he is dead and his consciousness is still around, like in some form like a sort of soul, then he is directly experiencing within himself something supernatural ("Hey! I'm still here!!"). Your hypothetical scenario is something he would be observing external to his self. Same way with Modulous' example of someone else who is dead sending a post death message using encryption - IT IS NOT jar. They are as if proxy examples. - xongsmith, 5.7d
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
The difference is in how he experiences it. If, however unlikely (hence the emphasis on "MIGHT"), after he is dead and his consciousness is still around, like in some form like a sort of soul, then he is directly experiencing within himself something supernatural ("Hey! I'm still here!!"). Your hypothetical scenario is something he would be observing external to his self. Same way with Modulous' example of someone else who is dead sending a post death message using encryption - IT IS NOT jar. They are as if proxy examples. Sure - but most of our knowledge is of this indirect kind. Including the evidence for evolution which relies on someone else (aka scientist) conducting experiments and transmitting this knowledge to us by proxy. That's basically why I picked that setup. We have proxy agents telling us the results of experiments to learn things about life before death. Surely proxy agents telling us the results of experiments to learn things about life after death should be equally good, right?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
X writes: The difference is in how he experiences it. If, however unlikely (hence the emphasis on "MIGHT"), after he is dead and his consciousness is still around, like in some form like a sort of soul, then he is directly experiencing within himself something supernatural ("Hey! I'm still here!!"). I asked jar explicitly if experiencing a ghost like existence of the Patrick Swayze type would constitute evidence of the supernatural and he simply evaded the question by reciting his mantra at me yet again. If you died and found yourself existing in such a manner would you consider that evidence of the supernatural? Assuming you could resist doing nothing more constructive than stalking Demi Moore can you imagine how you might go about seeking to demonstrate the existence of this supernatural existence to scientists? What would you do to make such supernaturality known to mankind?
X writes: Your hypothetical scenario is something he would be observing external to his self. Same way with Modulous' example of someone else who is dead sending a post death message using encryption - IT IS NOT jar. They are as if proxy examples. I probably grant my own bizzarre deeply personal and wholly unverifiable experiences with less credence than I do the verifiable evidence I garner through what you call "proxy" sources. Don't you? Otherwise my dreams about the Gruffalo are as good an indicator of reality as any other are they not?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
jar writes: Again, no I have never experienced "divine revelation that revealed to you a definitive method of emphatically distinguishing between natural and supernatural". So "MIGHT" this hypothetical scenario occur in the same way that your own hypothetical scenario "MIGHT" occur? Do you think there is a reason to consider one scenario more likely than the other?
jar writes: But so far no such critter has cum long. As you would expect unless you had experienced the actuality of either scenario.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I don't know, ask me after it happens.
I think I have mentioned that once or more before. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
jar writes: I don't know, ask me after it happens. After divine revelation happens? Or death? Or either?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Yes, or both or tomorrow.
The point is until something comes along to give me some reason to reconsider my position I see no need to reconsider my postion. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
jar writes: The point is until something comes along to give me some reason to reconsider my position I see no need to reconsider my postion. And the question posed in this thread is what exactly constitutes that "something".
jar writes: Straggler writes: After divine revelation happens? Or death? Or either? Yes, or both or tomorrow. Well I am glad to see we have got past your morbid obsession with death. So short of divine revelation and death scenarios what other means of helping you definitively conclude the supernatural might there be? I asked before and you evaded - But if you found yourself in the Patrick Swayze type ghost situation (i.e. dead but conscious and able to materially interract via your will alone) would you consider that evidence for the supernatural or just something "unknown"...? Please don't tell me what you MIGHT know. Just tell me what you would conclude from that specific scenario.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Straggler writes: jar writes: The point is until something comes along to give me some reason to reconsider my position I see no need to reconsider my postion. And the question posed in this thread is what exactly constitutes that "something".
jar writes: Straggler writes: After divine revelation happens? Or death? Or either? Yes, or both or tomorrow. Well I am glad to see we have got past your morbid obsession with death. So short of divine revelation and death scenarios what other means of helping you definitively conclude the supernatural might there be? I asked before and you evaded - But if you found yourself in the Patrick Swayze type ghost situation (i.e. dead but conscious and able to materially interract via your will alone) would you consider that evidence for the supernatural or just something "unknown"...? Please don't tell me what you MIGHT know. Just tell me what you would conclude from that specific scenario. No, I did answer that. If I found myself in the Patrick Swaze type ghost situation it would be "Unknown", not paranormal or supernatural, unless there was so specific reliable repeatable test I could use to distinguish paranormal and supernatural. Ask me after it happens. I MIGHT know then. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
jar writes: If I found myself in the Patrick Swaze type ghost situation it would be "Unknown", not paranormal or supernatural, unless there was so specific reliable repeatable test I could use to distinguish paranormal and supernatural. Can you explain what you mean by 'paranormal' in this context? Because I think by most common definitions of the term a dead person whose immaterial conscious will can interract with the material world would defibnitely constitute evidence of the paranormal.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024