[maximaldecimal]

.i., on 08 November 2009 - 11:06 AM, said:

I wasent really trying to insult anybody... I'm saying that if we live in a world that can be anyhing and is what we create, then things are just the way it supposed to be, that is the supernatural not proven fact. And of course, if we live in this kind of world that I'm imagening, then what we would call the "supernatural" is as real as anything else.

I would agree .i. is simply making an analogy about the nature of personal reality. In a way he was agreeing with you but also being a little vague on his personal opinions. To quote myself.

Quote

One man's chi is another man's electromagnetic anomoly.

In other words the evidence is what you do with it, and this does not count ad hom attacks as evidence like the string of evidence we just saw fram Mattshark 99% huh. It is merely conjuncture based on personal view. Evidence of the paranormal is then any evidence that is not fully explained in cause. In many examples of paranormal activity we can see wht happens but not why it happens. So this is all normal phenomena. It is only labeled as paranormal because there is a lack of explaination. The virtual wall that science has erected to keep mysticism out is fabricated because there was no answer to the question of why. The approach that if there is no answer it must be false is a shortcut to finding an answer. In other words within the box of personal reality. It is in otherwords bound by perception. No real problem with that, but the realism approach of dismissing things that don't fit is in itself mere assumption. Dismissal based on conjuncture.

This post has been edited by maximaldecimal: 12 November 2009 - 11:30 PM

[tinieblas]

It's all about personal views at the end of the day though, Max, though I hate to concede a point to the skeptics!!

Someone who has never eaten chocolate or even seen any cannot understand the devine and luxurious taste of it, may even doubt such a "food" exists...it's all experiences and the effects thereof. If someone has not experienced the paranormal, how can they understand those who have? No matter how hard we try, they will hold onto their "reason" because it's all they know.

[maximaldecimal]

tinieblas, on 13 November 2009 - 12:36 AM, said:

It's all about personal views at the end of the day though, Max, though I hate to concede a point to the skeptics!!

Someone who has never eaten chocolate or even seen any cannot understand the devine and luxurious taste of it, may even doubt such a "food" exists...it's all experiences and the effects thereof. If someone has not experienced the paranormal, how can they understand those who have? No matter how hard we try, they will hold onto their "reason" because it's all they know.

I would have to agree with you there. Reminds me of Obe Wan Kenobe in Empire Strikes Back

Quote

You'll find many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view

[Mattshark]

tinieblas, on 13 November 2009 - 06:36 AM, said:

It's all about personal views at the end of the day though, Max, though I hate to concede a point to the skeptics!!

Someone who has never eaten chocolate or even seen any cannot understand the devine and luxurious taste of it, may even doubt such a "food" exists...it's all experiences and the effects thereof. If someone has not experienced the paranormal, how can they understand those who have? No matter how hard we try, they will hold onto their "reason" because it's all they know.

The difference is there is evidence of chocolate, we can observe it, test it and display it. Not really comparable.


Maximal, do you expect evidence of something not existing? There is no such thing mate, you can only evidence something to exist.

[tinieblas]

Mattshark, on 14 November 2009 - 10:40 AM, said:

The difference is there is evidence of chocolate, we can observe it, test it and display it. Not really comparable.


Maximal, do you expect evidence of something not existing? There is no such thing mate, you can only evidence something to exist.

ok chocolate was a bad example but my imagination failed me at the time so I couldn't think of alternatives
You get the general idea though....supply your own metaphor...

[Mattshark]

tinieblas, on 14 November 2009 - 06:25 PM, said:

ok chocolate was a bad example but my imagination failed me at the time so I couldn't think of alternatives
You get the general idea though....supply your own metaphor...

The problem is though with experience is that different people can experience the same thing and perceive it in completely different ways.