Veil of Fire

RD: Most of the extrapolation applies to individuals rather than ideas. If I decide one person is lying about being able to faith-heal people, I will only apply that conclusion to further claims by that individual, not further claims of faith-healing.

If that guy later said he could double my stock market investments in a week, I would probably reject that claim based on past dishonesty. But if someone else told me they could faith-heal, I would not reject it based on the original person's failure. Only have to find one white crow to prove that white crows exist, after all, but a crow we've already proven is black doesn't necessarily need to be shown as black over and over again.

phlebas

I would agree with you if I thought that was what was really going on here.

Most of the people who are giving you the answers which upset you so much are not speaking from ignorance or gut feelings, I would wager. They understand all that stuff and probably thought initially that you did too.

What I am seeing in these posts is not so much "I have no information on this, but I am sure this is totally ludicrous." It's more "oh, shit, this again -- is there anything so outlandish that people won't believe it?"

In short, until some evidence shows up, to simply claim out of hand that you can communication psychically is to justifiably open yourself up to ridicule. To claim that you can communicate with your Bassett hound that way just opens that door wider.

What you're seeing as ignorant ridicule is more likely resignation and fatigue. You may have not followed these leads before, but many of us have, and we have mostly hung out our BASELESS CLAIMS NEED NOT APPLY sign.

Jayhawker Soule

Thank you, again. You and I clearly (and strongly) disagree -- which is, of course, fine. Perhaps we'll find ourselves discussing this further in the parallel thread. Take care.

Viti

Veil of Fire, I have re-read all the threads and am still in shock as to how far it has gone when apparently we simply have differences in personalities. I appreciate a healthy sense of the ridiculous in people as it is most often a basis for laughter, which is my favorite thing in the world. You seem to appreciate the willingness to accept anything stated or claimed at face value.

I reserve the right to scoff and laugh at anyone in any setting who gives any credence to Sonya the TV Pet Psychic, or believes the "Vampire Baby" headlines on tabloids, or explains his/her fear of fire is due to being burned at the stake in a past life, or shows me pictures of cigarette smoke and tells me they are ghosts.

If you prefer to seriously investigate these claims, then by all means go for it, but do not demand that everyone share your compulsion to ask "why".

Bree

YAY!

Thanks for placing this right on reserve, LadyShea. It's one that I take advantage of on a daily basis (especially when standing in line at the grocery) and one I simply could not live without. Having the wherewithall to laugh at the ridiculous is healthy and normal - it brings levity to life and keeps you on your toes!

VeilOfFire - I totally understand why you're upset. When I was "Wiccan" I was the same way - when someone challanged the supernatural (and therefore challanged my beliefs) I got mighty mad too. I think you took LadyShea and others too personally - she wasn't specifically mentioning you! We can not agree on some things and still get along! Doesn't mean we have to resort to petty middle-school bitch fests and ad hominem attacks!

Mad Kally

Put your hand on your monitor, I'm going to heal your brain.

MrDarwin

Kally, I'm asking you as an intellectually dishonest diptard, please be nice.

Oolon Colluphid

But my point is that everyone has prior background. Some more than other, some more relevant than others, but we've all got some background against which to judge.

Take creationism. To many people, the claims of creationists are plausible, because they lack the background. To a working palaeontologist, geologist, geneticist or ecologist, they genuinely are ludicrous, laughable, ridiculous. Stupid. Though potentially plausible, they can be dismissed out of hand as far far too improbable; conflicting with too much background.

Conversely, my four-year-old daughter will believe just about anything I tell her, because she's still developing her background.

Are you so lacking in background that you can't simply say "that's bollocks" to anything?

Take one claim. I am in fact Superman, I can use my heat vision to melt plastic and can fly at supersonic speeds unaided (and with it barely ruffling my hair). My bones are made of titanium alloy.

If you truly cannot bring yourself to just say that's ridiculous crap, then your mind is really open, and your brain has indeed fallen out.

Oolon

[ July 18, 2002: Message edited by: Oolon Colluphid ]</p>

Mad Kally

Maybe I am a faith healer. But ok, I'll behave.

Corwin

There's uberskepticism for you.

There's a group within the skeptic's community that insists that because we can't know anything with 100% certainty... that we can't actually know anything. This of course creates a hook for con artists and creationists to attack scientific theory, when in reality scientists accept the legal concept of 'reasonable doubt.' To put it a little more simply.... 99.9999999997% is FREAKIN CLOSE ENOUGH!