I have started a new thread here on stupidity and paranormal belief
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/paran ... 31952.html

I don't think anyone is stupid necessarily for believing in ghosts, especially if they have experienced phenomena that seems vividly tangible to them. I just think that some people by nature are more susceptible to having their minds play tricks on them, which seems to me to speak more to the wiring of their brains rather than an inherent lack of intelligence. As far as multiple people experiencing the same phenomena, instead of saying "there is substantial evidence for ghosts" based on these anecdotal accounts, it seems far more rational to say "there is evidence that people have had shared experiences of phenomena".

mattwilson wrote:

Paula wrote:I can't be mean to Jerome! I just can't do it, he's just too lovely

Oh but you can be mean to me? I see how that works!

I said it all in my sentence, Jerome's lovely. You are occasionally lovely, mostly a cheeky shit

jerome wrote:Yeah I can see where you are coming from. However say you wake up and see a figure bending over your bed. You or I might say "hypnopompic halluciantion" but to most folks that a ghost, and pretty convincing. And if you see your apparition in company, in broad daylight, and they see it too, what other word can you use but "ghost?"

j x

I am not sure, hallucination, dream, delusion, fantasy and mistake are the first few suggestions that spring to my mind. What I am sure about is that it is ridiculous to assume that I had witnessed the disembodied spirit of a dead person.
Whether I see something in daylight or night time makes no difference to its veracity. Spirits and ghouls do not inhabit the night, but our fears do, and nocturnal animals that look weird or make weird noises.
It's like seeing a tree fall and immediately deciding that you saw goblins pushing it over. Can I prove it wasn't goblins? No. Do I know it wasn't goblins? Yes. Why? Because goblins are a ridiculous proposition, just like ghosts.

jerome wrote:In terms of critical thinking though, how would you know it was an illusion not a ghost?

j x

I would not know, however, I have no reason to believe in ghosts unlike in illusions. Look, I am not going to debate ghosts, I have never needed to use this word, concept, and I hope it will stay that way. Question was asked, answer given. That is all.

tuco wrote:

jerome wrote:In terms of critical thinking though, how would you know it was an illusion not a ghost?

j x

I would not know, however, I have no reason to believe in ghosts unlike in illusions. Look, I am not going to debate ghosts, I have never needed to use this word, concept, and I hope it will stay that way. Question was asked, answer given. That is all.

Sure thing! I'm debating ghosts with Campermon, so I'm happy to leave it too!

BTW I forgot to welcome Hayley, who is a well known skeptical blogger, originator and chief mind behind Project Barnum - http://www.projectbarnum.co.uk/ and former co-host of the Righteous Indignation podcast. Hey Hayley! It was her article which opened the thread.

j x

If ghosts existed, they'd soon form organizations, demand equal treatment, get facebook accounts etc. They haven't done so, and I don't think it is because they're shy, or because they only like hanging out in dark scary houses.

I really thought this thread was going to be about how it is wrong to hunt and kill ghosts.

fingdingus wrote:I really thought this thread was going to be about how it is wrong to hunt and kill ghosts.

Stupid to hunt and kill things that dont exist