My Ghost Story

[JayUtah]

Jodie cooks her woo stew with no heed to complaints about its sickly taint. She knows exactly how it goes down here, and enjoys stinking the place up.

Be that as it may, the pattern of argumentation differs little from UFO claimants, homeopathic cure claimants, faith healing claimants -- and in that vein, religion claimants in general. There is always the pretense of taking a reasonable position: "I just want to find out what it was," or "If it turns out to be ordinary, I'd accept that." But the claimant then systematically rejects everything having to do with reason. And before long the claimant starts to get really personally attached to his own beliefs and interpretations of the event, often applying various ad hoc revision techniques to make sure the details remain untestable by science, or mysterious enough to maintain the illusion of an unsurpassable inductive leap.

 

[dlorde]

...I think before ghost hunters and paranormal investigators can start talking about other dimensions they should learn more about this one because it's amazing to me.

Thanks for letting me rant.

You hit the nail squarely on the head!

Thanks for ranting.

 

[Jodie]

'Cause we're big mean skeptics and close our minds to the wonders of the world around us.

But yeah I'd like Jodie to explain how she acquired these special mental powers to see ghosts and cougars and remember past lives that the rest of us mere mortals don't possess.

I've never seen an apparition. But I got locked in the bathroom at an old plantation by something. The only other thing was getting pinched by another something at Sloss Furnace in Birmingham, Al.

I'm not certain how my grandmother's partial got wedged into a ceiling light fixture. I can't see how a 92 year old woman that could barely walk would manage to climb up on a chair to do that but old people can surprise you sometimes, so that one is a "maybe".

I saw my mother in a dream who gave me a warning about what would happen to my siblings in the future.

I have two past life memories, one of being Socrate's student and of watching Abraham Lincoln give a speech.

That's the extent of my experiences. The only explanation I have is that I have a leaky id. I consider it to be a type of birth defect because our role here is to experience this life under our dimensional rules. I don't see a place for all of this other business, it certainly hasn't benefited me in any way.

The cougar sighting wasn't something I considered being paranormal.

But I did see an albino weasel crossing the road in my headlights coming home late at night in Mississippi. That was just weird, not ghostly.

 

[JayUtah]

That's the extent of my experiences.

That's half a dozen more than a healthy person.

The only explanation I have is that I have a leaky id.

Again, probably the only explanation you will accept. My explanation is that you seek attention.

...it certainly hasn't benefited me in any way.

Other than the attention, of course.

 

[Jodie]

So please explain how Tegmark's mathematical model of consciousness based on the mathematics of quantum mechanics and information theory, has anything to do with concepts of a soul?

It depends on whether you consider consciousness to be the soul. In my belief, I think that we use the brain as a lens to focus our self awareness, or soul, or " I am alive" feeling to experience this 4th dimensional reality. From what I understand Tegmark was trying to describe this sense of self awareness using quantum theory. Except his made up word for this self awareness/soul/ muchy muchness is perceptronium. I'm not clear on why he chose that term, it sounds like a Transformer's name, like Optimus Prime, and no one will take that seriously.

 

[Jodie]

That's half a dozen more than a healthy person.

I think I'm in the majority rather than the minority when you consider the general population. How do you define healthy? Have you visited the Community Section here lately?

Again, probably the only explanation you will accept. My explanation is that you seek attention.

If I wasn't posting something diametrically opposed to the concept of the forum then what on earth would you have to talk about? I view it as entertaining, and believe or not, some of you have actually managed to change my mind on a lot of things I once believed before. This topic on the afterlife unfortunately won't be one of them.

Other than the attention, of course.

I get the feeling that's the fall back excuse when you've run out of anything else to say.

 

[Jodie]

Your own (mostly unconscious) insight, fallible memory/unintentional confabulation and sheer coincidence are all much more plausible explanations than an entity capable of seeing the future communicating with you through your dreams.

What if you're wrong about how my brain is working in these situations, would that mean you might have to give what I said some serious consideration?

 

[JayUtah]

If I wasn't posting something diametrically opposed to the concept of the forum then what on earth would you have to talk about?

So attention, then. Got it. That's the only reason I can imagine why someone would spend so much time among such harsh critics. But don't worry, without you there would still be a plethora of UFO abductees, faith healers, rosary-fingerers, climate-change deniers, conspiracy theorists, and other ghost hunters.

I get the feeling that's the fall back excuse when you've run out of anything else to say.

The sum total I've had to say about your claims, previous and present, is that your feelings don't matter to anyone but you. You've made a valiant attempt to suggest that your warm-fuzzies have (or ought to have) some sort of vindication in science. You've simultaneously made a valiant attempt vilify science because it can't disprove those same warm-fuzzy anecdotes. All those have been answered by me and others.

We get it. You're a big fan of metaphysics. Once you stop making outrageous personal claims to get attention, you might get someone to discuss it with you.

 

[JayUtah]

What if you're wrong about how my brain is working in these situations, would that mean you might have to give what I said some serious consideration?

Serious consideration would require proof from you. Can you supply any? What if your brain is working normally, as others have suggested, and the things you've experienced are just part of normal human experience? What if, aside from the embellishments you can't seem to keep straight, your experiences are rather ordinary? Would that mean you aren't special anymore?

 

[Jodie]

Be that as it may, the pattern of argumentation differs little from UFO claimants, homeopathic cure claimants, faith healing claimants -- and in that vein, religion claimants in general. There is always the pretense of taking a reasonable position: "I just want to find out what it was," or "If it turns out to be ordinary, I'd accept that." But the claimant then systematically rejects everything having to do with reason. And before long the claimant starts to get really personally attached to his own beliefs and interpretations of the event, often applying various ad hoc revision techniques to make sure the details remain untestable by science, or mysterious enough to maintain the illusion of an unsurpassable inductive leap.

I think what I experienced was ordinary, just not for 4th dimensional space here on Earth. The details remain untestable because they are untestable, or at least until physics catches up with a way to intuit what other dimensional space is like based on what is testable. Isn't that one of the reasons they built CERN?

 

[JayUtah]

I think what I experienced was ordinary, just not for 4th dimensional space here on Earth.

Asked and answered. Your speculative musings upon others' speculative musings do not constitute any sort of reality.

The details remain untestable because they are untestable, or at least until physics catches up...

No, the details are untestable because random personal anecdotes are always untestable, which is why they are so popular with a wide range of fringe claimants looking to find some straw-man reason to decry science. Science is not hopelessly hobbled just because it knows the difference between fact and imagination.

 

[Jodie]

Serious consideration would require proof from you. Can you supply any? What if your brain is working normally, as others have suggested, and the things you've experienced are just part of normal human experience? What if, aside from the embellishments you can't seem to keep straight, your experiences are rather ordinary? Would that mean you aren't special anymore?

The best I can do is provide circumstantial evidence regarding multi dimensional space. Then I borrowed from neuro research regarding consciousness in developing AI. All I've done is try to synthesize the two into a cohesive hypothesis, one that can't be tested at the moment, but that might change at some point in the future. Then I applied that to some specific experiences I've had.

Am I special? I doubt it, some of you have had similar experiences but you chose to toss it off as something else. I happen to think our consciousness resides in other dimensions besides just here, that we are multidimensional beings, but our focus is on this "now", so to speak. That would apply to you, me, everyone across the board equally.

 

[Jodie]

Asked and answered. Your speculative musings upon others' speculative musings do not constitute any sort of reality.

It doesn't make it wrong, at least not that we know of yet. It only seems irrational if you think your flesh and blood body is the entire "you".

No, the details are untestable because random personal anecdotes are always untestable, which is why they are so popular with a wide range of fringe claimants looking to find some straw-man reason to decry science. Science is not hopelessly hobbled just because it knows the difference between fact and imagination.

Without imagination where would science be? I don't decry science, I embrace it because it's the only road we can use to understand our reality.

 

[JayUtah]

The best I can do is provide circumstantial evidence regarding multi dimensional space.

No, you provide anecdotes that you support with vague, handwaving references to "multi-dimensional space" that necessitate you having to warp the original intent of their authors. Every genre of fringe claimants has their special brand of pseudo-science. UFO enthusiasts appeal to Townsend, etc.

Then I borrowed from neuro research regarding consciousness in developing AI. All I've done is try to synthesize the two into a cohesive hypothesis...

No, you've tried to provide a pseudo-scientific backfill to the personal anecdotes the form the core of your public performance.

Am I special? I doubt it...

I do too. But I don't doubt that you think you're special. Just like every other fringe claimant who relies on personal anecdotes propped up against a backdrop of pseudo-scientific handwaving.

ome of you have had similar experiences but you chose to toss it off as something else.

"Toss off." Yeah, people interpret differently the same ordinary experiences you've had and that merits your scorn. Please, by all means continue trying to argue that you don't think you're special.

When my father passed away I had several dreams of him. Just dreams. No need to appeal to other dimensions or ghosts. So yeah, go ahead and tell everyone else how I'm a guy chained in a cave.

That would apply to you, me, everyone across the board equally.

What would apply equally to every person on this board is objective evidence. But you don't have any of that, do you?

 

[JayUtah]

It only seems irrational if you think your flesh and blood body is the entire "you".

I define as "me" what can be proven to be "me." I wisely refuse to bank on what I imagine might else be "me." You seem to be confused as to what constitutes "rational."

Without imagination where would science be?

The same place it would be without empiricism. Imagination provides the hypothesis; empiricism provides the proof. You always forget that second part.

 

[Jodie]

So attention, then. Got it. That's the only reason I can imagine why someone would spend so much time among such harsh critics. But don't worry, without you there would still be a plethora of UFO abductees, faith healers, rosary-fingerers, climate-change deniers, conspiracy theorists, and other ghost hunters.



The sum total I've had to say about your claims, previous and present, is that your feelings don't matter to anyone but you. You've made a valiant attempt to suggest that your warm-fuzzies have (or ought to have) some sort of vindication in science. You've simultaneously made a valiant attempt vilify science because it can't disprove those same warm-fuzzy anecdotes. All those have been answered by me and others.

We get it. You're a big fan of metaphysics. Once you stop making outrageous personal claims to get attention, you might get someone to discuss it with you.

Well, rather than be offended by how I interpret my own personal experiences, I think you just don't want to consider that your own consciousness might survive your physical existence here, for whatever reason. Insulting me won't make the thoughts I suggested go away.

 

[Jodie]

I define as "me" what can be proven to be "me." I wisely refuse to bank on what I imagine might else be "me." You seem to be confused as to what constitutes "rational."

For right here and right now, it serves you just fine.

The same place it would be without empiricism. Imagination provides the hypothesis; empiricism provides the proof. You always forget that second part.

Imagination provides the hypothesis, but it is based on empirical data , as I tried to demonstrate. Are you telling me that every suggested hypothesis discussed here requires proof? Is there no educational benefit in pondering the "what ifs" ?

 

[JayUtah]

Well, rather than be offended by how I interpret my own personal experiences...

Interpreting them in public, loudly and repeatedly. Do you really think your motives are so transparent? As to the offense component, you're posting ghost stories in a forum clearly devoted to skepticism. You know exactly what response to expect. Complaining about it just makes us laugh.

 

[JayUtah]

For right here and right now, it serves you just fine.

Indeed. When the evidence changes, so likely will my view. Until then, no.

Imagination provides the hypothesis, but it is based on empirical data , as I tried to demonstrate.

Well, no, you demonstrated that you don't know what the hypothetico-deductive method is. First, if you're going to lambast science, learn what science is. Second, if you think that science supports your random nonsensical crap, learn what science is.

Are you telling me that every suggested hypothesis discussed here requires proof?

Yes. If you want it to be seen as rational.

Is there no educational benefit in pondering the "what ifs" ?

Pondering is not proof. When you lambast science for being unable to explain your embellished fantasies, you transcend pondering. Evidence, or GTFO.

 

[Jodie]

No, you provide anecdotes that you support with vague, handwaving references to "multi-dimensional space" that necessitate you having to warp the original intent of their authors. Every genre of fringe claimants has their special brand of pseudo-science. UFO enthusiasts appeal to Townsend, etc.

I have no idea who Townsend is, so what is the original intent of the research that I cited to back up my supposition if I'm incorrect?

No, you've tried to provide a pseudo-scientific backfill to the personal anecdotes the form the core of your public performance.

It looked like science to me, the only backfill I provided would be how our consciousness interacts or exists within a multidimensional world. If we exist here in 4th dimensional space then why would we not co-exist simultaneously in other dimensional space? I'm not talking about just people, wouldn't that apply to everything including inanimate objects?

I do too. But I don't doubt that you think you're special. Just like every other fringe claimant who relies on personal anecdotes propped up against a backdrop of pseudo-scientific handwaving.

Nothing I stated is pseudoscience other than the idea that we might co-exist in other dimensional space.

"Toss off." Yeah, people interpret differently the same ordinary experiences you've had and that merits your scorn. Please, by all means continue trying to argue that you don't think you're special.

There is no scorn, it's no different than saying "dismiss" or "attribute", it sounds like you simply didn't like my choice of verb. I thought I was arguing for the existence of multidimensional consciousness and how that might apply to some of my personal experiences, do you think that makes me special ? If so, you need to start a new thread in Community.

When my father passed away I had several dreams of him. Just dreams. No need to appeal to other dimensions or ghosts. So yeah, go ahead and tell everyone else how I'm a guy chained in a cave.

I'm sure those dreams gave you great comfort. I don't know what happened in your dreams to have an opinion. The only thing that separated my dream from the ordinary was the content that did eventually happen several years after the fact. As I said, it was pointless, but I gave Mom an "A" for effort.

What would apply equally to every person on this board is objective evidence. But you don't have any of that, do you?

Of course not, but I haven't seen anything but derision from you so if you are trying to educate me, you fail. What I do see is someone getting very bent out of shape at the thought that the world might not conform to his preconceived notions. I would say that you've embraced your own chains similar to those of an animal that has lived in captivity for all of it's life who doesn't know how to act when the door to his cage is left open.