Print Page | Close Window

Do You Believe in Ghosts?

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=61606
Printed Date: November 28 2024 at 05:24
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Do You Believe in Ghosts?
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Subject: Do You Believe in Ghosts?
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 21:28
Me and my friend are having an argument about how many people believe in ghosts. I will use this highly scientific, unbiased, random sample to prove my point. He has more faith in people than me.

-------------
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "



Replies:
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 22:13
Of course ghosts are real.

-------------


Posted By: mrcozdude
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 22:50
No but I do believe in Psychic energy's which have the presence of a ghost

-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/cozfunkel/" rel="nofollow">




Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 22:58
I am a Christian who does not believe in anything that is not physical.

-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Luke. J
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 23:34
If "ghost" means human-shaped figures who enter my room by the wall, then I think I don't believe in them.


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 01:44
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

I am a Christian who does not believe in anything that is not physical.

So do you believe in ghosts? And how do you define physical?


Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 01:57
I voted yes FWIW.
I was always a skeptic for ages, but a lot of things I've read about the matter and even my own personal experiences have led me to change my mind.
Mind you, I'm an atheist, so religion or any of that spirituality stuff doesn't really come into it for me.


Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 03:03
I've had some experiences which push me to vote 'yes'

-------------

Jon Lord 1941 - 2012


Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 03:08
Originally posted by Petrovsk Mizinski Petrovsk Mizinski wrote:

I voted yes FWIW.
I was always a skeptic for ages, but a lot of things I've read about the matter and even my own personal experiences have led me to change my mind.
Mind you, I'm an atheist, so religion or any of that spirituality stuff doesn't really come into it for me.
Buh? How can you believe in ghosts and not believe in God? You're basically saying "All this religion stuff is just people being delusional throughout the centuries because I don't believe in anecdotal evidence, but all this anecdotal evidence about ghosts has convinced me".
 
I'm inclined to say that most/all unexplained phenomena is the brain incorrectly processing information. I believe in God, more or less, but that doesn't entail ghosts, at least in the traditional sense.


-------------
if you own a sodastream i hate you


Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 03:32
Originally posted by Henry Plainview Henry Plainview wrote:

Originally posted by Petrovsk Mizinski Petrovsk Mizinski wrote:

I voted yes FWIW.
I was always a skeptic for ages, but a lot of things I've read about the matter and even my own personal experiences have led me to change my mind.
Mind you, I'm an atheist, so religion or any of that spirituality stuff doesn't really come into it for me.
Buh? How can you believe in ghosts and not believe in God? You're basically saying "All this religion stuff is just people being delusional throughout the centuries because I don't believe in anecdotal evidence, but all this anecdotal evidence about ghosts has convinced me".
 
I'm inclined to say that most/all unexplained phenomena is the brain incorrectly processing information. I believe in God, more or less, but that doesn't entail ghosts, at least in the traditional sense.


Ghosts have been captured on Kirlian cameras, so at least some physical proof does exist.
I have however yet to see anyone capture any physical evidence of god.
Ghosts are still something that haven't been totally explained and probably never will be but I have no doubt in my mind they exist.
And I can make the distinction between my brain processing/thinking irrational things and rational things thank you very much. I've had plenty of experience with anxiety and paranoia problems, so I know what it's like to have experienced mental states in which I was far from being in the right state of mind and my personal experiences with what I believe to be ghosts all happened when I was feeling perfectly calm and of a good mood. Had I been feeling otherwise I would have been skeptical of what I saw/felt, but I don't feel I have anything to question if my mental state was in perfect working order at the time of the occurrences, nor was I intoxicated/on drugs at the times either.



Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 03:48

Oh come on, ghost pictures are terrible. And how would a spiritual being be captured on film anyway? It makes no sense.

Maybe you only thought you were in a normal state of mind. I'm not trying to insult you, but we don't really understand how the brain works, or why it doesn't work.


-------------
if you own a sodastream i hate you


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 04:05

Don't believe in ghosts, but I am, let's say 'unnerved', by the dark - it's a natural instinctive reaction that stopped our ancestors being eaten by bears and sabre-tooth tigers and ghost-stories were created to play on those fears.

As for http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/663/can-kirlian-photography-capture-ghostly-images - Kirlian cameras and photo's of ghosts - simple science easily explained, nothing unnatural about it, let alone supernatural.
 


-------------
What?


Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 04:21
I am Irish on my mother's side. I believe in the little folk. the only ghost I believe in is the one which eats handkerchiefs and stockings Confused

-------------


A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta


Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 04:23
I know that one - he tends to hide cigarette lighters & car keys too

-------------

Jon Lord 1941 - 2012


Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 05:30
Originally posted by Jim Garten Jim Garten wrote:

I've had some experiences which push me to vote 'yes'


I remember you telling me about your experiences, Jim. They sounded pretty damn conclusive to me!

I've had one experience, that made me think there could be something a little more than what we know... Just because I cant explain everything in maths, flow charts and equations is not a good enough reason for me to dismiss an idea out of hand.


Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 05:41
Ghosts do not exist.

-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 05:56
As with God and UFOs and other such things, the only honest answer begins...

I don't know, but......

Wink



Related item: Do any of you ever talk to dead relatives?   I find myself sometimes talking to my beloved grandparents, not because I think they hear, or because I expect an answer.  I think I do it light-heartedly because it helps me keep their memory alive somehow.  Weird, huh?






Posted By: mystic fred
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 06:03
Like everybody else I am fascinated by ghost stories, I have never experienced any kind of supernatural activity personally though others I know have.
 
In the 70's the "Ouija Board" game was very popular, we had one of these and many fun evenings were spent around the table with this abominable thing, but then my family went through a period of a number of deaths,  illness, car crashes  and  generally  bad luck affecting us all for many years.
 
Around the time my Dad died in January 1976 my house had instances of unnatural activity so startling you could say the house was indeed haunted. Though I never experienced anything myself as I spent  few nights there I heard reports of footsteps up the stairs, tinkling bells in mid air and static rustlings, even the poor cat was frightened. This went on for a couple of years but subsided, and normal life was restored.
 
I found out from a magazine article  that the paranormal activity could have been triggered off by supernatural energy from my sister, who at 16 took my Dad's death especially badly and the feeling of grief manifested itself as supernatural activity. 
 
Some years ago I found the old Ouija board in a cupboard during a clear out, took it to the bottom of the garden and burned it.
 
Over the years my interest in History has taken me to some very forbidding places - Tower of London, Berry Pomeroy Castle, Hampton Court, numerous isolated Scottish  castle ruins including Urquhart  at night,  but I have never experienced any kind of ghosts at all - maybe i'm not in the least psychic or the whole thing is in everybody's head - though part of me believes in something out there we know very little about...Confused
 
 


-------------
Prog Archives Tour Van


Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 06:27
Originally posted by Finnforest Finnforest wrote:

Do any of you ever talk to dead relatives?   I find myself sometimes talking to my beloved grandparents, not because I think they hear, or because I expect an answer.  I think I do it light-heartedly because it helps me keep their memory alive somehow.  Weird, huh?


I've been doing this for the first time over the last 3 months - I lost both an Aunty and a Grandfather (The daughter and her father) within the space of 3 days, and I was really shaken emotionally by it.

My grandfather and I were particularly close, and although I'd rather not speak about it too much, but it gave me masses of comfort to talk as if they were there with me.

So not weird at all

-------------


Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 06:37
definitely not weird - when I visit my mother I often chat away to my late father (in my head though - don't want mum to think her son's going doolally )

Originally posted by Blacksword Blacksword wrote:

Originally posted by Jim Garten Jim Garten wrote:

I've had some experiences which push me to vote 'yes'


I remember you telling me about your experiences, Jim. They sounded pretty damn conclusive to me!


Whilst I'd hesitate to use the word conclusive, it does make me tend toward the positive side of the argument...

-------------

Jon Lord 1941 - 2012


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 06:55
Originally posted by Jim Garten Jim Garten wrote:

definitely not weird - when I visit my mother I often chat away to my late father (in my head though - don't want mum to think her son's going doolally )

While I don't go as far as actually talking to my late mum and dad, I do use them as a mental yard-stick, questioning myself what they would do or say in any circumstance where I feel I need help or support, just as I would have done if they were still alive.


-------------
What?


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 07:13
Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

I am a Christian who does not believe in anything that is not physical.

So do you believe in ghosts? And how do you define physical?


http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: LinusW
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 07:20
I've never experienced anything that suggests ghosts are real.
I've never read/heard/seen anything that has convinced me of their existence.

So I don't believe in ghosts.

Would love to be wrong though. This world lacks some of that old-fashioned "magic".


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 07:55
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

I am a Christian who does not believe in anything that is not physical.

So do you believe in ghosts? And how do you define physical?


http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717

But if there is nothing besides the physical world, each person must be a physical entity that is either identical with his body or a constitutional part of it, right? So when the body ceases to exist, how can the person (or the soul) remain? If we assume that the soul is a part of physical body, why can't it be destroyed or taken apart by physical means like other physical objects? Or is it that there is some dimension of the physical body that we cannot see or touch and that already exists on a higher (eternal) dimension?



Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 07:58
Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

I am a Christian who does not believe in anything that is not physical.

So do you believe in ghosts? And how do you define physical?


http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717

But if there is nothing besides the physical world, each person must be a physical entity that is either identical with his body or a constitutional part of it, right? So when the body ceases to exist, how can the person (or the soul) remain? If we assume that the soul is a part of physical body, why can't it be destroyed or taken apart by physical means like other physical objects? Or is it that there is some dimension of the physical body that we cannot see or touch and that already exists on a higher (eternal) dimension?



You are your body- nothing more.  When you die, you return to the earth.  I do not believe people die and some immaterial part of them remains.

You will find that I'm a somewhat peculiar Christian.  Wink


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 08:04
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

I am a Christian who does not believe in anything that is not physical.

So do you believe in ghosts? And how do you define physical?


http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717

But if there is nothing besides the physical world, each person must be a physical entity that is either identical with his body or a constitutional part of it, right? So when the body ceases to exist, how can the person (or the soul) remain? If we assume that the soul is a part of physical body, why can't it be destroyed or taken apart by physical means like other physical objects? Or is it that there is some dimension of the physical body that we cannot see or touch and that already exists on a higher (eternal) dimension?



You are your body- nothing more.  When you die, you return to the earth.  I do not believe people die and some immaterial part of them remains.

You will find that I'm a somewhat peculiar Christian.  Wink

So you don't believe in the Resurrection or the Holy Spirit either? Confused


Posted By: omri
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 08:05
I add my voice to Henryplainview and Epignosis.
There is no soal only body. There is no higher dimension.
 
I recommend the book "Zen and the art of motorcycle maintainance" where the author claims the laws of Neuton to be ghosts.
 
I also add that I don't believe in ghosts but I love ghost dance (Troller tanz).
 
And one last thing "It's the blaze who cross my night gown, it's the phone ring"


-------------
omri


Posted By: The Sleepwalker
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 08:08
I do believe in "ghosts", or at least soem kind of immaterial form of human... by which I don't mean god or something like that, cause I don't believe in a god. There are some weird stories about ghosts, like beople going insane in houses that have a certain past (even if those people didn't know that past) and several other strange happenings... 

I really hope I'm right about this, as I think it would be very cool to "haunt a house".LOL


-------------


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 08:09
Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

I am a Christian who does not believe in anything that is not physical.

So do you believe in ghosts? And how do you define physical?


http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717

But if there is nothing besides the physical world, each person must be a physical entity that is either identical with his body or a constitutional part of it, right? So when the body ceases to exist, how can the person (or the soul) remain? If we assume that the soul is a part of physical body, why can't it be destroyed or taken apart by physical means like other physical objects? Or is it that there is some dimension of the physical body that we cannot see or touch and that already exists on a higher (eternal) dimension?



You are your body- nothing more.  When you die, you return to the earth.  I do not believe people die and some immaterial part of them remains.

You will find that I'm a somewhat peculiar Christian.  Wink

So you don't believe in the Resurrection or the Holy Spirit either? Confused


Yes I do.

The Bible is very clear that resurrections are bodily resurrections (i.e., physical).

As for the Holy Spirit, I believe that to be God's power personified (I'm, traditionally speaking, not a Trinitarian either- too much baggage with all those terms, plus the Bible doesn't teach it explicitly).

I actually do not think spirit is the opposite of physical.  I could have sworn I've explained that somewhere around here before...*rummages through the threads*


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 08:29
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

I am a Christian who does not believe in anything that is not physical.

So do you believe in ghosts? And how do you define physical?


http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717

But if there is nothing besides the physical world, each person must be a physical entity that is either identical with his body or a constitutional part of it, right? So when the body ceases to exist, how can the person (or the soul) remain? If we assume that the soul is a part of physical body, why can't it be destroyed or taken apart by physical means like other physical objects? Or is it that there is some dimension of the physical body that we cannot see or touch and that already exists on a higher (eternal) dimension?



You are your body- nothing more.  When you die, you return to the earth.  I do not believe people die and some immaterial part of them remains.

You will find that I'm a somewhat peculiar Christian.  Wink

So you don't believe in the Resurrection or the Holy Spirit either? Confused


Yes I do.

The Bible is very clear that resurrections are bodily resurrections (i.e., physical).

As for the Holy Spirit, I believe that to be God's power personified (I'm, traditionally speaking, not a Trinitarian either- too much baggage with all those terms, plus the Bible doesn't teach it explicitly).

I actually do not think spirit is the opposite of physical.  I could have sworn I've explained that somewhere around here before...*rummages through the threads*

So what exactly happens in a physical resurrection? Confused Is it just another word for decomposition? When the dead (physical) person returns to the earth, will he remain a person even after he (the body) has turned into dirt? Is it really resurrection if the person doesn't exist as a one entity after death?


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 08:38
Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

I am a Christian who does not believe in anything that is not physical.

So do you believe in ghosts? And how do you define physical?


http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717

But if there is nothing besides the physical world, each person must be a physical entity that is either identical with his body or a constitutional part of it, right? So when the body ceases to exist, how can the person (or the soul) remain? If we assume that the soul is a part of physical body, why can't it be destroyed or taken apart by physical means like other physical objects? Or is it that there is some dimension of the physical body that we cannot see or touch and that already exists on a higher (eternal) dimension?



You are your body- nothing more.  When you die, you return to the earth.  I do not believe people die and some immaterial part of them remains.

You will find that I'm a somewhat peculiar Christian.  Wink

So you don't believe in the Resurrection or the Holy Spirit either? Confused


Yes I do.

The Bible is very clear that resurrections are bodily resurrections (i.e., physical).

As for the Holy Spirit, I believe that to be God's power personified (I'm, traditionally speaking, not a Trinitarian either- too much baggage with all those terms, plus the Bible doesn't teach it explicitly).

I actually do not think spirit is the opposite of physical.  I could have sworn I've explained that somewhere around here before...*rummages through the threads*

So what exactly happens in a physical resurrection? Confused Is it just another word for decomposition? When the dead (physical) person returns to the earth, will he remain a person even after he (the body) has turned into dirt? Is it really resurrection if the person doesn't exist as a one entity after death?


I'm not smart enough to know the ins and outs of how this works (I don't have to be).  The Bible gives me clues (Ezekiel 37, John 11)- suffice it to say that if the God of the universe created man out of the dust of the Earth, it should be no difficult task for Him to reconstitute the human body for the resurrection.

The Bible also talks about "glorified bodies" given to Christians after the resurrection. This is what Jesus had when he rose from the dead.  I take this to mean a body that exists in a higher dimension- thus able to pop in and out of "existence" in this dimension at will (this is exactly what Jesus did after his resurrection).


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 08:46
The Bible, in which I believe, speaks also about angels and demons. For example Genesis 19:1: "And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground". Now these beings reputedly have no bodies, but they are spiritual by nature. If anyone wants to refer to this beings as "ghosts", be my guest...


-------------


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 08:53
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

I am a Christian who does not believe in anything that is not physical.

So do you believe in ghosts? And how do you define physical?


http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717

But if there is nothing besides the physical world, each person must be a physical entity that is either identical with his body or a constitutional part of it, right? So when the body ceases to exist, how can the person (or the soul) remain? If we assume that the soul is a part of physical body, why can't it be destroyed or taken apart by physical means like other physical objects? Or is it that there is some dimension of the physical body that we cannot see or touch and that already exists on a higher (eternal) dimension?



You are your body- nothing more.  When you die, you return to the earth.  I do not believe people die and some immaterial part of them remains.

You will find that I'm a somewhat peculiar Christian.  Wink

So you don't believe in the Resurrection or the Holy Spirit either? Confused


Yes I do.

The Bible is very clear that resurrections are bodily resurrections (i.e., physical).

As for the Holy Spirit, I believe that to be God's power personified (I'm, traditionally speaking, not a Trinitarian either- too much baggage with all those terms, plus the Bible doesn't teach it explicitly).

I actually do not think spirit is the opposite of physical.  I could have sworn I've explained that somewhere around here before...*rummages through the threads*

So what exactly happens in a physical resurrection? Confused Is it just another word for decomposition? When the dead (physical) person returns to the earth, will he remain a person even after he (the body) has turned into dirt? Is it really resurrection if the person doesn't exist as a one entity after death?


I'm not smart enough to know the ins and outs of how this works (I don't have to be).  The Bible gives me clues (Ezekiel 37, John 11)- suffice it to say that if the God of the universe created man out of the dust of the Earth, it should be no difficult task for Him to reconstitute the human body for the resurrection.

The Bible also talks about "glorified bodies" given to Christians after the resurrection. This is what Jesus had when he rose from the dead.  I take this to mean a body that exists in a higher dimension- thus able to pop in and out of "existence" in this dimension at will (this is exactly what Jesus did after his resurrection).

I still think that a person has to be something more than just the physical body. What if, for example, person A dies and his body turns into dirt, and out of that dirt grows a plant that person B eats. Now, if a person was identical with his body, persons A and B would share some physical parts. So if B dies and both A and B are resurrected, the resurrected bodies cannot consist of the same matter as the mortal bodies. Thus it makes sense to assume that resurrected people were never identical with their bodies, but that they were either spiritual or abstract entities that were first given their mortal bodies and then their glorified bodies, neither of which they are identical with.


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 08:53
Originally posted by someone_else someone_else wrote:

The Bible, in which I believe, speaks also about angels and demons. For example Genesis 19:1: "And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground". Now these beings reputedly have no bodies, but they are spiritual by nature. If anyone wants to refer to this beings as "ghosts", be my guest...


As I mentioned, I don't believe "spiritual" and "physical" are antonyms.

For Lot to see these angels, the angels would have to have displaced / reflected light in order to be visible. 

That means, then, that if someone sees a ghost, the ghost must somehow physically exist.

Casper the friendly ghost could catch a ball and fly through a wall.  He could grab the drying sheets before they fell from the clothesline and landed in the mud, but he could also be a bit clumsy and knock over an expensive vase accidentally.


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 09:04
Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

I am a Christian who does not believe in anything that is not physical.

So do you believe in ghosts? And how do you define physical?


http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717

But if there is nothing besides the physical world, each person must be a physical entity that is either identical with his body or a constitutional part of it, right? So when the body ceases to exist, how can the person (or the soul) remain? If we assume that the soul is a part of physical body, why can't it be destroyed or taken apart by physical means like other physical objects? Or is it that there is some dimension of the physical body that we cannot see or touch and that already exists on a higher (eternal) dimension?



You are your body- nothing more.  When you die, you return to the earth.  I do not believe people die and some immaterial part of them remains.

You will find that I'm a somewhat peculiar Christian.  Wink

So you don't believe in the Resurrection or the Holy Spirit either? Confused


Yes I do.

The Bible is very clear that resurrections are bodily resurrections (i.e., physical).

As for the Holy Spirit, I believe that to be God's power personified (I'm, traditionally speaking, not a Trinitarian either- too much baggage with all those terms, plus the Bible doesn't teach it explicitly).

I actually do not think spirit is the opposite of physical.  I could have sworn I've explained that somewhere around here before...*rummages through the threads*

So what exactly happens in a physical resurrection? Confused Is it just another word for decomposition? When the dead (physical) person returns to the earth, will he remain a person even after he (the body) has turned into dirt? Is it really resurrection if the person doesn't exist as a one entity after death?


I'm not smart enough to know the ins and outs of how this works (I don't have to be).  The Bible gives me clues (Ezekiel 37, John 11)- suffice it to say that if the God of the universe created man out of the dust of the Earth, it should be no difficult task for Him to reconstitute the human body for the resurrection.

The Bible also talks about "glorified bodies" given to Christians after the resurrection. This is what Jesus had when he rose from the dead.  I take this to mean a body that exists in a higher dimension- thus able to pop in and out of "existence" in this dimension at will (this is exactly what Jesus did after his resurrection).

I still think that a person has to be something more than just the physical body. What if, for example, person A dies and his body turns into dirt, and out of that dirt grows a plant that person B eats. Now, if a person was identical with his body, persons A and B would share some physical parts. So if B dies and both A and B are resurrected, the resurrected bodies cannot consist of the same matter as the mortal bodies. Thus it makes sense to assume that resurrected people were never identical with their bodies, but that they were either spiritual or abstract entities that were first given their mortal bodies and then their glorified bodies, neither of which they are identical with.


You're drawing a conclusion based on my incomplete understanding of the mechanics of the resurrection- as I mentioned, I don't know how it all works out.

Let's go another direction (since we're treading in the territory of "Who am I?")...

Is your arm you or just a part of you?

Let's see...an amputee may be missing an arm, but the amputee is still a person (I hope we'd agree).

How many body parts can a person lose until he or she ceases to be a person?  Let's assume then that a person is just a brain in a vat- connected to a complex machine that facilitates "life" and stimulates the sensory nerves in such a way that this brain can see, hear, and be conscious.  Is that brain a person?

Assuming we say yes, and later flip the switch so that the brain dies, gets thrown into the landfill and deteriorates completely (becoming nutrients for the soil, etc), is that entity still a person?  I think by this point most people would say no.

The question then, becomes, "what is the eternal aspect of personality and consciousness?"  If you believe a person is "somehow" a person even without a body, then the burden of proof is on you to prove this.  I'd also want you to show how the non-physical personality interacts with the physical entity (this was Descartes' crushing problem- to facilitate Cartesian dualism, he postulated that this interaction took place in the pineal gland in the brain- despite the inability to scientifically demonstrate this).


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 09:23
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by someone_else someone_else wrote:

The Bible, in which I believe, speaks also about angels and demons. For example Genesis 19:1: "And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground". Now these beings reputedly have no bodies, but they are spiritual by nature. If anyone wants to refer to this beings as "ghosts", be my guest...


As I mentioned, I don't believe "spiritual" and "physical" are antonyms.

For Lot to see these angels, the angels would have to have displaced / reflected light in order to be visible. 

That means, then, that if someone sees a ghost, the ghost must somehow physically exist.

Casper the friendly ghost could catch a ball and fly through a wall.  He could grab the drying sheets before they fell from the clothesline and landed in the mud, but he could also be a bit clumsy and knock over an expensive vase accidentally.
Angel mythology describes seven choir's of angels, of various physical forms when they impinge on our dimension (using Rob's explanation) - the angels in Ezekiel are somewhat difficult to visualise from the text descriptions, implying that they were not of this dimension (and leading von Daniken to assume the description was of an alien space craft). Biblically, they generally are regarded as beings of light rather than beings of clay.


-------------
What?


Posted By: clarke2001
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 09:33
There's much more than a surrounding world withing our perception, and science is still clueless about many things about matter, energy and information. But ghosts - unsettled human souls wondering around halls and eventually popping on photos with their living relatives - do not exist.

Here's a little math.

Each human while alive consists of matter, occupies a certain amount of space, moves from point A to point B, waves a hand, goes to a shop, chews food.

Dogs too. They run, chase a stick, live their dog lives.

So, if a human being got  something, call it "force", "soul", "freedom of choice", anything un-material that differs us from a brick wall, we can apply the same to dogs, cats and mollusks, do we agree?

Okay. Now. There are more than six billion humans alive right now. There were between 60 to 100 billion people since the dawn of the human kind (scientific estimation). Which means, each of us is surrounded with 10 to 15 ghosts right now.

Even if "the doors" between "our world" and the "other world" are opened only occasionally, we should all be flooded with photos of human ghosts. As well as dogs. And mollusks. And (trillions of) ants. And a plethora of other evidence. There would be no watchable TV program, because it would be polluted with annoying poltergeists every few seconds.

And why my Australopithecus Africanus grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grand grandfather from Tanzania was never caught on film? Because he doesn't know how to use a camera?





-------------
https://japanskipremijeri.bandcamp.com/album/perkusije-gospodine" rel="nofollow - Percussion, sir!


Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 09:34
Originally posted by Finnforest Finnforest wrote:

As with God and UFOs and other such things, the only honest answer begins...

I don't know, but......

Wink

 
This is pretty much my thought on the subjects.  I voted no, that I don't believe in ghosts, but really "I don't know but....".


-------------


Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 09:48
Rob, this discussion is even weirder than when I found a Christian who believed God and Jesus were separate gods.
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

As for http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/663/can-kirlian-photography-capture-ghostly-images - Kirlian cameras and photos of ghosts - simple science easily explained, nothing unnatural about it, let alone supernatural. 
Wow, I hadn't bothered before to look up with that actually was, that's pretty damn stupid.


-------------
if you own a sodastream i hate you


Posted By: YtseBen
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 09:55
I've believed in them for my whole life.


Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 10:04
deleted

-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 10:48
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

I am a Christian who does not believe in anything that is not physical.

So do you believe in ghosts? And how do you define physical?


http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717

But if there is nothing besides the physical world, each person must be a physical entity that is either identical with his body or a constitutional part of it, right? So when the body ceases to exist, how can the person (or the soul) remain? If we assume that the soul is a part of physical body, why can't it be destroyed or taken apart by physical means like other physical objects? Or is it that there is some dimension of the physical body that we cannot see or touch and that already exists on a higher (eternal) dimension?



You are your body- nothing more.  When you die, you return to the earth.  I do not believe people die and some immaterial part of them remains.

You will find that I'm a somewhat peculiar Christian.  Wink

So you don't believe in the Resurrection or the Holy Spirit either? Confused


Yes I do.

The Bible is very clear that resurrections are bodily resurrections (i.e., physical).

As for the Holy Spirit, I believe that to be God's power personified (I'm, traditionally speaking, not a Trinitarian either- too much baggage with all those terms, plus the Bible doesn't teach it explicitly).

I actually do not think spirit is the opposite of physical.  I could have sworn I've explained that somewhere around here before...*rummages through the threads*

So what exactly happens in a physical resurrection? Confused Is it just another word for decomposition? When the dead (physical) person returns to the earth, will he remain a person even after he (the body) has turned into dirt? Is it really resurrection if the person doesn't exist as a one entity after death?


I'm not smart enough to know the ins and outs of how this works (I don't have to be).  The Bible gives me clues (Ezekiel 37, John 11)- suffice it to say that if the God of the universe created man out of the dust of the Earth, it should be no difficult task for Him to reconstitute the human body for the resurrection.

The Bible also talks about "glorified bodies" given to Christians after the resurrection. This is what Jesus had when he rose from the dead.  I take this to mean a body that exists in a higher dimension- thus able to pop in and out of "existence" in this dimension at will (this is exactly what Jesus did after his resurrection).

I still think that a person has to be something more than just the physical body. What if, for example, person A dies and his body turns into dirt, and out of that dirt grows a plant that person B eats. Now, if a person was identical with his body, persons A and B would share some physical parts. So if B dies and both A and B are resurrected, the resurrected bodies cannot consist of the same matter as the mortal bodies. Thus it makes sense to assume that resurrected people were never identical with their bodies, but that they were either spiritual or abstract entities that were first given their mortal bodies and then their glorified bodies, neither of which they are identical with.


You're drawing a conclusion based on my incomplete understanding of the mechanics of the resurrection- as I mentioned, I don't know how it all works out.

Let's go another direction (since we're treading in the territory of "Who am I?")...

Is your arm you or just a part of you?

Let's see...an amputee may be missing an arm, but the amputee is still a person (I hope we'd agree).

How many body parts can a person lose until he or she ceases to be a person?  Let's assume then that a person is just a brain in a vat- connected to a complex machine that facilitates "life" and stimulates the sensory nerves in such a way that this brain can see, hear, and be conscious.  Is that brain a person?

Assuming we say yes, and later flip the switch so that the brain dies, gets thrown into the landfill and deteriorates completely (becoming nutrients for the soil, etc), is that entity still a person?  I think by this point most people would say no.

The question then, becomes, "what is the eternal aspect of personality and consciousness?"  If you believe a person is "somehow" a person even without a body, then the burden of proof is on you to prove this.  I'd also want you to show how the non-physical personality interacts with the physical entity (this was Descartes' crushing problem- to facilitate Cartesian dualism, he postulated that this interaction took place in the pineal gland in the brain- despite the inability to scientifically demonstrate this).

Descartes placed quite a lot of weight on the belief that people are essentially thinking subjects, regardless of the fact that when we're asleep we don't think or feel attached to our bodies in the same way as when we are awake. (What seems incredibly strange to me is that every time I wake up I find myself with the same body.) There has to be something other than consciousness that's responsible for the person's identity through time, which leads me to believe that a person is an entity that exists "outside" the body with some kind of special relation to it.

Obviously I don't know the answer to Descartes' problem, but it would seem that one possible way to avoid it would be to assume that entities cannot be divided to physical and non-physical entities, but that materiality and spirituality are aspects that different entities have in various amounts, so that there is a continuum from things that are mostly material to things that are mostly spiritual. This would also apply to interaction between different entities, for example a hand pushing a table would be a more physical interaction than a magnet pulling a magnet or a soul interacting with a brain. (If we consider ghosts this would mean that we can see them and physically interact with them through our bodies because of their physical properties, and that we can sense them directly because of their spiritual properties.)


Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 11:15
Originally posted by YtseBen YtseBen wrote:

I've believed in them for my whole life.

Thats OK, some people believe in fairies too.


-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 11:19
Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

I am a Christian who does not believe in anything that is not physical.

So do you believe in ghosts? And how do you define physical?


http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=56485&PID=3386717#3386717

But if there is nothing besides the physical world, each person must be a physical entity that is either identical with his body or a constitutional part of it, right? So when the body ceases to exist, how can the person (or the soul) remain? If we assume that the soul is a part of physical body, why can't it be destroyed or taken apart by physical means like other physical objects? Or is it that there is some dimension of the physical body that we cannot see or touch and that already exists on a higher (eternal) dimension?



You are your body- nothing more.  When you die, you return to the earth.  I do not believe people die and some immaterial part of them remains.

You will find that I'm a somewhat peculiar Christian.  Wink

So you don't believe in the Resurrection or the Holy Spirit either? Confused


Yes I do.

The Bible is very clear that resurrections are bodily resurrections (i.e., physical).

As for the Holy Spirit, I believe that to be God's power personified (I'm, traditionally speaking, not a Trinitarian either- too much baggage with all those terms, plus the Bible doesn't teach it explicitly).

I actually do not think spirit is the opposite of physical.  I could have sworn I've explained that somewhere around here before...*rummages through the threads*

So what exactly happens in a physical resurrection? Confused Is it just another word for decomposition? When the dead (physical) person returns to the earth, will he remain a person even after he (the body) has turned into dirt? Is it really resurrection if the person doesn't exist as a one entity after death?


I'm not smart enough to know the ins and outs of how this works (I don't have to be).  The Bible gives me clues (Ezekiel 37, John 11)- suffice it to say that if the God of the universe created man out of the dust of the Earth, it should be no difficult task for Him to reconstitute the human body for the resurrection.

The Bible also talks about "glorified bodies" given to Christians after the resurrection. This is what Jesus had when he rose from the dead.  I take this to mean a body that exists in a higher dimension- thus able to pop in and out of "existence" in this dimension at will (this is exactly what Jesus did after his resurrection).

I still think that a person has to be something more than just the physical body. What if, for example, person A dies and his body turns into dirt, and out of that dirt grows a plant that person B eats. Now, if a person was identical with his body, persons A and B would share some physical parts. So if B dies and both A and B are resurrected, the resurrected bodies cannot consist of the same matter as the mortal bodies. Thus it makes sense to assume that resurrected people were never identical with their bodies, but that they were either spiritual or abstract entities that were first given their mortal bodies and then their glorified bodies, neither of which they are identical with.


You're drawing a conclusion based on my incomplete understanding of the mechanics of the resurrection- as I mentioned, I don't know how it all works out.

Let's go another direction (since we're treading in the territory of "Who am I?")...

Is your arm you or just a part of you?

Let's see...an amputee may be missing an arm, but the amputee is still a person (I hope we'd agree).

How many body parts can a person lose until he or she ceases to be a person?  Let's assume then that a person is just a brain in a vat- connected to a complex machine that facilitates "life" and stimulates the sensory nerves in such a way that this brain can see, hear, and be conscious.  Is that brain a person?

Assuming we say yes, and later flip the switch so that the brain dies, gets thrown into the landfill and deteriorates completely (becoming nutrients for the soil, etc), is that entity still a person?  I think by this point most people would say no.

The question then, becomes, "what is the eternal aspect of personality and consciousness?"  If you believe a person is "somehow" a person even without a body, then the burden of proof is on you to prove this.  I'd also want you to show how the non-physical personality interacts with the physical entity (this was Descartes' crushing problem- to facilitate Cartesian dualism, he postulated that this interaction took place in the pineal gland in the brain- despite the inability to scientifically demonstrate this).

Descartes placed quite a lot of weight on the belief that people are essentially thinking subjects, regardless of the fact that when we're asleep we don't think or feel attached to our bodies in the same way as when we are awake. (What seems incredibly strange to me is that every time I wake up I find myself with the same body.) There has to be something other than consciousness that's responsible for the person's identity through time, which leads me to believe that a person is an entity that exists "outside" the body with some kind of special relation to it.

Obviously I don't know the answer to Descartes' problem, but it would seem that one possible way to avoid it would be to assume that entities cannot be divided to physical and non-physical entities, but that materiality and spirituality are aspects that different entities have in various amounts, so that there is a continuum from things that are mostly material to things that are mostly spiritual. This would also apply to interaction between different entities, for example a hand pushing a table would be a more physical interaction than a magnet pulling a magnet or a soul interacting with a brain. (If we consider ghosts this would mean that we can see them and physically interact with them through our bodies because of their physical properties, and that we can sense them directly because of their spiritual properties.)


I would disagree there- magnetism is a totally physical phenomenon just as a hand pushing a table would be.

I would also ask why you think there "has to be" something else giving us an identity.

Also, you never wake up with the same body, technically speaking.  Your skin sheds, your hair falls out, new hair grows, nails grow, you've aged, you've gained (or loss) fat, etc.  Your body is like that river you can never step into twice.  Wink

Edit: I said "skin shreds."  LOL


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 11:36
^ I think the quote pyramid is high enough now. Wink

I said there "has to be" something else besides consciousness giving us an identity because we are not conscious all the time, yet when we regain consciousness we feel we're still the same person. I guess memory could give us an identity, but I'm suspicious about this because I feel memory is something that we have, not something that we are. (A person who has lost his memory is still a person, and most people would even say that he's the same person he was before losing his memory.)

It's true that we never wake up with the same body, but in most cases the body we wake up with is fairly similar to the body we had the night before, so I think we can call it the same body. If someone switched more than half of it in a surgical operation, I would still call it the "same" body because it would be the body of the same person. (But if the brain was switched I'm not sure what would happen.)


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 11:41
Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

^ I think the quote pyramid is high enough now. Wink

I said there "has to be" something else besides consciousness giving us an identity because we are not conscious all the time, yet when we regain consciousness we feel we're still the same person. I guess memory could give us an identity, but I'm suspicious about this because I feel memory is something that we have, not something that we are. (A person who has lost his memory is still a person, and most people would even say that he's the same person he was before losing his memory.)

It's true that we never wake up with the same body, but in most cases the body we wake up with is fairly similar to the body we had the night before, so I think we can call it the same body. If someone switched more than half of it in a surgical operation, I would still call it the "same" body because it would be the body of the same person. (But if the brain was switched I'm not sure what would happen.)


It's like the Darth Vader question- how many body parts can be replaced by a machine before a person is just a robot?

Of course...I would go so far as to say that a human is nothing more than a high-end, ingeniously-engineered machine...

...and some more ingeniously-engineered than others. WinkLOL


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 11:43
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

^ I think the quote pyramid is high enough now. Wink

I said there "has to be" something else besides consciousness giving us an identity because we are not conscious all the time, yet when we regain consciousness we feel we're still the same person. I guess memory could give us an identity, but I'm suspicious about this because I feel memory is something that we have, not something that we are. (A person who has lost his memory is still a person, and most people would even say that he's the same person he was before losing his memory.)

It's true that we never wake up with the same body, but in most cases the body we wake up with is fairly similar to the body we had the night before, so I think we can call it the same body. If someone switched more than half of it in a surgical operation, I would still call it the "same" body because it would be the body of the same person. (But if the brain was switched I'm not sure what would happen.)


It's like the Darth Vader question- how many body parts can be replaced by a machine before a person is just a robot?

Of course...I would go so far as to say that a human is nothing more than a high-end, ingeniously-engineered machine...

...and some more ingeniously-engineered than others. WinkLOL

So do some machines know they exist?


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 11:47
Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

^ I think the quote pyramid is high enough now. Wink

I said there "has to be" something else besides consciousness giving us an identity because we are not conscious all the time, yet when we regain consciousness we feel we're still the same person. I guess memory could give us an identity, but I'm suspicious about this because I feel memory is something that we have, not something that we are. (A person who has lost his memory is still a person, and most people would even say that he's the same person he was before losing his memory.)

It's true that we never wake up with the same body, but in most cases the body we wake up with is fairly similar to the body we had the night before, so I think we can call it the same body. If someone switched more than half of it in a surgical operation, I would still call it the "same" body because it would be the body of the same person. (But if the brain was switched I'm not sure what would happen.)


It's like the Darth Vader question- how many body parts can be replaced by a machine before a person is just a robot?

Of course...I would go so far as to say that a human is nothing more than a high-end, ingeniously-engineered machine...

...and some more ingeniously-engineered than others. WinkLOL

So do some machines know they exist?


Tony R does.

LOL


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 11:47


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 11:50
Shocked


Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 11:54
Seriously, no- I don't believe we are at the level of sophistication to make a robot self-aware. 

Doesn't mean it can't happen (especially if its true that the brain is a complex, albeit biological computer anyway).


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: The T
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 12:12
I believe in the ghost of Patricy Swayze

-------------


Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 12:34
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:



For Lot to see these angels, the angels would have to have displaced / reflected light in order to be visible. 

That means, then, that if someone sees a ghost, the ghost must somehow physically exist.



I don't think this deduction is valid. If ghosts existed (which I don't believe at all) then that would imply the existence of things which our normal laws of physics don't apply to. Your idea of reflection of light is interesting, and yet another hint towards the non-existence of ghosts.Smile

BTW: They did have mushrooms and weeds back then ... Wink


-------------
https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike



Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 12:41
Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:



For Lot to see these angels, the angels would have to have displaced / reflected light in order to be visible. 

That means, then, that if someone sees a ghost, the ghost must somehow physically exist.



I don't think this deduction is valid. If ghosts existed (which I don't believe at all) then that would imply the existence of things which our normal laws of physics don't apply to. Your idea of reflection of light is interesting, and yet another hint towards the non-existence of ghosts.Smile

BTW: They did have mushrooms and weeds back then ... Wink


I thought I made it clear that I don't believe in ghosts.  Confused


-------------
https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 13:01
Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:

BTW: They did have mushrooms and weeds back then ... Wink
Unrelated to the discussion between Mike & Rob, but prompted by this line (and a comment in Reviews Discussions - I love the serendipity of unrelated connections) - the Salem Witch Hunts are thought to have been started by people tripping as a result Ergot poisoning from eating bread made with contaminated rye - the "bewitchment" blamed on the hapless victims of the trials. (ergot poisoning is also known as St Anthony's Fire - but I haven't managed to find out why yet). Some of the reported ghost sightings (and perhaps even Angels and other unexplained phenomena) could be the result of hallucinations from the inadvertent eating of psychotropic plants or fungi.


-------------
What?


Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 13:03

To be a big ninny, I will say that just because psychotropics are involved doesn't mean the involved aren't touching other dimensions. Many believe that these tools are required to open doors of perception.

Dude, we should start a band....


-------------
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 13:20
Personally I think it's chemically induced synesthesia, but if that opens doors then who needs a handle.

-------------
What?


Posted By: Nightfly
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 14:36
Perhaps we could have done with a sitting on the fence option in this poll as I couldn't vote yes or no to be honest. While I'm not totally convinced of the existence of ghosts I feel there's too many sightings and experiences by people for there to be nothing in it.


Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 14:48
Sometimes I half-heartedly wish there were ghosts, witches, or some sort of occult, but that's usually when I've watched too much Buffy the Vampire Slayer (just started going through all 7 seasons again recently Cool).
 
In the end, no.


-------------
http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!


Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 14:50
Originally posted by LinusW LinusW wrote:

I
Would love to be wrong though. This world lacks some of that old-fashioned "magic".
 
This. It's silly, I know. But I think this thought a lot.


-------------
http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!


Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 14:55
Also, this reminds me of the ending to Opeth's Still Life. The main character (does he have a name?) is right before being hanged sees the ghost of Melinda next to him, despite being an atheist. I think it's an interesting shift for the story. I'd actually like to know if that's a reflection of Mikael's beliefs at all.

-------------
http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!


Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 14:57
No I don't. But then again I am sane

-------------
"Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value."

Arnold Schoenberg


Posted By: Tarquin Underspoon
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 16:31
I believe in something like that. Ghosts, per se? Nah.

-------------
"WAAAAAAOOOOOUGH!    WAAAAAAAUUUUGGHHHH!!   WAAAAAOOOO!!!"

-The Great Gig in the Sky


Posted By: omri
Date Posted: September 30 2009 at 04:16
I think that modern physics is much more bizzare and odd than any silly ghosts stories. If you feel lack of magic than learn physics. It is all magic !
Apart from that, angels in the bible are people who bring messages. Only much later on (Isia something I guess) there is a descreption of angels as we used to think about them today and they are called in a different name (The one good thing about knowing hebrew is the ability to read the bible in it's original language). However, If you read that descreption closely you'll realise he was taking some hot staff !


-------------
omri


Posted By: Alberto Muņoz
Date Posted: September 30 2009 at 20:15
Originally posted by Jim Garten Jim Garten wrote:

I've had some experiences which push me to vote 'yes'
 
Me too


-------------






Posted By: Mind_Drive
Date Posted: October 01 2009 at 16:57
Originally posted by mrcozdude mrcozdude wrote:

No but I do believe in Psychic energy's which have the presence of a ghost


yes, me too.
also i am not afraid of death (ofc it would be very sad because im much too young to die) because i believe that my soul will perfectly exist without my body and sometime will live in onother body again.


-------------
It's just a ride... <3


Posted By: KoS
Date Posted: October 01 2009 at 19:49
No, I don't believe in ghosts or spirits or physic powers or any of that nonsense.

Now, ghost particles, that's a different story.



Posted By: mrgd
Date Posted: October 05 2009 at 02:12
Like Nightfly, this poll is too black and white . There's no room for grey areas - and I'm not being flippant.

I had some experiences in a house I owned back in the early 80s that I simply cannot explain . One of these events took place in the presence of others and two or three others involved just me. I didn't see a human form or white or grey area misty beings moving or anything in that traditional / fantasy sense that others may well claim to have seen. Each of these things occurred in daylight.

All I can say is that my personal experiences [ and I don't really want to go into them any further ] have left me , well , not a non-believer. I am open to the suggested existence of inexplicable forces because I have experienced such things . Paranormal ? Maybe . 'Ghosts ' in common parlance ? I cannot say.

I did some years later find out from a friend who was a relative of a former owner of the house that his wife had died in the house a number of years before I owned it and that he had experienced a strong desire to buy the house back to move into it. He never did . I moved on . The house has changed hands many times and it is still there. I have had no similar experiences since.

From my point of view, religiuos commitment or influences do not enter into it.

-------------
Looking still the same after all these years...
mrgd


Posted By: weetabix
Date Posted: October 07 2009 at 18:45
I have  never seen a ghost but where I work at 5:00 the dead come back to life ......... that count?


Posted By: jampa17
Date Posted: October 09 2009 at 12:54
Maybe I can help... in the Christian believes, The Old Testament proclaim about the physical resurrection and the preservation of the physical bodies in the judgement day... the conservation of the body is really clear on that believe... then... in the New Testament Jesus speaks very graphical that no dead man is aloud to leave heaven or hell to come to the "real world" so, if you're christian, you don't have to believe in ghost as a soul of death people...
 
In the other hand, if you're not Christian, you can say that those entities that can been seing or feel are more like energies of the brains or massive alucinations... there's a lot of studies bout that... what I really believe is that there are energies that get free when the brain dies, and that energies remains here, on the physical side, or the material side... and that's what we can believe is a ghost... just energy surrounding the places... but you know... maybe when I die I can show you... jajaja.. not.. not kiddin... jejeje...


-------------
Change the program inside... Stay in silence is a crime.


Posted By: jampa17
Date Posted: October 09 2009 at 13:00
By the way... I feel there's no room on this poll... cause you believe or not... and I feel must of us have an idea... or an exponation... so there must be a third option, you know... like a paralel exponation or something like that...
 
I'm totally Christian Catholic and believes the tradition have a lot of reasons about many things... and Do not believes in ghosts, but there's not deny about some rare fenomena that is not explain yet... I go for the brain potential energy that we still don't understand...


-------------
Change the program inside... Stay in silence is a crime.


Posted By: Silverbeard McStarr
Date Posted: October 09 2009 at 16:27
I'm an atheist and a sceptic so no.


Posted By: camilleanne
Date Posted: October 10 2009 at 09:38
No God no Ghost....LOL

-------------
The planet is fine the people are f**ked.
-George Carlin-


Posted By: el dingo
Date Posted: October 12 2009 at 02:50
Originally posted by Alberto Muņoz Alberto Muņoz wrote:

Originally posted by Jim Garten Jim Garten wrote:

I've had some experiences which push me to vote 'yes'
 
Me too
 
That makes three of us - but i can't vote because i don't understand how or why the things I've experienced happened.
 
In my previous house I had a book about UFOs on the bedroom bookshelf, wedged tight between other books. I came home from work one night and there it was on the floor. And that was just one of many such experiences in that house...


-------------
It's not that I can't find worth in anything, it's just that I can't find worth in enough.


Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: October 12 2009 at 03:21
Originally posted by el dingo el dingo wrote:

Originally posted by Alberto Muņoz Alberto Muņoz wrote:

Originally posted by Jim Garten Jim Garten wrote:

I've had some experiences which push me to vote 'yes'

 

Me too


 

That makes three of us - but i can't vote because i don't understand how or why the things I've experienced happened.

 

In my previous house I had a book about UFOs on the bedroom bookshelf, wedged tight between other books. I came home from work one night and there it was on the floor. And that was just one of many such experiences in that house...





Tell more!

-------------


Posted By: el dingo
Date Posted: October 12 2009 at 03:34
^
 
Okay - when i get back from work though.


-------------
It's not that I can't find worth in anything, it's just that I can't find worth in enough.


Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: October 12 2009 at 23:47

I don't believe in them per se, but admit that they might exist, though strictly as a scientific phenomena, not some magical inexplicable spiritual thing.

Emotional energy exists in some physical form. It may be possible that, especially in case of an extreme event such as murder or rape, or someone inhabiting the same place for decades, this energy does not dissipate and 'stains' a location. In certain conditions, especially when dark/quiet and the observer is undistracted, we become susceptible to this energy and it gives us thoughts and sensory impressions. These impressions are what we call ghosts. They are not visitations from beyond the grave, but emotional stains.


Posted By: KoS
Date Posted: October 12 2009 at 23:49
Originally posted by Textbook Textbook wrote:

I don't believe in them per se, but admit that they might exist, though strictly as a scientific phenomena, not some magical inexplicable spiritual thing.

Emotional energy exists in some physical form. It may be possible that, especially in case of an extreme event such as murder or rape, or someone inhabiting the same place for decades, this energy does not dissipate and 'stains' a location. In certain conditions, especially when dark/quiet and the observer is undistracted, we become susceptible to this energy and it gives us thoughts and sensory impressions. These impressions are what we call ghosts. They are not visitations from beyond the grave, but emotional stains.
LOL



Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 02:30
Originally posted by el dingo el dingo wrote:

Originally posted by Alberto Muņoz Alberto Muņoz wrote:

Originally posted by Jim Garten Jim Garten wrote:

I've had some experiences which push me to vote 'yes'

 

Me too


 

That makes three of us


The problem with elaborating on such experiences on an open forum is whilst you cannot generally explain them & are not saying they prove the existence of the supernatural, you just know any elaboration will invite derisive denial from some quarters

-------------

Jon Lord 1941 - 2012


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 02:41
Originally posted by Jim Garten Jim Garten wrote:

Originally posted by el dingo el dingo wrote:

Originally posted by Alberto Muņoz Alberto Muņoz wrote:

Originally posted by Jim Garten Jim Garten wrote:

I've had some experiences which push me to vote 'yes'

 

Me too


 

That makes three of us


The problem with elaborating on such experiences on an open forum is whilst you cannot generally explain them & are not saying they prove the existence of the supernatural, you just know any elaboration will invite derisive denial from some quarters
pppf! you're imagining something that hasn't happened yet Tongue


-------------
What?


Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 03:03
I've had some experiences which push me to believe this will happen

-------------

Jon Lord 1941 - 2012


Posted By: el dingo
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 04:09
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Jim Garten Jim Garten wrote:

Originally posted by el dingo el dingo wrote:

Originally posted by Alberto Muņoz Alberto Muņoz wrote:

Originally posted by Jim Garten Jim Garten wrote:

I've had some experiences which push me to vote 'yes'

 

Me too


 

That makes three of us


The problem with elaborating on such experiences on an open forum is whilst you cannot generally explain them & are not saying they prove the existence of the supernatural, you just know any elaboration will invite derisive denial from some quarters
pppf! you're imagining something that hasn't happened yet Tongue
 
I guess that's point proven JimTongue


-------------
It's not that I can't find worth in anything, it's just that I can't find worth in enough.


Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 05:05
I am moved to start a "Do You Believe In The Bay City Rollers" thread. Personally I cannot countenance that something so monstrous actually took place.


Posted By: el dingo
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 05:11

There's no place for Bay City Rollers denialists on PAShocked

Next you'll be saying you don't believe in the existence of the OsmondsShockedShocked


-------------
It's not that I can't find worth in anything, it's just that I can't find worth in enough.


Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 06:26
Could members please refrain from open criticism of two groups currently under consideration for inclusion by the Zeuhl team please?

-------------

Jon Lord 1941 - 2012


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 06:41
I believe the Bay City Rollers got some pretty cool tunes.


Posted By: el dingo
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 08:03
Originally posted by Jim Garten Jim Garten wrote:

Could members please refrain from open criticism of two groups currently under consideration for inclusion by the Zeuhl team please?
 
Oh shucks, I forgot about the awesome guitar break on "Crazy Horses"Embarrassed


-------------
It's not that I can't find worth in anything, it's just that I can't find worth in enough.


Posted By: el dingo
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 08:04
Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

I believe the Bay City Rollers got some pretty cool tunes.
 
Like as in Summerlove Sensation and Shang-a-Lang I suppose?


-------------
It's not that I can't find worth in anything, it's just that I can't find worth in enough.


Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 10:37
^ Don't know. I've only heard DedicationEmbarrassed


Posted By: el dingo
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 13:33
I've got Dedication... by Thin Lizzy

-------------
It's not that I can't find worth in anything, it's just that I can't find worth in enough.


Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 18:35

The Bay City Rollers are a myth perpetuated by members of this very forum, a fictitious bogeyman designed to explot people's fear of crappy, fad type music and thus to shock and guilt them into supporting prog and other "serious" music. The numerous photos of these Bay City Rollers show obvious signs of being forgeries- such clothes and hairstyles have patently never been in fashion. They are the creation of fearmongering prog enthusiasts. As for the recordings, funnily enough it seems no one will admit to owning one- why is that I wonder? Because they never existed. Numerous details such as a hugely popular and fresh pop group coming from the land of bagpipes simply do not add up.

 
(This is not off topic, BCR are a lot scarier than ghosts.)


Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 19:11
GHOSTS OF PERDITION LOL

-------------


Posted By: TheCaptain
Date Posted: October 13 2009 at 19:28
Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Vompatti Vompatti wrote:

^ I think the quote pyramid is high enough now. Wink

I said there "has to be" something else besides consciousness giving us an identity because we are not conscious all the time, yet when we regain consciousness we feel we're still the same person. I guess memory could give us an identity, but I'm suspicious about this because I feel memory is something that we have, not something that we are. (A person who has lost his memory is still a person, and most people would even say that he's the same person he was before losing his memory.)

It's true that we never wake up with the same body, but in most cases the body we wake up with is fairly similar to the body we had the night before, so I think we can call it the same body. If someone switched more than half of it in a surgical operation, I would still call it the "same" body because it would be the body of the same person. (But if the brain was switched I'm not sure what would happen.)


It's like the Darth Vader question- how many body parts can be replaced by a machine before a person is just a robot?

Of course...I would go so far as to say that a human is nothing more than a high-end, ingeniously-engineered machine...

...and some more ingeniously-engineered than others. WinkLOL

So do some machines know they exist?


I think this comic (highly researched, published in Nature, and widely accepted as fact amongst the scientific community) sums up everything perfectly.




Anyway, I don't think ghosts in the sense that I know them exist. I'm far too scientific for such hocus pocus although I do believe in the Christian God. Strange and seemingly contradictory but it works if you don't think about it for more than a second.


-------------
Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal.



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk