Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Good..Then carry on "rest of you".
why we need ghosts
- Thread starter birch
- Start date
Good..Then carry on "rest of you".
What do eyewitness accounts of ghosts have to do with the thread topic "why we need ghosts"?
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
You haven't kept up with the 25 page conversation about evidence for the paranormal?
You think that Keanu sharing an anecdote on a chat show constitutes proof of ghosts?
How do you know, before you do anything to independently check the credibility of the eyewitness's story?
Oh no? For instance, lying about ghosts makes you like him more, which means you're more likely to pay to watch his movies, which in turn impacts his average paycheck. That would be a possible reason, wouldn't it?
Keanu is an entertainer, remember. Telling spooky stories is something that entertainers do to entertain.
Do you know him well enough to know he has no reason to lie? How do you know that?
It's an experience he believes he had. A fairly pedestrian ghostly encounter; nothing especially fascinating, except for the cheer squad.
Who said they were upset by it? Are you upset by it? Are you upset by the suggestion that maybe Keanu didn't see a ghost?
What do you think Keanu's testimony would be good for in a court, exactly? Establishing beyond reasonable doubt that ghosts exist, to the satisfaction of a judge, perhaps? How about establishing on a balance of probabilities that ghosts exist, to the satisfaction of a judge? No? Then what? Please explain what it would be "good enough" for in a court.
Sure. MR is employing one of the classic logical fallacies - "appeal to authority." In fact in this case it's even worse - it's an appeal to non-authority; a claim from someone who has no expertise whatsoever in the 'paranormal' being used as proof simply because they are a popular movie star. Such arguments were used by tobacco companies to "prove" cigarettes were good for you in the 1940's and 1950's.
It's also one strand of a bandwagon fallacy.
"If it's good enough for Keanu, and Ellen and Sting to believe in ghosts, it should be good enough for everybody!"
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Except it isn't about beliefs. It's about experiences. And if these famous well-known people are having experiences of ghosts, that is compelling evidence that cannot be easily dismissed.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
The only authority I respect in these actors and singers is that of the firsthand eyewitness who has no agenda to prove or disprove anything about the paranormal and who are just like us living their everyday lives. That's why I respect their testimony, because there is a credibility and honesty in them sharing these very personal experiences that risks getting them only mocked and ridiculed as nutcases. If the paranormal can happen randomly to these normal well-known figures in our society, then it must be realer and more common than we suspect.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Yep..
I don't need to check the credibility of people just casually sharing personal experiences from their lives. To suspect they are lying or hallucinating is insanely paranoid and laden with a disingenuous agenda to debunk everything. Remember, that's your crowd, not mine.
LOL! That's how you think, not me.
He's not a lecturer who goes around telling ghost stories. He's an actor in movies and a musician. He is about as far from the paranormal as Mickey Mouse is.
People telling about their personal experiences are rarely lying. They have no need to. It's just sharing something they experienced once. There is no agenda behind it.
The housekeeper beside him reacted to the ghost too. So there's definitely corroboration of his experience.
You're the one bitching about the post. Why are you upset by it, besides that it just basically threatens your skeptical worldview?
Establishing the existence of ghosts. Perhaps one among hundreds of such accounts I could present to the court from the TV series Celebrity Ghost Stories.
No, they are living for popularity. That's what makes them money. That's what makes them successful. And that's what makes them different. If they can say "I saw a ghost!" and the program they are on gets more hits, then the show makes more money, they get invited back and they make $$$.
Which makes them more money. Attention = money to an actor. Witness John Travolta and Scientology, Kanye West and "the government created AIDS", Woody Harrelson and 9/11 Trutherism, Fran Drescher and her "alien abduction." No wonder they are so free with their opinions; they like money.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
That's a hugely cynical view on what appear to be very decent normal people just talking about their experiences. Nobody goes to your movies because you said you saw a ghost once. But they might have less respect for you as a wooer. That's what your crowd does isn't it? Attacking people's reputations because they said they saw something paranormal? Imputing them with motives for greed and fame just for sharing their personal ghost account?
Magical Realist:
Also, again with the thing about dishonesty. Are you worried that people who tell ghost stories might be dishonest? You keep bringing it up, almost every time you give an example of somebody who says she has seen a ghost.
Lying and hallucinating are two possibilities. False memory is another rather likely one in this particular case.
It's compelling evidence that some famous well-known people report experiences that they interpret as having to do with ghosts. It's also compelling evidence that some celebrities believe in ghosts. That's all.
It must be realer because it happens to celebrities? What?
Also, again with the thing about dishonesty. Are you worried that people who tell ghost stories might be dishonest? You keep bringing it up, almost every time you give an example of somebody who says she has seen a ghost.
Ah, well there's your problem, right there! Fix that, and you'll be good to go.
But you just said Keanu was credible. Was that just an assumption you made, then, having done no checking? Okay then, as long as we recognise that it is an assumption based on nothing.
No, it's sensible to consider the more likely explanations, before diving straight for the improbable.
Lying and hallucinating are two possibilities. False memory is another rather likely one in this particular case.
Assuming I had such an agenda, what would be disingenuous about it?
You didn't answer the question I asked you. Why not? (I saw your tell-tale nervous "LOL".)
No. He's a guy who is paid to appear on chat shows. On this particular occasion, he told a ghost story.
So his ghost story is more likely to be real?
How do you know? How well do you know Keanu?
How do you know they are "rarely" lying? What checking have you done?
How do you know?
How do you know this? She wasn't on the chat show, too, was she? It's not just because that's what Keanu said, is it? You have independently checked. Or haven't you?
Great! Show me the interview/youtube/whatever with the housekeeper.
Am I? How so?
What makes you think I'm upset? You sound a bit upset yourself.
I don't recall any judgments being handed down by the courts to say "The existence of Ghosts was proved beyond reasonable doubt in the State vs. Blogs." Got any references to where that has happened?
Last edited:
Look at it this way: I like watching Tom Cruise movies. He's a good actor and has made some good choices in terms of the movies he has starred in. As it happens, Tom is also a famous Scientologist, and Scientology is a damaging cult.
I don't watch more Tom Cruise movies because Tom is a scientology, but I'll bet that Scientologists watch more Tom Cruise movies because Tom is a Scientologist.
Last edited:
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
LMAO! Uhh no...people who believe in ghosts don't go to Keanu Reeves movies because he said he saw a ghost once on Jimmy Kimmel. That's the last thing in the world you think about when deciding to see a movie. But I can see how a skeptic trying to explain away Reeves' ghost story would resort to such ad hoc reasoning.
Last edited:
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
No..it's compelling evidence that well-known people experience what are called "ghosts".
You're the one accusing Keanu and I assume also Wanda, and Ellen, and Sting, and Blair, of deviously concocting ghost stories to selfishly enhance their own careers somehow. Only Wanda is a comedian, so I guess more people will go to her concerts if they think she saw a ghost. And Sting is a musician, so I guess more people will buy his CDs if they think he saw a ghost. And Ellen is a talk show host, so I guess more people will watch her show if they think she saw a ghost. And so on and so forth down the spiral of your twisted thinking.
Yeah...I assume Keanu is a normal honest person just like everyone else who happened to have seen a ghost rather than assume as you do he is a conniving greedy liar who makes up ghost stories to increase ticket sales of his movies. Yeah...that's what I assume.
The more likely explanation is that he is simply telling the truth like all normal sane people do. Only in your twisted universe would a ghost story qualify one as being a sociopathic liar or a hallucinating nutcase.
Pretending you're being objective when in fact you are biased toward debunking all cases of paranormal encounters.
Which ofcourse makes him a conniving greedy liar. Only in your twisted world
I've seen him in many interviews. He's a normal honest person. I can tell.
Normal sane people don't lie about their personal experiences in casual friendly conversations. It's part of the definition of being normal and sane.
How do you know he's a conniving greedy liar? What do you base this assumption on other than that he said he saw a ghost?
Keanu said so. And he's not lying because he's a normal sane person.
You're the one smearing Keanu Reeves' reputation just for saying he saw a ghost. Why would you do this if he didn't upset you somehow?
You asked me a hypothetical and I answered with a hypothetical. What's this about real courts deciding this now?
Last edited:
Clap Clap Clap
You are soooo right
experience what are called "ghosts" ✓
Soooo experience what are called "ghosts"
Now - can you tell us what they really really are?
Magical Realist:
You're sounding more upset now.
Remember where we started with this. You asserted that Keanu could have no possible reason to lie about seeing a ghost. I merely suggested one possible reason he might, hypothetically, lie about that. I'm not saying that he did lie, only that he could have a reason to lie, for all we know.
Also, who are these people who are proven to have seen ghosts? Or are you just assuming up front, without investigating anything, that they've seen ghosts?
The question is: did he experience a ghost? Is there any evidence that he did, apart from his own interpretation of what he believes he experienced? I'm not aware of any, and I don't think you are either.
Oh, and I see what you did there, avoiding the question I asked you: "What checking have you done [to verify that people who report ghosts 'rarely' tell lies]?" I suppose the answer is: you haven't done any checking. You just assume.
Recall that you said "The housekeeper beside him reacted to the ghost too. So there's definitely corroboration of his experience."
You have so far utterly failed to produce said housekeeper to corroborate Keanu's story. So what's so "definite" about this corroboration of yours?
Does Keanu's story corroborate itself, as far as you're concerned? If that's what you think, then I'd venture that "corroboration" doesn't mean what you think it means, even leaving aside the technical meaning of the term and substituting something like "confirmation".
Besides, I have done nothing to smear his reputation, as far as I can tell.
It's not that important to me whether Keanu or Sting believes in ghosts. If they ever want to discuss the matter with me, I'll be very happy to try to educate them in the same way I've tried to educate you. They are victims of the education system, same as you are. They are not to blame. Actually, they have a better excuse than you, who has been introduced to skepticism yet refuses to apply what he has been taught.
You're sounding more upset now.
None of them? How do you know this?
It may be the last think you would think of, or the last thing I would think of, but you can't make general statements about everybody, especially about all believers in ghosts. Not without some actual evidence either way.
Who's explaining away his story? His story is what it is. The only problem is when you start assuming, for no good reason, that ghosts are real because of his story.
Sure. People report all kinds of experiences. What I'm interested in is not so much what Keanu thought he experienced, but what could make him think he experienced a ghost. Obviously, one possibility is a ghost made him think that, but there are many other, more likely, possibilities that you haven't even considered.
I have done no such thing.
Remember where we started with this. You asserted that Keanu could have no possible reason to lie about seeing a ghost. I merely suggested one possible reason he might, hypothetically, lie about that. I'm not saying that he did lie, only that he could have a reason to lie, for all we know.
You ought to stop guessing. That's my main take-away message here. You spend most of your time guessing this and assuming that, rather than looking at the available evidence objectively.
There's another guess on your part. But as a working hypothesis, I'm happy to assume that, too. There's no evidence of dishonesty on his part here.
It's wrong to assume that "everyone else" who ever reported seeing a ghost is a "normal honest person" like Keanu. That would be a rash generalisation.
Also, who are these people who are proven to have seen ghosts? Or are you just assuming up front, without investigating anything, that they've seen ghosts?
What makes you think I assume he is a conniving greedy liar etc.? I have said nothing of the sort.
Yes, but telling the truth about what? I actually have little doubt that he told the truth about what he believes he experienced, although that's not the same as saying he could have no possible motive to lie, as we have established.
The question is: did he experience a ghost? Is there any evidence that he did, apart from his own interpretation of what he believes he experienced? I'm not aware of any, and I don't think you are either.
Where are you getting this stuff from? This is just your conception of my "twisted universe" of your imagination. It has nothing to do with anything I've actually written here.
I'm biased towards requiring extraordinary evidence before I will believe an extraordinary claim.
Even if your intuition (yes, that's all it is) about him is correct, that doesn't mean he experienced a ghost. It just means he honestly believes he experienced a ghost.
How do you know that everybody who reports a ghost is normal and sane? That's just a generalisation, isn't it? A rhetorical flourish on your part.
Oh, and I see what you did there, avoiding the question I asked you: "What checking have you done [to verify that people who report ghosts 'rarely' tell lies]?" I suppose the answer is: you haven't done any checking. You just assume.
Right.
Recall that you said "The housekeeper beside him reacted to the ghost too. So there's definitely corroboration of his experience."
You have so far utterly failed to produce said housekeeper to corroborate Keanu's story. So what's so "definite" about this corroboration of yours?
Does Keanu's story corroborate itself, as far as you're concerned? If that's what you think, then I'd venture that "corroboration" doesn't mean what you think it means, even leaving aside the technical meaning of the term and substituting something like "confirmation".
Normal sane people never lie, now? Do you think lying means a person must be insane or abnormal?
Regarding the effects on Keanu's reputation of his ghost story, I'd say the most significant damage was done around the time he told the story on national TV, wouldn't you? Nothing I write here is likely to affect Keanu's reputation very much.
Besides, I have done nothing to smear his reputation, as far as I can tell.
Do you really imagine that it upsets me when another celebrity claims to have seen a ghost, or the yeti, or a UFO? Celebrities come out with all kinds of crazy stuff, all the time.
It's not that important to me whether Keanu or Sting believes in ghosts. If they ever want to discuss the matter with me, I'll be very happy to try to educate them in the same way I've tried to educate you. They are victims of the education system, same as you are. They are not to blame. Actually, they have a better excuse than you, who has been introduced to skepticism yet refuses to apply what he has been taught.
I thought you said that eyewitness testimony would be sufficient to establish the existence of ghosts to the satisfaction of a court. But you're not aware of any actual judgment in which any court has held that ghosts exist. It would seem that you made just one more sweeping claim that you couldn't support when push came to shove, then. Right?
It is "hugely cynical" to think that actors want to be seen and be paid a lot? That's reality.
Correct.
But if you go on Jimmy Kimmel and you say you saw a ghost, and his ratings go up a tiny bit because it's a popular belief, then he will be more likely to have you back. Perhaps Conan or Noah might invite you as well. And the next time you go to an audition, you'll have a leg up on the competition, because you are a more popular, well known actor.
And actors like to succeed.
What's a wooer? And what is "my crowd?" Science types?
Not at all. I don't think any less of Bill Murray for playing a Ghostbuster, or Michael Keaton for playing Beetlejuice. I fault the people who think that means that ghosts are real.
Well I saw an interview with him once and he came off as a little nuts. I can tell. (<- just as valid.))
Now you are getting closer. It is compelling evidence that well known people claim to experience ghosts. And being well known lends them zero credence over someone less well known. Keanu Reeves? Nancy Pelosi? The guy telling ghost stories at that campfire? All have about the same level of credence when it comes to ghost sightings.
Actors do interviews because they want attention - and they get attention by being "edgy", not by giving "just the facts, ma'am". It occurred to me years ago when a talk-show host said that so-and-so was a "nice guy": Is he? Or is he just a good actor? I would think that an actor is an even less credible eyewitness than most people. He makes his living by faking sincerity.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Uh no. Actors don't lie about their life experiences on national TV during interviews because they want to appear "edgy". They tell the truth just like all people do. To say they lie because they are actors is just stupid.