Are all paranormal claims fact by default unless they are disproved?
2007-11-13 04:51:17 · 9 answers · asked by Peter D 7 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Alternative ➔ Paranormal Phenomena
The thing is...skeptics demand "proof". Believers already have "proof". I guess "faith" is believing without "proof". I was like you...I had to have proof...because when I just had "faith"..I didn't notice anything happening. Now I wish I'd stayed with "faith". The Bible says (something like) ..there are more things in the heavens and on earth than you can imagine. (I didn't put quotes because I don't know the exact words. I just heard this (again) somewhere this week..probably tv)Someone put that verse in the Bible for some reason.
Thanks again for the question.
EDIT: Denie - I can't tell if you mean faith is an important part of believing in the paranormal. It's difficult accepting the Bible as rationalization for ignorance. Thanks for the answer lady.
2007-11-13 07:37:18 · update #1
The above is a copy of Denie's post. Can't change it now can I?
2007-11-13 13:56:13 · update #2
I want to make sure that it is understood that a scientific skeptic is not looking for proof at all, since that skeptic will know that obtaining proof is impossible through the scientific method. The scientific method instead deals in evidence.
On to the question at hand -- the veracity of a paranormal claim? I think there's too many possibilities to give an encompassing answer to that. But as a skeptic, I would prefer physical evidence that is gained under controlled conditions by researchers who regularly publish their work in peer-reviewed scientific journals. This is pretty much the standard for the rest of the science world. Unfortunately, this would eliminate 99.9999% of all paranormal claims :(
So, to be practical, I have to accept something less. Eyewitness testimony, especially in panic situations which paranormal happening tend to be, are not very reliable. I would still require physical evidence and some kind of reassurance that those involved are honest and take reasonable care in their research. I'd also need to know the controls used in the study, if any. All of this doesn't guarantee that the paranormal event will still be considered a "real event" after I look through the evidence, but it would at least get my sincere attention.
2007-11-13 12:37:54 · answer #1 · answered by John 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Being an advanced student of Psychology and Philosophy, I am a bit of skeptic; however, I have seen things that I have yet to find a rational explanation for and I was taught from a young age to believe that anything is possible, although not always probable. So, yeah, I suppose it is possible that when human beings die they assume a new kind of energy and that energy can remain on earth and float around amongst the living, but is it probable? That is an entirely different issue. I have also had a very strange experience take place when my (now ex) boyfriend died in a car crash eight years ago. I was riding in a vehicle 120 miles away from the area, but I saw the whole thing take place! I didn't know for sure, until I got the phone call about 30 minutes later telling me what happened. I witnessed the accident and I wasn't even nearby! How the hell could that have happened... there is no logical explanation as of yet, but still it happened. My second cousin passed away many years ago and my other cousins (his sisters) went to visit his grave. For some reason they decided to take pictures and on both the pictures and the negative were these bluish white figures of a "ghost" on them. We have all tried to come up with a logical explanation- were they smoking? No. Could it be a light in the distance that cast a reflection? No. As of right now we still don't have a logical answer. They then wrote a book about it. The book is called Pictures, Dreams, and Visits by Linda Graham and Betty Graham-Freiling. I think the issue here is that you can start to believe anything when there is no proof that is does not exist. To some degree that may even be healthy.
2016-05-22 23:34:33 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The thing is...skeptics demand "proof". Believers already have "proof". I guess "faith" is believing without "proof". I was like you...I had to have proof...because when I just had "faith"..I didn't notice anything happening. Now I wish I'd stayed with "faith". The Bible says (something like) ..there are more things in the heavens and on earth than you can imagine. (I didn't put quotes because I don't know the exact words. I just heard this (again) somewhere this week..probably tv)Someone put that verse in the Bible for some reason.
Thanks again for the question.
2007-11-13 06:55:08 · answer #3 · answered by Deenie 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hi Peter,
The only evidence is going to be personal from experiencing it yourself. Even a 6 year old will not accept any evidence that is produced and there is nothing that can be done to persuade this 6 year old to believe what you experienced.
He would have to experience it for himself and decide from his own thoughts on the issue.
Especially with all the digital editing software photos and video are never going to pass any skeptic, so what's left to produce as evidence? Not a whole lot.
Only if you took that skeptic to the site where you experienced the thing and let them experience it too, but as you know when weird things happen, you cannot make them happen on demand. They just seem to happen when they happen.
I have had a few extreme experiences but I still only believe the ones that affected me personally. Another person is not going to give me any evidence that would make me believe their cliams.
Just as with religion. If you do not have a personal experience with whatever God you are dealing with, you will not be able to really accept it as truth. That is why religion invbented faith.
Faith is the insurance policy that lets you say, "I don't really believe it but I want to get the rewards it offers so I will have faith that it actually is true."
We can't use faith in paranormal stuff because there is no reward. You have to get a guarantee to heaven or 32 virgins etc or faith doesnt work in your brain.
2007-11-13 05:11:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Considering there has never been one paranormal claim substantiated.I'd say they have to be considered fiction by default.Speaking for myself,it's pretty simple.Being an open-minded guy.I'll settle for either of two things.Seeing it,or have someone actually do it.Most people here believe in ghosts and don't claim to have seen one.It's faith based a flashing light,over exposed photo or strange sound.They are good to go.Hop on the Spooky town Express.Psychics or telekinetics All they have to do is do it.Psychic, predict something we can all see for ourselves.Telekinetic,here is a jar with a feather in it.Let's see you make it move.
2007-11-13 11:53:08 · answer #5 · answered by Dr. NG 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
substantiated evidence that can't be explained by normal occurrences. It was likely a bit of undigested beef....
The burden of evidence is on those making the claim and no one has stood up to reality yet.
2007-11-13 05:00:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Repeatability under controlled conditions.
It kind of depends what the claim is.
2007-11-13 05:01:54 · answer #7 · answered by selket 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Only if someone throws green slime is the claim actually substantiated.
2007-11-13 04:55:22 · answer #8 · answered by Neil 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
hard physical evidence!!
2007-11-13 04:56:38 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋