Do you believe in ghosts ?

[stvdv]

You don't get what he is saying

That's true

Oh, I get what he's saying.

He's saying that there is no way that he can demonstrate the existence of ghosts unless he resorts to unverifiable claims, superstition, and anecdote. It's just making excuses as to why the ability to use reason and logic which has served us so well for everything else, just doesn't apply to ghosts for reasons which you can't actually explain.

You don't get what he is saying

Still true

 

[stvdv]

We are capable of much more than scientific reasoning, I agree.

Feels good that we agree

What I don't agree with is that these other techniques are able to actually give any reliable information about the real universe.

Feels good that we disagree

Can you demonstrate that these other techniques you speak of can give accurate information about the universe?

I could

If so, please do.

I won't

Why?

You are an Atheist. IF I were to give you proof, it might be seen as violating RF Rule #8. Besides that, I want you to stay Atheist. Besides that ....

8. Preaching/Proselytizing
Creating (or linking to) content intended to convert/recruit others to your religion, spirituality, sect/denomination, or lack thereof is not permitted. Similarly, attempting to convert others away from their religion, spiritual convictions, or sect/denomination will also be considered a form of preaching. Stating opinions as a definitive matter of fact (i.e., without "I believe/feel/think" language, and/or without references) may be moderated as preaching.

 

[Tiberius]

That's true




Still true

All you do is make claims, yet you seem incapable of actually explaining your position.

You just gonna keep claiming I am wrong, or are you going to put your money where your mouth is and show me WHY I am wrong?

 

[Tiberius]

Feels good that we agree


Feels good that we disagree


I could


I won't

Why?

You are an Atheist. IF I were to give you proof, it might be seen as violating RF Rule #8. Besides that, I want you to stay Atheist. Besides that ....

Excuses, excuses.

Many words, little content.

 

[stvdv]

All you do is make claims, yet you seem incapable of actually explaining your position.

You just gonna keep claiming I am wrong, or are you going to put your money where your mouth is and show me WHY I am wrong?

FYI: See first 3 quotes: You were the one making claims, not me. Which I proved wrong. And you never acknowledged you were wrong.
FYI: I feel no need to "play your games"...Why should I defend myself? I made ZERO claims here. You made claims
FYI: IF you really want to know about God THEN I suggest you start changing your "Religion" from Atheist into Theist for example
FYI: IF you really want to know about God THEN I suggest you start bugging God with your questions and not me
FYI: IF you don't want to know about God THEN I don't want to provide you with proof about God
FYI: IF you don't want to know about God THEN I don't want to help you find proof against God

*): Next time ask me "I want to prove God does not exist ... you want to play my game?"...I probably say NO

Well, do you ?
Kindly note: please do refrain posting in this thread if you are afraid from ghosts, thank you.

No. There's no reasonable evidence for them. Only anecdote and superstition.

That is not correct. Correct would be "You don't have reasonable evidence"

Well, if we assume that anybody who actually possessed such reasonable evidence would present it, and also given that nobody has ever actually presented such reasonable evidence, I think it's safe to say that such evidence doesn't exist.

Yes, I think that's a good way to go, to phrase it as your opinion starting with "I think"

As I have already asked, is there any good reason why someone with such evidence would not provide it?

Yes, according to the Sages and Saints:
1) Science is below the mind; Spirituality is above the mind
2) In Silence the Voice of God can be heard

I don't see how those things count as a reasonable justification for not providing evidence.

"reasonable evidence" for spiritual matters would need reason(= intellect,mind etc)
BUT that's problematic, as spirituality is beyond the mind, meaning you won't "get it" using the mind
Second one to see needs similar deduction

So you have to resort to special pleading. You need to say the ability to reason and use rational logic that has given us all of the scientific advances we have today suddenly does not apply to ghosts because... reasons.

No special pleading needed. Humans are capable of much more than only scientific reasoning. Plenty of proof around; do you want to "see"?

We are capable of much more than scientific reasoning, I agree.

What I don't agree with is that these other techniques are able to actually give any reliable information about the real universe. Can you demonstrate that these other techniques you speak of can give accurate information about the universe? If so, please do.

You don't get what he is saying

That's true

Oh, I get what he's saying.

He's saying that there is no way that he can demonstrate the existence of ghosts unless he resorts to unverifiable claims, superstition, and anecdote. It's just making excuses as to why the ability to use reason and logic which has served us so well for everything else, just doesn't apply to ghosts for reasons which you can't actually explain.

You don't get what he is saying

Still true

All you do is make claims, yet you seem incapable of actually explaining your position.

You just gonna keep claiming I am wrong, or are you going to put your money where your mouth is and show me WHY I am wrong?

You accuse me of things you did yourself, see the top of this message

 

[Tiberius]

FYI: See first 3 quotes: You were the one making claims, not me. Which I proved wrong. And you never acknowledged you were wrong.

Pray tell, what claims did I make?

FYI: I feel no need to "play your games"...Why should I defend myself? I made ZERO claims here. You made claims

Let's have a look at the claims you made...

You claimed that there was reasonable evidence for ghosts, more than just anecdote and superstition (Post 78).

You then claimed that science is below the mind and spirituality is above the mind (whatever that means), and you also claimed that the voice of God can be heard in silence (again, more buzzwords that sound grandiose but actually have very little meaning). (post 138)

You claimed there was plenty of proof around (I assume you mean proof for ghosts, as usual you were incredibly vague about it and didn't even bother to outline what this proof actually is). (Post 157.)

You also claimed that showing me the alternate ways of getting objective knowledge about the universe would somehow count as trying to convert me, despite the fact that I am asking you outright to show me what you are talking about. (post 162)

Those are the claims that you made, and you've never once backed them up with any kind of support.

FYI: IF you really want to know about God THEN I suggest you start changing your "Religion" from Atheist into Theist for example

What in the world are you going on about? I've been debating religion online for about 20 years. You think your arguments are new to me?

FYI: IF you really want to know about God THEN I suggest you start bugging God with your questions and not me

I'm not. I'm bugging you about the evidence you claim to have that definitively demonstrates the existence of GHOSTS, not God.

FYI: IF you don't want to know about God THEN I don't want to provide you with proof about God
FYI: IF you don't want to know about God THEN I don't want to help you find proof against God

First, the existence or non-existence of God is irrelevant to me. I want to know the truth, whatever that may be.

Secondly, we are not discussing the existence of God, we are discussing the existence of GHOSTS.

 

[stvdv]

Pray tell, what claims did I make?

No. There's no reasonable evidence for them. Only anecdote and superstition.

 

[Tiberius]

...

Very well, if you disagree with that, please show me some reasonable evidence for ghosts.

 

[Ancient Soul]

Oh, I get what he's saying.

He's saying that there is no way that he can demonstrate the existence of ghosts unless he resorts to unverifiable claims, superstition, and anecdote. It's just making excuses as to why the ability to use reason and logic which has served us so well for everything else, just doesn't apply to ghosts for reasons which you can't actually explain.

LOL!

It's clear that you don't "get it" at all.

 

[Tiberius]

LOL!

It's clear that you don't "get it" at all.

The please feel free to explain to me what I'm not getting.

 

[stvdv]

Pray tell, what claims did I make?

Below your claim

Do you believe in ghosts ?

No. There's no reasonable evidence for them. Only anecdote and superstition.

Below your proof

Very well, if you disagree with that, please show me some reasonable evidence for ghosts.

Burden of proof:
In a logical argument, if someone states a claim, it is up to that person to prove the truth of his or her claim.
stvdvRF

 

[Tiberius]

Below your claim


Below your proof


Burden of proof:
In a logical argument, if someone states a claim, it is up to that person to prove the truth of his or her claim.
stvdvRF

Wow, you are so far off the mark.

I said I didn't have a belief in ghosts. I never claimed that ghosts can't possibly exist.

Likewise, I don't believe there is currently a cat sitting outside my front door, but that's not the same thing as me claiming there can't possibly be a cat there.

So, I made no claim, I simply made a statement about my belief regarding ghosts.

 

[stvdv]

Pray tell, what claims did I make?

Below your claim

Do you believe in ghosts ?

No. There's no reasonable evidence for them. Only anecdote and superstition.

Below your proof

Very well, if you disagree with that, please show me some reasonable evidence for ghosts.

Burden of proof:
In a logical argument, if someone states a claim, it is up to that person to prove the truth of his or her claim.

I said I didn't have a belief in ghosts. I never claimed that ghosts can't possibly exist.

Wrong, You claimed, and I quote:

No. There's no reasonable evidence for them. Only anecdote and superstition.

To which I replied:

That is not correct. Correct would be "You don't have reasonable evidence"

stvdvRF

 

[Tiberius]

Below your claim


Below your proof





Wrong, You claimed, and I quote:

To which I replied:

stvdvRF

So, you have resorted to quibbling over wording. The last refuge of the one who doesn't actually have a valid point, but just wants to waste everyone's time.

 

[stvdv]

So, you have resorted to quibbling over wording. The last refuge of the one who doesn't actually have a valid point, but just wants to waste everyone's time.

 

[Tiberius]

...

And now you're not posting anything at all.