these people make me roll my eyes. :rolleyes: <- like that.
ghosts don’t exist. they’re all in your head. you choose to impose the idea that something special will happen into your mind, and then you superimpose those ideas on anything that happens that is out of the ordinary.
normal
creak
‘ah, the house is settling.’
person told that they have a ghost in their house
creak
‘jinkies, we have a ghost on our hands! call the priest and get out the sage, guys, it’s time to call on the ghostbusters!’
i don’t think anyone has ever provided any evidence that they exist in the slightest, that can’t be debunked. but still those stupid fucks go on about how they’re haunted by negative spirits and things that go OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH in the night.
this probably doesn’t apply to this forum, as most aren’t stupid idiots who believe in the supernatural. and for that i am glad. i just wish i could get my friends to STFU about the supernatural and going on about haunted houses.
One thing that stupid idiots don’t understand is that a cow is a bovine, but a bovine is not necessarily a cow. Maybe it is you who should shut the fuck up.
What would you accept as proof? If you’ve already denied even the possibility of God’s existence, then you’ve already concluded that proof is impossible — circulus in demonstrando. But if you accept the possibility, then proof of His existence is inescapable.
Are people accosting you and insisting that you believe in the supernatural?
If they do, when they do, tell them that you do not share their beliefs and that you’re not interested in discussing the subject.
Otherwise, I have no idea what your beef here is (“beef” “bovine” Ha!). Oh, never mind.
I am pretty skeptical of most of these things myself, but I had a brush with something creepy a few years back that I have no explanation for (and I certainly wasn’t hoping that it was supernatural :shudder:), so my mind is still open.
Perhaps, just perhaps, there are more things in this world than you understand. Perhaps, just perhaps, there are things that do exist but yet not have been 100% proven yet.
Whatever. I, for one, choose to not look down my nose quite so eagerly at anyone who believes in such things. But if it makes you feel better to feel so smug and superior about them (gosh, that phrase is getting a lot of use from me lately), well, knock yourself out.
I’m (weak) atheist. I accept the possibility that God’s existence may be proven - as well as that of Thor, Jupiter, Baal, Krishna, etc. But so far there’s nothing ‘inescapable’ about their existence.
Anyway, despite this, I’ve had a couple of ‘ghostly’ experiences that were as yet inexplicable. Do I think it’s spirits? No, though I’m not going to totally dismiss this idea, in the same way as I won’t totally dismiss the deities I mentioned above. But I think the likelihood is way small. I would imagine there’s a simple explanation, probably not even requiring some new form of science to explain it. It’s just I don’t know what that explanation is.
you mean to say you’ve never had something forced on you, without any actual physical force? to say that everything is easily inescapable ‘unless they’re forcing you to do so with a gun to your head’(not exact words, but the ‘accosting’ bit fits under the same idea) is just plain fucking bullshit.
i’ve had friends blather on for a good amount of time about the supernatural. i tell them i don’t want to hear it, but some are rather fanatical. other than that, they’re great friends. so it’s not inexscable unless i tell my friends to fuck off or kick them out, which isn’t what a friend should do.
Possibilty of supernatural existing, but i first need to see conclusive and extensive evidence, alright. But my friends outright say that the supernatural exists, despite science proving them wrong.
friend complains of a ‘spooky and supernatural’ noise coming from basement. turns out to be the pipes. only then he decides to shut up about it being supernatural.
Yeah, you’re right. What a friend should do is post anonymous insults about them on the Internet. By that standard, you must be their very bestest friend.
Lib, I’ve seen that ontological thingy before. I don’t understand the nomenclature, but I do understand logic and plain English - maybe explain it thus (maybe in another thread coz this one’s about ghosties and ghoulies and long-leggedy beasties and things that go bump in the night…)?
Who knows what he’s talking about. Anyway, as per your request:
Given
~N(~g) It is possible that God exists (premise)
Prove g
g → N(g) If God exists in actuality, then it is necessary that God exists (Law of Necessitation)
N(g) v ~N(g) Either it is necessary that God exists, or else it is not (Law of Excluded Middle)
~N(g) → N(~N(g)) If it is not necessary that God exists, then it is necessary that it is not necessary that God exists (Modal Axiom)
N(g) v N(~N(g)) Either it is necessary that God exists or else it is necessary that God necessarily does not exist (Disjunction on 2,3)
N(~N(g)) → N(~g) If it is necessary that God necessarily does not exist, then it is necessary that God does not exist. (Becker’s Postulate — necessity obtains)
N(g) v N(~g) Either it is necessary that God exists, or else it is necessary that He does not. (Disjuntion 4,5)
N(g) It is necessary that God exists (Law of Noncontradiction 6, premise)
N(g) → g If it is necessary that God exists, then God exists. (Law of Necessitation)