I just think the "believers" on this site would benefit a lot from two things. 

1.  A skeptical mindset
2.  A better understanding of science

Standards for proof seem to be pretty low for "believers".  There is the "But I saw it with my own eyes!", for some reason "believers" will assume it's more likely that it was the devil, a ghost, a spirit, or whatever....rather than the more likely spontaneous hallucination, just as an example.  Why is it that something that has little to no evidence for its existence (the devil, ghosts, spirits, god) is more likely than something that has been observed and has quite a bit of evidence behind it (spontaneous hallucinations) ?  Sounds like flawed reasoning to me.  I've given "believers" the benefit of the doubt numerous times.  I still try to use my ouija board alone, in the dark, with candles, and nothing works.  I'm going to be attempting a spell to scry a demon in the mirror when I have time.  I'm also going to be going to a haunted location near my town.  A graveyard that has had sightings for decades.  And I will use the ouija board there.  I'll be bringing a knife or something though, because this graveyard is about a mile or two from civilization deep in the woods and the place really creeps me out lol. 

My post was meant to sound so harsh not because I like to debate like this, neither because I found any of your posts except the last one offending. I'm sorry if I got it wrong, but from what I've read, you made it sound like there's something wrong with him because he has 'difficulties' witnessing supernatural events.  In the end, it seems that it was all just a misunderstanding. My apologies.

i find the issue with someone who is not finding the proof he wants and still on the fence, wanting to believe but won't without proof while belittling those who do believe and already have had their own reasons for doing so.


My Response: I think supernatural stuff actually has a natural explanation.  I think it is explainable by science, I think that whatever it is, it's just misunderstood.  But this is all assuming that it's real, because there's a good chance human perception was deceived and it's not real.  To believe in something as radical as ghosts, demons, spirits, etc. without any proof or evidence would be irrational in my opinion. 

I just think the "believers" on this site would benefit a lot from two things. 

1.  A skeptical mindset
2.  A better understanding of science

Standards for proof seem to be pretty low for "believers".  There is the "But I saw it with my own eyes!", for some reason "believers" will assume it's more likely that it was the devil, a ghost, a spirit, or whatever....rather than the more likely spontaneous hallucination, just as an example.  Why is it that something that has little to no evidence for its existence (the devil, ghosts, spirits, god) is more likely than something that has been observed and has quite a bit of evidence behind it (spontaneous hallucinations) ?  Sounds like flawed reasoning to me. 

I've given "believers" the benefit of the doubt numerous times.  I still try to use my ouija board alone, in the dark, with candles, and nothing works.  I'm going to be attempting a spell to scry a demon in the mirror when I have time.  I'm also going to be going to a haunted location near my town.  A graveyard that has had sightings for decades.  And I will use the ouija board there.  I'll be bringing a knife or something though, because this graveyard is about a mile or two from civilization deep in the woods and the place really creeps me out lol. 

In one paragraph he doesn't mind being a nonbeliever, in another those who do believe are incapable of doubting their senses or understanding science and then he's going out in the woods with a quija board and knife to find proof of something he doesn't believe in because it's "creepy", giving us the benefit of the doubt?so who's being illogical in this whole endeavor?


My Response:  Was I not clear in my paragraphs?  I'm looking for the evidence.  I'm willing to resort to unusual circumstances to see if what so many people claim is actually real.  And I've said it before, I'm convinced it's most likely fake, but there's still that .0001% chance that it's possible.  And no, that number was not calculated, it was just as an example for how unlikely I think it is.  Is bringing a knife for self defense strange where you live?  I'm bringing a knife for self defense, because I'll be a mile or two in the woods away from people.  I don't think it would be wise to be defenseless, at night, in the woods.  An animal could attack, or some psychopath, who knows?   The consequences of being unprepared could be fatal, therefore the benefits outweigh the costs for bringing the knife.  I think if you would have spent like 20 or 30 more seconds to think, you would have realized that I probably need that knife for self defense.  I've been to this graveyard before at night, and the place would give anyone but the bravest of men, the "creeps".  This only gives credence to the whole idea that it's all in your mind, the place being creepy puts your mind on edge, jumping at the slightest sound, seeing "figures" in the dark that are actually trees or a lamp shade, etc.  So, I don't see how I'm being illogical here.  You're the one who believes ghosts, demons, and spirits are real, which from mine and much of the scientific community's perspective is illogical seeing as how there is no proof or evidence for any of those things. 

"How am I showing any disrespect towards you or anyone else?"

I just think the "believers" on this site would benefit a lot from two things. 

1.  A skeptical mindset
2.  A better understanding of science

Monstrous is a place where people who find themselves different from that set of logic can meet their kind" What you're saying is that Monstrous is a place for people who disregard logical scientific explanations to things and resort to the "more likely" scenario in which it was a demon, the devil, a ghost, a spirit, etc.

There is logic, flawed logic, and fallacies.  From Wikipedia:
It examines general forms that arguments may take, which forms are valid, and which are fallacies. 

Remember when I was talking about unfalsifiable theories?  That's one of those fallacies. 
Because these people are different from that set of logic, it seemed reasonable to assume that they disregard logical scientific explanations to things.  They then resort to what is in their opinion the more logical idea that supernatural stuff must exist.  Deductive Reasoning. 

I'm open to anything.  I just think that the majority of people have low standards for "proof". 

I would consider my standards for proof quite high.  So from yours and most other people's perspectives, it would be "average" I assume.   

Also, how would my doubt benefit me?  If I had to guess, I would say it keeps me from jumping to conclusions and assuming that literally every sound I heard at night simply HAD to be of demonic origins.

I fail to see how this is insulting.  I exhaust every possible explanation, and when I can't figure it out, I simply say "I don't know".  I'm not one of those people that just has to have an answer for everything.  A lot of people don't do what I do, they assume it's ghosts or demons or something else. 

The proverbs you referenced, could it be that simply talking about it just puts you on edge and makes you jumpy and start seeing things in the corner of your eye? 

Watching scary movies, talking about scary ghost stories with your friends, that kind of stuff puts you in the mood to be all paranoid and jumpy and start seeing shadows in the corner of your eye.  I don't see how it's insulting.  It's the truth, it happens to kids and to (a lesser extent) adults. 

I do not require "proof" to believe something.  I require credible evidence to decide whether I want to believe a claim someone makes.  It is what any sane, rational minded person would want

Again, it's the truth, is it not?  A sane, rational minded person would want proof/evidence when someone makes an incredible claim such as "ghosts, demons, and spirits are real". 

I think people should have an open mind, raise their standards on what they choose to believe in, and never be too proud to say "maybe i was wrong". 

I don't think those are poor standards to live by.  Always strive to improve yourself. 

You seem to make the conclusion that whatever makes your job easier = logical.  But, whatever makes the company more efficient, is not logical.  Logic to you is simply a perspective then?  I do not mean to be rude, but that is the conclusion I came to and I detailed my reasoning.

I detailed my reasoning.  Logic is not a perspective.  Your job got a little harder, which made you think it was illogical.  But the company is now better able to track their income and expenses, that's pretty logical to me.  This is no insult or disrespect, merely a business trying to become more efficient. 

If demons are real, I would assume it would only make sense that God is real as well, and in that case...I totally screwed up and got it all MAJORLY wrong.  What am I to believe based off of evidence though?  Am I supposed to blindly believe there is a God?  Choosing to blindly believe in anything does not sit well with me. 

Why is it bad for me to state my position on religion?  "Choosing to blindly believe in anything does not sit well with me".  I have no reason to believe in God, I have no reason to believe he exists, so why should I?  I simply don't know if he is real or not.  If someone makes an incredible claim, I need evidence to believe them. 

"Ignorance is bliss, tis folly to be wise"  A highly subjective quote, as it varies significantly with each person.  Some people are more comfortable being ignorant to the truth.  Some people are more comfortable knowing the truth.  I am more comfortable knowing the truth, than continuing to live in an illusion. 

Ignorance means to lack knowledge or awareness about something.  Everything I wrote in that paragraph is true.  If you think it is false, please point it out.  I am not afraid to admit being wrong.  If you find the truth insulting, well, I'm merely the messenger. 

And for me, that is nowhere near enough to make me a believer. 

This is a very neutral phrase.

I've given "believers" the benefit of the doubt numerous times.  I still try to use my ouija board alone, in the dark, with
candles, and nothing works.  I'm going to be attempting a spell to scry a demon in the mirror when I have time.  I'm also going to be going to a haunted location near my town.  A graveyard that has had sightings for decades.  And I will use the ouija board there.  I'll be bringing a knife or something though, because this graveyard is about a mile or two from civilization deep in the woods and the place really creeps me out lol.

i just got off work an hour ago and relaxing at home with my daughter watching a muppet movie on cable i pay for, you're sneaking around woodsy urban graveyards with a knife and quija board looking for something you don't believe in...

My Response:  I responded above. 

I'm very confused.

I can whole heartedly agree, take no offense at this statement and leaving the argument on that note.

This just shows you are quite adept at taking things out of context.  There is a whole paragraph that follows those three words.  I don't understand why you resort to these methods to make me look like some confused fool.  Taking things out of context will get you nowhere. 

My Response: I think supernatural stuff actually has a natural explanation.  I think it is explainable by science, I think that whatever it is, it's just misunderstood. 

Exactly why the term supernatural should be taken very lightly.

[jordyn]

i'm from montana, i wouldn't take a knife for defense in the woods.

i'm tired of you making those who believe sound like ignorant dummies that can't understand reason, rational or science because i believe and you don't have the proof you require to do so, you have the questions about this stuff, i don't and quite happy not having it around me.

[jordyn]

My Response: I think supernatural stuff actually has a natural explanation.  I think it is explainable by science, I think that whatever it is, it's just misunderstood. 

Exactly why the term supernatural should be taken very lightly.

For as much as i love supernatural and the things i'd enjoy teaching castiel...sadly,  i think it's done as much damage for that world as charm did for witchcraft.

otherwise i agree. 

There is a well-spring of resistance to scientific skepticism here on Monstrous that I believe is actively hindering the development of understanding about paranormal/supernatural/unexplained phenomena. Without skepticism, the discussions simply descend into echo chamber territory - that is, our tendency as human beings to seek only that information that we agree with and to accept uncritically any information offered that reinforces our established beliefs. This is intellectual stagnation. Reading through past posts here is eye-opening, and often eye-watering. A claims x. B, C and D accept claims of x uncritically. A becomes guru of all x-related subject matter, despite no evidence or proof of claims/knowledge. Everyone sits around patting backs, masturbating egos and reinforcing delusions in an orgy of collective narcissism. E questions A and x. E is banned for "offending" the groupthink.

This unquestioning belief in the infallibility of the groupthink - and the lame old "don't be so close-minded" argument - leads to... hypocritical closed-mindedness! "But the emperor is wearing a fancy new set of robes!" "Shut up!" "We can't hear you! Lalalala..." Skeptics who challenge the status quo are stereotyped as biased trolls. In order to stay in favour, everyone feels pressured to self-censor any ideas they may have had that deviate from the groupthink. The ensuing illusion of unanimity further reinforces uncritical acceptance of any old swill as "truth" or "fact" while the dissenters' silence is viewed as agreement. Meanwhile, the appointed "mind guards" - okay, let's call 'em what they are, "thought police" - shield the group from dissenting information and weigh-in with metaphorical fists and feet and ban-hammers against those who offer it.

The simple fact is, to be well informed, we all need to seek out and pay attention to information that offers new perspectives. We need to challenge our own assumptions instead of simply reinforcing our current beliefs. Regardless of your beliefs, there is always someone who sees things differently based on the same general facts. They may have new facts, previously unknown to you, that will persuade you that they’re right. Even we skeptics have to work on the principle that anything is possible. But the question is, is it likely? That's why we offer alternative explanations, that's why we constantly ask questions, or ask what evidence is available.

Even if you remain unpersuaded, through relentless curiosity and self-challenge you may still find that you have a more nuanced understanding of your belief.

Nobody should be forced to agree with anything written on these forums. Everyone should feel free to challenge ideas, beliefs and claims.

Just as important, nobody has to respond to those challenges.

The only requirement is that all parties to all sides of an argument attempt to keep calm, and be polite. As soon as one resorts to insults or ad hominem fallacies, they have figuratively lost the argument.

Excellent and well thought out post Jake. 

Unfortunately, it would appear that Nina did exactly what you stated in your reply.  I disagreed with Nina, because she was unable to prove her point, so she labeled me as a troll and banned me. 

You should come back Jake!