Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Firebird" data-source="post: 9723133" data-attributes="member: 7015803">Then we are in trouble, scientifically speaking <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Yes, that is the point I'm trying to make. To state it directly: there are conceptions of ghosts which are compatible with self-reported experiences which are not amenable to scientific investigation.Self reported supernatural experiences are widespread across pretty much all cultures, including (ime) from self proclaimed skeptics. These either have an external cause or an internal cause. I think we know what the internal cause explanation looks like; but what would it look like if there was an external cause?There is a complicated tangent about metaphysics here. Not to go too far down that road. But, a lot of philosopher believes they are external concepts. And, measuring brain activity associated with a feeling does not mean the mental activity is identical to the feeling.I think if you are the kind of person who says "love is just a chemical reaction" etc. you will not find supernatural phenomena in general plausible.</blockquote>