Why do skeptics investigate the Paranormal?

[Almeisan]

as a reply to the original post.

after seeing this and other similar sites, if one were to own a website one would have to ask members only to only sign up if they were 'like minded' individuals - then there would be a harmonious exchange of information and conversation. which would be preferable.

rather than put up with the 'assumed authority' of those who label themselves 'skeptic'.

they might just as well hold up a banner saying 'i am not knowledgeable on the subject'

neither do we like the way skeptics refer to the opposite of themselves as 'believers' - they do not appreciate the difference between understanding/knowledge/truth and belief, and confound them.

nothing good is ever achieved by argument.

Truth's arrive through the experience of the individual :that is the continuing unfoldment of the individual .

alas

[evil inside]

as a reply to the original post.

after seeing this and other similar sites, if one were to own a website one would have to ask members only to only sign up if they were 'like minded' individuals - then there would be a harmonious exchange of information and conversation. which would be preferable.

rather than put up with the 'assumed authority' of those who label themselves 'skeptic'.

they might just as well hold up a banner saying 'i am not knowledgeable on the subject'

neither do we like the way skeptics refer to the opposite of themselves as 'believers' - they do not appreciate the difference between understanding/knowledge/truth and belief, and confound them.

nothing good is ever achieved by argument.

Truth's arrive through the experience of the individual :that is the continuing unfoldment of the individual .

alas

Making an argument is different than having one. Personally I believe that a good argument promotes discussion and through that, knowledge.

[evil inside]

I whole heartedly agree. I don't like some of those reality shows just because they tell the investigators the whole low down, and then the investigators play on that. I absolutely agree with evil inside. ~Jackal

Yes, it completely ruins the programme for me, too.

...I could just hug you!

[spiridion]

Then why do skeptics comment on this? I don't get it!? LOL...

Why do they participate at all if they do not believe in it? Show me proof it doesn't exist... Just as much as proof is asked of Paranormal Investigators, where is the proof of yours that there is nothing out there?

Ftr, I am not saying I am one of those skeptics - I do believe there is unexplained stuff out there, and I highly respect the work of paranormal investigators, (which is why I'm here.) But many skeptics do not.

As for proving that something doesn't exist - I think that nonbelievers would say there is nothing to prove - that believers in the paranormal should be the ones proving that something does exist.

[coldethyl]

Then why do skeptics comment on this? I don't get it!? LOL...

Why do they participate at all if they do not believe in it? Show me proof it doesn't exist... Just as much as proof is asked of Paranormal Investigators, where is the proof of yours that there is nothing out there?

I guess I'd be called a skeptic, since everyone has to be labeled.

I don't make a habit of asking people for proof. What I do is offer alternative, logical explanations when they are asked for.

How many people have come to this very board with no clue about sleep paralysis and then because of a link I or someone else have provided, went away understanding what happened to them?

Threads like this invariably end up as a skeptics vs. believers hate bash. I don't know why everyone tries so hard to convince each other when the convictions are obviously so strong.

I state my opinion and move along for the most part. It's pointless to try and flog a dead horse.

In saying that, I've said this several times as well.

[shadow_flame]

i consider that everything has to have balance. but what i hate, is extreme sides of spectrum. in kinesis related things i see many "oh i have been doing pyrokinesis for four years, i 'm thinking of going to electrokinesis now". no, i don't generalize, but this field of work attract many such people, many from teenage population. so i feel skeptics are very much needed there. on the other hand, i get very irritated when skeptics assume all-knowing position, and treat believers like kids, just because of their beliefs. i have seen this not only in paranormal studies, but also in religion related stuff

[Luis-E]

Then why do skeptics comment on this? I don't get it!? LOL...

I dont get it either.

[Pluto-x]

I have to admit, this topic is getting interesting. Long as we can keep it clean and stray away from bashing one another, perhaps it can come to some kind of conclusion somewhere. So far nobody has bashed each other in this thread, surpisingly enough. Those are the kind of threads I can enjoy. It goes to show everyone a thread can be started without bashing someone. So far nobody has really answered my questions. They've given us a perspctive of what both skeptics and believers are but never really answered why skeptics get involved in the paranormal? If they do not believe in such a thing, why are they leaving comments about it? What is considered to be enough evidence for a skeptic to believe something is paranormal? Nobody has shown me proof that it doesn't exist yet.

[coldethyl]

but never really answered why skeptics get involved in the paranormal? If they do not believe in such a thing, why are they leaving comments about it?

Did you read what I said at all? How can you say that when I said this: What I do is offer alternative, logical explanations when they are asked for.

How many people have come to this very board with no clue about sleep paralysis and then because of a link I or someone else have provided, went away understanding what happened to them?

[spiridion]

So far nobody has really answered my questions. They've given us a perspctive of what both skeptics and believers are but never really answered why skeptics get involved in the paranormal? If they do not believe in such a thing, why are they leaving comments about it? What is considered to be enough evidence for a skeptic to believe something is paranormal? Nobody has shown me proof that it doesn't exist yet.

I believe I have answered this too! A skeptic can be interested in the paranormal because although skeptic, we still believe such things are possible. Skepticism does not necessarily mean that a person is 100% sure that paranormal things don't exist, (I would call this a nonbeliever,) just that we have our doubts.

And how can you prove that paranormal things don't exist???

[Regency]

I believe I have answered this too! A skeptic can be interested in the paranormal because although skeptic, we still believe such things are possible. Skepticism does not necessarily mean that a person is 100% sure that paranormal things don't exist, (I would call this a nonbeliever,) just that we have our doubts.

And how can you prove that paranormal things don't exist???

I agree with this Spiridon. Here's a definition of skeptic from Wikipedia.

In ordinary usage, skepticism or scepticism (Greek: skeptomai, to look about, to consider; see also spelling differences) refers to

1. an attitude of doubt or a disposition to incredulity either in general or toward a particular object,

2. the doctrine that true knowledge or knowledge in a particular area is uncertain, or

3. the method of suspended judgment, systematic doubt, or criticism that is characteristic of skeptics (Merriam–Webster).

I agree with what you say about a non-believer being someone who is 100% sure there is no such thing. I myself am a floater, a technical term that, well that I've just made up. I would like to believe and hope to be convinced of such things - but I feel this won't happen unless I have an experience of my own. I love hearing people's experiences and seeing the evidence, if something looks fake to me, then I'll say so - but I never set to be negative about other people's experiences or evidence. Also number 2 in that list above states "the doctrine that true knowledge is uncertain" - that doesn't mean out and out disbelief.

Anyone else care to come out as a Floater?

Reg

[LIGhostChick]

Not all skeptics are respectful of the field. There are alot of skeptics on this board that post comments to get a rise out people. They're obnoxious & forceful of their way of thinking. Then there are others, like Coldethyl, that have the right idea. It's good to try & find other possibilities otherwise you'd be very very gullible.

[coldethyl]

^ Thank you very much for that.

I hate labels. I think the term floater is a nice one, Reg!

[Regency]

^ Thank you very much for that.

I hate labels. I think the term floater is a nice one, Reg!

Thanks Coldethyl.

Also, I'd just like to say that when my sister tells me she saw candles being held by some invisble entity walking up a staircase - I believe what she's saying to me, my belief here is in my sister. I know she wouldn't lie to me and that she absolutely believes she saw what she did.

I also believe that some of the photographic evidence and personal accounts here are entirely plausible to be paranormal and some of them push me closer to that knowledge... I just think it would take a personal experience for me to KNOW, but I think that's true of most people.

Phew, there was a lot of beliefs there, did that make sense.

Edited September 25, 2007 by Regency

[Pluto-x]

Reg... isn't that what I've been kind of saying all along? That Skeptics should be labeled as something different? There is a lot of similarities to a paranormal investigator who believes as to a skeptic. Both are trying to find logical & scientific explanations first... but if there's something you cannot explain, then it leans towards being Paranormal. Most groups revolve around that method. I also think non believer skeptics should be labeled as something different as well. I don't understand why "Non Believers" get involved at all. I can see those skeptics who are interested but using the method like I mentioned before.

Reg... when I posted my terminology and definitions earlier, I too got them from good old Wiki...

I did that to better understand the terms myself to make myself more clearer when commenting on it.

In the end... I think we ALL lack the knowledge of knowing what's really going on. Isn't that why we are all investigating? So we basically have a common goal there???

[evil inside]

This is such a philosophical subject that I don't think any of us will be completely happy with any one answer.

[Regency]

In the end... I think we ALL lack the knowledge of knowing what's really going on. Isn't that why we are all investigating? So we basically have a common goal there???

Absolutely. I couldn't agree more and there lies the answer to the original question "why do skeptics investigate the paranormal".

I bet it didn't have floater in wiki though, eh?

[LadyHay]

Hey all,

Like to add my two cents on this.

First of all, why does there have to be "sceptics (Canadian spelling)" and "paranormal investigators"? They are not antonyms to each other. They do not necessarily mean the opposite. I know many believers who use rational and sceptical thinking in their line of hobby. The opposite of skeptic

I think that sceptic has become a dirty word because a lot of believers do not like to be questioned. Even when someone (a sceptic) is trying very hard to understand or make sense of the believer's experience.

People here complain that sceptics question them harshly when they claim to have had perhaps a very bizarre experience. I think the goal of a good sceptic in that case would be to bring forth RATIONAL THINKING. Why is that a bad thing?

Consider this - A homeowner hears banging in their home, things go missing, apparitions are seen, voices are heard - there are all the classic signatures of what we know to be a possible haunting. The homeowner takes a few pics of the house and VOILA!! ORBS!!!! He goes into a frenzy saying he has proof of the ghosts in his home.

That is NOT rational thinking. And I have seen that non rational kind of thinking all over this board and in the seven years I have been dealing with my group.

Someone once put it to me this way: If a home is haunted, and you are taking photos in the home, and a cat walks into the picture, does that mean the cat is a ghost or haunted?

Certainly, those orbs MAY be ghosts, or they MAY NOT. But this is where scepticism comes in boys and girls... PROBABILITY over POSSIBILITY. Sceptics would probably be more than happy to admit that something odd is going on in the home, however, they might draw the line at orbs=ghosts.

That is MY take on a sceptic.

[evil inside]

Cheers Hezzbelle!

[spiridion]

In the end... I think we ALL lack the knowledge of knowing what's really going on. Isn't that why we are all investigating? So we basically have a common goal there???

Absolutely!

for Regency and Hezzbelle. I guess I would be labeled a floater too, but I don't want to think of what Wikipedia or the dictionary defines this as...

((Not so nice images.....toilets.....You get the picture.)

[evil inside]

Absolutely!

for Regency and Hezzbelle. I guess I would be labeled a floater too, but I don't want to think of what Wikipedia or the dictionary defines this as...

((Not so nice images.....toilets.....You get the picture.)

EewW! That is not a lovely mascot.

[frodonet]

it's good to have sceptics around. it keeps the mofo hoaxers away. :angry2:

[JackalnChainz]

Then why do skeptics comment on this? I don't get it!? LOL...

Why do they participate at all if they do not believe in it? Show me proof it doesn't exist... Just as much as proof is asked of Paranormal Investigators, where is the proof of yours that there is nothing out there?

Back to my point...lol.

[JackalnChainz]

...I could just hug you!

Don't fight the feeling... Sincerely, JackalNChainz

[coldethyl]

First of all, why does there have to be "sceptics (Canadian spelling)" and "paranormal investigators"? They are not antonyms to each other. They do not necessarily mean the opposite. I know many believers who use rational and sceptical thinking in their line of hobby. The opposite of skeptic

I think that sceptic has become a dirty word because a lot of believers do not like to be questioned. Even when someone (a sceptic) is trying very hard to understand or make sense of the believer's experience.

People here complain that sceptics question them harshly when they claim to have had perhaps a very bizarre experience. I think the goal of a good sceptic in that case would be to bring forth RATIONAL THINKING. Why is that a bad thing?

EXACTLY!!!

(The emphasis is mine.) That's the best sentence ever.

Some believers only want blind belief and be damned with everything else.