|
|
|
|
Alexander1304
Skeptic Friend
75 Posts |
 Posted - 10/24/2015 : 12:54:03
|
Hi All,
As a person who is not(unfortunately) science oriented I ask you:
regarding paranormall/mystical experiences what should we think about their reliability.Consider for example such claim, when 2.5 years ago I discussed personal experiences of other worlds for here:
"In my experience, when you live in returns time and live parallel worlds, there are those who order them- good top up, and others do not get along, so thay deleted from them .Some living proof , some part have not "
How rational/scientific minded person should regard such claim?Wow he claims "some living proof"
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 10/26/2015 : 09:41:25 [Permalink]
|
Scientifically "paranormal/mystical experiences" have only been demonstrated to exist in the minds of those who believe they have had them and by those that haven't but believe that others have.
James Randy have had an open challenge which I remember him offering at least in the early 60's, some 50+ years ago. Back then I seen him on camera pull out of his wallet a cashiers check for ten thousand dollars, which he carried at all times, which he would give to anyone able who positively demonstrated ANY paranormal/mystical OR psychic ability. Today it is up to a million dollars and being offered through the James Randy Educational foundation. The reality is after 50+ years the challenge still stands and remains unclaimed by every one who tried to claim it. Many thousands of people over history have attempted to prove or demonstrate these beliefs have a foundation in reality and have come out with nothing. Whether it is the failure of honest efforts to find anything which supports such beliefs and assertions that they are in fact are real, we are all still here with nothing and holding an empty bag. What does your " not science oriented " mind conclude from that? That should be telling you something, what does that tell you? Good luck on that. |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
 |
|
|
ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf
USA
1487 Posts |
Posted - 10/26/2015 : 19:45:29 [Permalink]
|
| Guiding or tricking a human ape brain into feeling the truth doesn't mean that it has been found. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 10/26/2015 : 19:54:53 [Permalink]
|
Alexander1304:
How rational/scientific minded person should regard such claim?Wow he claims "some living proof" |
Very skeptically. Anecdotal evidence doesn't count for much if the claim is anything but mundane.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 10/27/2015 : 18:41:12 [Permalink]
|
One has to distinguish between personal experiences and the conclusions drawn from them. There's often little reason to doubt that a person's experiences were actually experienced. If a person tells you, "I died on the operating table, saw a white light and then god-like face," they're probably telling you the truth of what they experienced.
If they go on to conclude that God exists, that is when they've left reason behind.
But, because many people don't separate experiences from conclusion, if you tell them that they can't conclude the existence of God from their experience, one of the more common responses you'll get is, "are you calling me a liar?" Trying to get them to see the difference may not get you far if they're that invested in their conclusion.
On the other hand, if someone tells you that they witnessed a person regrow an amputated leg in an hour, you can doubt that experience all you like, it's probably a lie. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
How reliable personal experiences/accounts?
