haha! No one is forcing you guys to read and/or participate in this thread.
Might be Ego.
Might possibly be that belittling others is the only method some can employ to bolster their own Ego.
Remember Wegs, this is sciforums.com.
Magical Realist - this is for you ;)
- Thread starter wegs
- Start date
Might be Ego.
Might possibly be that belittling others is the only method some can employ to bolster their own Ego.
Remember Wegs, this is sciforums.com.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
For my part, no. Virtually no one on this forum has been more patient with MR than myself. There are several threads, at least a thousand posts long, where I patiently walked through the science of cognition, perception and memory recall. Whether or not MR believed me or wilfully denied known science, I still took the time and consideration to go through it. I try to not drag that forward, but I have a responsibility to dismantle wilful ignorance of basic cognition, perception and human behavior where I see it.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Yep...it's definitely all about ego for them.
" my , myself, I , me, I, I , I and I " ...no Ego...
So, do you honestly believe that by exercising your "responsibility" on sciforums.com that you will successfully " dismantle wilful ignorance of basic cognition, perception and human behavior " ?
If you do believe that, then is it at all possible that that belief may stem from a " wilful ignorance of basic cognition, perception and human behavior " ?
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
You're questioning the very purpose of a discussion forum.
If someone doesn't want to be challenged on faulty assertions, one can simply refrain from making faulty assertions. But once they're put out there, they're fair game for challenge. That's what discussion is all about.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Dave would have us all believe that human perception is unreliable because people sometimes see ghosts. I rejected that ridiculous assertion, and he hasn't been able to let it go since. That's why he jumps into the middle of threads like this bringing it up again and again in offtopic trollish posts, as if that is going to make me bow before his authority. It doesn't. It just makes me laugh at his desperation and his inability to tolerate disagreement.
Last edited:
Is the ^^above quoted^^ an example of one of these "faulty assertions" that you Post about?
Is there any possibility that you may have misread or simply misunderstood my questions?
If you reread them, you may find that I was questioning your ability to " dismantle wilful ignorance of basic cognition, perception and human behavior " by exercising your "responsibility" on sciforums.com.
BTW, DaveC426913, how/why were you given this "responsibility"?
Were you appointed?
Elected?
Did you just assume this "responsibility"?
What you describe seems to be more along the lines of what a Debate "is all about".
In all actuality your Posts seem not to be concerned so much with Discussing or Debating...but merely Arguing.
You claim to "try to not drag that forward", and yet...
Gawdzilla Sama
Valued Senior Member
And nobody's stopping me, either.haha! No one is forcing you guys to read and/or participate in this thread.
That's why I love ghosts, they don't have an ego. Anymore.
Hard for a non existent entity to have anything
Which is particularly strange when ghost are seen wearing clothes
Since when have inanimate stuff had any of the attributes normal associated with ghost?
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
I would not have you take my word for anything. This is all documented fact. That's the beauty of science, and why ego doesn't come into it. These aren't my ideas; these are simply facts, and they're available to anyone who cares about their education.
There's no evidence that disproves that there may be paranormal activity lurking about, but there is no evidence to support it. Like testable evidence. Eye witness accounts are subjective. I tend to determine the validity of the claim, based on how the claimant comes across.
I'm kind of like an agnostic when it comes to ghosts.
I'm kind of like an agnostic when it comes to ghosts.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Indeed. Well said.
And that being filtered through several retellings - the tellers of which we have little idea about. Generally we have no access to the first-hand claims. We read the stories of other people, who have heard second-hand or occasionally first-hand claims, but we have no way to verify any aspect of how the claimant "comes across".
The internet is a giant publicity machine. By definition, it's a tool to get publicity for one's own cause. Sometimes those motives are sincere. But their desire to be believed does not qualify as "extraordinary evidence".
All thoughtful skeptics are.
No rational skeptic declares that ghosts don't exist - any more than rational atheists declare God doesn't exist. It is simply a case of 'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.' And skeptic simply set the bar higher than others.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Every day billions of people all over the planet get thru their day ok by perceiving accurately what is going on in front of them. That fact alone totally refutes your claim that human perception is unreliable.
As far as you know!That's why I love ghosts, they don't have an ego. Anymore.
But if popular media has taught me nothing else, it's that ghosts can have huge egos. Look at Nearly Headless Nick, irate that he is not seen as worthy enough to be invited to the Headless Hunt. He's also quite proud of his courage during his life: "I hope I, Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington, have never been guilty of cowardice in my life! That's noble blood that runs in my veins!"
Hmm, you could be right. Beetlejuice was a total narcissist!
You know what would resolve all this? If we could all agree to visit a haunted place of some type in our local area, and see if there's anything to the rumors. Of course, there will be the usual skeptics, but I'd hope you all could be honest in relaying your experiences. Maybe at Halloween, we can do this, for festivity sake.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Even if you stay at a haunted location overnight, there is no guarantee something will happen. I've stayed at a couple of haunted B&B's and nothing happened. To really ensure an experience you would have to do a prolonged stay, like maybe a week. There's not many willing to go that far to catch something paranormal though. Paranormal investigators only ever catch something because they endure so many long hours of nothing happening. It takes patience and considerable commitment to the cause.
That would be fun. There's a cemetery in Old Town San Diego where they have Halloween events. (Interesting/useless fact - when they built the roads in Old Town they built them over parts of the cemetery, so there are little tiny brass markers in the pavement where people are buried.)
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
No it doesn't.
That's analogous to saying "every day billions of people all over the planet drive cars without having an accident. That fact alone refutes the claim that people die in car accidents ."
It's faulty logic.
Besides: again, it's not my claim. It's fact. You would know that if you had the slightest desire to objectively study paranormal events.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Wrong. It's analogous to claiming every day billions of people all over the planet drive cars without having an accident and that fact alone refutes the claim that driving cars is unreliable.
Remember, this is your claim, not science's or mine or anyone else's. And I just refuted it.
Last edited: