Existence vs Awareness

[Nyarlathotep]

What makes you say that? Because no one has been able to furnish proof to you? What exactly does that prove?

I say it because it is so. If you have evidence to the contrary, by all means show it. And it proves that there is no good reason to suppose that these tales of the supernatural are anything but stories.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

Iacchus, please, just because everyone says it is so does not mean it really is so. That's what it's called an argument from authority.

Technically its an argument from popularity. Argument from authority would be more along the lines of "A famous lawyer said that John Edwards is real and that's good enough for me".

 

[Nyarlathotep]

Really? Why should I have to rely on someone else's say so in order to understand what I'm talking about? Do you honestly believe that this is what it's all about? You don't seem to understand, I'm the one who's making the claim.

Yes, you are the one making the claim. Which means it is your job to prove it, not anyone elses to disprove it.

 

[Iacchus]

I say it because it is so. If you have evidence to the contrary, by all means show it. And it proves that there is no good reason to suppose that these tales of the supernatural are anything but stories.

And, if I claim that I see a ghost, does that necessarily guarantee that you'll see the same thing too? How does this make me wrong?

 

[Iacchus]

Technically its an argument from popularity. Argument from authority would be more along the lines of "A famous lawyer said that John Edwards is real and that's good enough for me".

And then there's the argument regarding a common or shared experience. This is the only thing I'm alluding to, and it has nothing to do with whether something is popular or not.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

And, if I claim that I see a ghost, does that necessarily guarantee that you'll see the same thing too? How does this make me wrong?

Who knows if you're wrong? But if I didn't see it, and haven't seen any other ghost, and have no evidence that ghosts even exist, why should I belive you did? Remember, if you claim you saw it and you want me to beleive it, then it is up to you to prove you did, not up to me to prove you didn't.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

And then there's the argument regarding a common or shared experience. This is the only thing I'm alluding to, and it has nothing to do with whether something is popular or not.

Your argument is "lots of people claim to have had supernatural experiences, thus they are real". That is a textbook example of the bandwagon type of Argumentum Ad Populum

"Bandwagon": the fallacy of attempting to prove a conclusion on the grounds that all or most people think or believe it is true.

Most, many, or all persons believe statement p is true.
Statement p is true.

 

[Taffer]

Technically its an argument from popularity. Argument from authority would be more along the lines of "A famous lawyer said that John Edwards is real and that's good enough for me".

Oh dear, you are correct.

I blame mornings.

 

[Taffer]

Really? Why should I have to rely on someone else's say so in order to understand what I'm talking about? Do you honestly believe that this is what it's all about? You don't seem to understand, I'm the one who's making the claim.

Oh, I do understand that, Iacchus. I understand perfectly that you are making a claim, and thus the burden of proof is on you to back up your claim. So far, you have been lacking.

 

[Taffer]

And, if I claim that I see a ghost, does that necessarily guarantee that you'll see the same thing too? How does this make me wrong?

It doesn't. Nothing can make you wrong. That's why you cannot prove a negative, Iacchus. It is up to you to show that your claim is true, no the other way around.

 

[Taffer]

And then there's the argument regarding a common or shared experience. This is the only thing I'm alluding to, and it has nothing to do with whether something is popular or not.

Of course it does. Your argument is basically:

"P1) Lots of people have had a supernatural experience.
P2) They can't all be wrong.
C) Therefore the supernatural exists."

This is an argument from popularity (not, as I said before, an argumet from authority. I don't know what I was thinking ). Perhaps you need an example to see why this is fallacious logic?

P1) Throughout human history, people knew that the world was flat.
P2) They can't all have been wrong.
C) Therefore the world is flat.

See?

 

[RandFan]

Oh my dear dog in heaven. It was hard to read this entire thread with all the blood shooting out of my eyes. Iacchus, what is your point?! I think it's safe to say that you clearly have no idea what you're talking about, so why don't you stop weaving posts filled with gibberish and back-talk and start addressing some actual topics brought up here. Heck, you might try *learning* something from some of these posts. I know I have, despite having to dodge and weave through your trolling.

Regardless, thanks to Mercutio, Nyar, and others who have pointed me towards some really interesting topics.

You assume much sir.

 

[LotusMegami]

I need Iacchus posts and I just don't understand.

I get scared when I see the dolphins, because it means my brain will hurt.

 

[Belz...]

Well, if I was a real wiz with statistics maybe I could you help you out. But, since I'm not, and the issue is not being addressed, we'll just have to leave it at that. The fact that the whole of history is rife with tales of the supernatural (across all cultural and geographical barriers) does constitute evidence by the way. So you can't just come waltzing in (after the fact) and claim that there is in fact none. All it takes is one person to get it right you see.

No, the fact that history is rife with tales of the supernatural is NOT evidence of anything supernatural. Rather, it's evidence that people are prone to fill the gaps of their knowledge with whatever suits their fancy.

But it's a common ploy by people like you. We ask you for evidence, and, since you have none, you point to anecdotes to support your position. Hunster said the same thing about christianity. It's an argument from popularity, and it's a fallacy. Again.

 

[Belz...]

Neither is this the type of experience I would wager on, since both are extreme examples. I'm thinking more in terms of mystical experiences, where people have encountered these things (and/or beings) from the other side.

What "other side". You speak as though those experiences were somehow compatible or similar. They're not. They vary greatly from culture to culture or person to person. How do you explain that ?

 

[Belz...]

And, if I claim that I see a ghost, does that necessarily guarantee that you'll see the same thing too? How does this make me wrong?

Iacchus, all of our knowledge about the universe depends on the consistency of observations. Science and logic only function properly if we agree on what the terms means, on what we experience and on what the data represents.

If your "mystical" experience is completely subjective and different from other people's mystical experiences, then it stands to reason that it is a figment of your imagination, and not part of objective reality.

 

[Mojo]

I get scared when I see the dolphins, because it means my brain will hurt.

That's sig material!

 

[Iacchus]

Up from the dephths of the subconscious ...

 

[Iacchus]

Of course it does. Your argument is basically:

"P1) Lots of people have had a supernatural experience.
P2) They can't all be wrong.
C) Therefore the supernatural exists."

This is an argument from popularity (not, as I said before, an argumet from authority. I don't know what I was thinking ). Perhaps you need an example to see why this is fallacious logic?

And, because I have had shared a similar experience and, am willing to attest to this, regardless of what anyone else has to say about it, you are mistaken. I'm not basing it upon what others have experienced, I'm basing it upon my own. Which isn't to say others can't share similar experiences, because they do.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

And, because I have had shared a similar experience and, am willing to attest to this, regardless of what anyone else has to say about it, you are mistaken. I'm not basing it upon what others have experienced, I'm basing it upon my own. Which isn't to say others can't share similar experiences, because they do.

But you are trying to get US to accept it by weight of the number of people you claim have had similar experiences. Again, classic "argument from popularity".