Well, he provided answers to your questions but it seems that you feel it was still mere coincidence that the caller ID displayed his mother’s name, “Lisa.”
I'm not convinced the events he describes ever happened in the first place. We have only his word for it, and we all know he has a penchant for ghost stories. The nurse isn't on the forum posting the story. What we have is an obviously biased person feeding us a story with no independent evidence to back it up. Therefore, it makes a lot of sense to be extremely skeptical about it.
But let's assume this happened. There's a phone
in the room where Magical Realist was that would produce the called ID "Lisa". For all we know, Magical Realist himself used that phone to call the nurse's cellphone, just to mess around. On the other hand, there would be no need for him actually to do anything in order to tell his story of communication from the Beyond. It would be far easier just to make it up.
But let's assume that Magical Realist isn't making it up and didn't make the call himself. Then what are the chances of somebody
else in the hospital (or wherever this was) using that particular phone to call a nurse who also worked at the hospital? Nothing has been said so far that rules out that possibility.
But let's assume that no human present used Magical Realist's Mum's phone to call the nurse. Then is there a chance that some
other number registered to a "Lisa" could have called the nurse's phone? Certainly there is. Magical Realist asserts that the nurse didn't personally know any other Lisas, but that doesn't rule out the possibility of an unlikely coincidence.
But let's assume that no human anywhere is actually responsible for that supposed call. Could it possibly be a computer glitch in the phone system, then, since that particular phone had very likely been used to phone the nurse before. Or did somebody push "redial" by accident? There's no way for us to know without further investigation.
But let's assume that we can somehow rule out all of the above as explanations. Can we conclude it could only have been a ghost who made the call happen, then? Certainly not. All we could say, with the given evidence, is that the event is unexplained. Given that there's no evidence that ghosts of any kind exist, it would be sensible to assume that the possibility of a ghost being responsible would be very low. So, maybe a passing cosmic ray glitched the phone system in just the right way to produce an unlikely coincidence, or something. There's simply no way to know.
But what about Magical Realist's story that about his prior discussion with his Mum, in which he says she agreed she would "do something with technology but nothing too scary"? Isn't this just the kind of thing she might do? Answer: once again there's no way to tell. We have no information about Magical Realist's Mum. We don't know if she loved phones. We also have no information about what technologies ghosts are able to affect from Beyond the Grave. Oh wait! I forgot for a moment: we don't even know that ghosts exist at all!
Also think about the whole "doing something with technology but nothing too scary" thing. There are
a lot of things that would fit that description. The TV suddenly turns itself on? Must be MR's Mum's ghost. MR's work swipe card stops working mysteriously? Must be MR's Mum's ghost. MR has a bank error in his favour due to a computer glitch? Must be MR's Mum's ghost who is responsible. MR's fridge breaks down? Must be MR's Mum's ghost messing with it in a non-scary way. You get the picture. The fact is: MR could put
any unexplained not-too-scary technological event down to his Mum's promise to visit him as a ghost.
Now if MR's Mum had told him "At exactly 12 noon on the day after I die, I will cut the power to the entire hospital for a period of exactly 43 minutes"
and his Mum also had that recorded in her registered will before her death,
and the advertised power cut actually happened and was documented appropriately,
then we'd be dealing with events that would require some serious thought.
The nurse doesn’t know anyone named “Lisa,” and a first name only appearing seems a little unusual, don’t you think?
We only have MR's word for what the nurse knows or doesn't know, remember. Nobody has interviewed the nurse, least of all you or me. As for the first name thing, I have some names of contacts in my address book on my cell phone, filed under first names only. If they call me, only their first name comes up, because that's what I put into my phone to identify their number.
But to your point, there isn’t anything wrong with viewing what MR experienced as merely “unusual.”
If MR was a trustworthy, unbiased commentator on topics such as this, it would be fine to take what he says at face value, and it would indeed be unusual and possibly noteworthy. But you and I both know that MR is about the least biased commentator on ghosts and paranormal we could possibly find, so he is absolutely not to be trusted on such matters. A prudent person would set the evidentiary bar very high indeed before being willing to accept any alleged paranormal experience to be fact, if told by Magical Realist (and I, for one, am a prudent person).
I think the problem you have is that MR considered it a spiritual sign, and not mere coincidence. Is this an accurate assumption on my part?
Yes, that's accurate, assuming it actually happened as MR says it did, which I doubt. See above for all the reasons I have a problem with MR making that assumption.
Even though I’m open to the possibility that ghosts may exist, I’m personally skeptical of ghosts interacting with tangible objects, such as knocking things over, doors slamming, phones ringing etc. Where is their “energy” coming from?
Even existing requires some energy. If you can
see a ghost, then it must be emitting or reflecting light, which requires something to do the emitting or reflecting. The existence of whatever that "something" is would require energy, unless it is somehow able to break the established laws of physics
.
The idea behind paranormal “feelings” hence my creating this thread, stems from perhaps confirmation bias - if we want to believe in ghost activity, then we will lean towards that as the plausible option when faced with unusual or unexplainable situations.
Absolutely. It's called
confirmation bias. We tend to look for evidence that supports what we already believe and to ignore or downplay evidence that goes against that. This is why MR is willing to ignore all alternative explanations other than his Mum phoning him from the Other Side (if the events even happened as described).
What do you feel is the explanation behind the name “Lisa” showing up on caller ID?
I have no idea. I try not to draw definite conclusions about things in the absence of evidence. I have suggested some possibilities, above, but I can't confirmed if any of them is right, based on the available evidence.
It is important to appreciate that I'm not even ruling out the possibility that it was just what MR says it was: his Mum's ghost making a phonecall. I'm just estimating the probability of that explanation as vanishingly small, albeit non-zero. I'm quite willing, however, to consider any additional supporting evidence for a ghostly explanation, if any were ever to come to light.
Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. I'd say the claim that ghosts can make phonecalls to the living is an extraordinary claim, wouldn't you?