• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Are ghosts real?

FreedomFromAll said:
I applaud you! That is a brilliant way to deflect. Set me off on a errand for you that'll keep me busy. And if I refuse to take it on, you get lord over me and point fingers. ANd you will have the illusion that you saved face.

It doesn't seem to be a deflection to me. I said that cognitive science is a field whose members try to figure out calculationist models of the human mind. If that's wrong, then there should be people who describe themselves as cognitive scientists who are either not calculationists, or who don't try to model the human mind, or both.

FreedomFromAll said:
Its a field of science. It doesnt all have to do with mapping the brain.

I thought I was the one saying it's a field of science...but I never said it all has to do with mapping the brain. Quite the contrary, most cognitive scientists don't map the brain. That's for neuroanatomists. Cognitive scientists try to come up with theories about which kinds of circuits have to exist in order for the human mind to do the things it can do. It's then left to neuroscientists to find those circuits (or, more often, not).

FreedomFromAll said:
Can you provide the evidence of that claim? Or are you just sharing a opinion?

I already have. Turing proved that any computer is equivalent to some Turing machine. If the brain is a computer, it's equivalent to some Turing machine.

I don't understand how it could possibly be made any easier to grasp.

FreedomFromAll said:
Perhaps its because its what Turing wanted?

I don't know what that means in response to my post. The point is that brains are (probably) not arbitrary computers. You wouldn't need a UTM to simulate a brain, just some Turing Machine.
 
It doesn't seem to be a deflection to me. I said that cognitive science is a field whose members try to figure out calculationist models of the human mind. If that's wrong, then there should be people who describe themselves as cognitive scientists who are either not calculationists, or who don't try to model the human mind, or both.



I thought I was the one saying it's a field of science...but I never said it all has to do with mapping the brain. Quite the contrary, most cognitive scientists don't map the brain. That's for neuroanatomists. Cognitive scientists try to come up with theories about which kinds of circuits have to exist in order for the human mind to do the things it can do. It's then left to neuroscientists to find those circuits (or, more often, not).
Its good of you to follow my lead. Next show after the break.



I already have. Turing proved that any computer is equivalent to some Turing machine. If the brain is a computer, it's equivalent to some Turing machine.

I don't understand how it could possibly be made any easier to grasp.
You proved it with a "If" lol you have a strange definition of proven. You would think with all that education that you would have a better grasp of how these things work.


I don't know what that means in response to my post. The point is that brains are (probably) not arbitrary computers. You wouldn't need a UTM to simulate a brain, just some Turing Machine.
Come on dont you even remember what you type? "Well, no one has ever built a Turing machine as Turing himself proposed (as far as I know)" Turing proposed a Universal Turing Machine. But you are right that is neither here or there and has zero to do with ghosts. SO does any of this have anything to do with ghosts or are you just trying to sound smart?
 
Lots of non-material things exist. Electricity, dark matter love, gravity, potential, heat so on so forth.

Electricity,potential and heat are based in physics.

Love has been shown to originate in the brain. The brain is made of mass.

Gravity depends on mass.

Dark matter is a kind of matter hypothesized in astronomy and cosmology to account for gravitational effects that appear to be the result of invisible mass.


Making none of your examples non material.
 
Lots of non-material things exist. Electricity, dark matter love, gravity, potential, heat so on so forth.

Actually, all of those things are material. Just because you can't see them doesn't mean they aren't just another form of matter.
 
Electricity,potential and heat are based in physics.

Love has been shown to originate in the brain. The brain is made of mass.
Physics may explain things but they aren't material.

The brain may be mass, but that isn't really relevant.

Gravity depends on mass.
But not material.

Dark matter is a kind of matter hypothesized in astronomy and cosmology to account for gravitational effects that appear to be the result of invisible mass.
it's really a shot in the dark, a guess.
See what Michio Kaku (a famous physicist) says about it.

Michio Kaku: What Is Dark Matter?: http://youtu.be/e4nnpg4N35o


Making none of your examples non material.
They are all non material. You made squat.
 
Last edited:
FreedomFromAll said:
Its good of you to follow my lead. Next show after the break.

Your posts are chock full of snippy sarcastic comments lacking any real content. I usually don't point this out (since it should be obvious), but all you're doing is signalling that your arsenal has run dry.

FreedomFromAll said:
You proved it with a "If" lol you have a strange definition of proven. You would think with all that education that you would have a better grasp of how these things work.

Conditional statements appear in proofs all the time. All of the standard logical operators can be put in terms of conditionals and negation.

FreedomFromAll said:
Come on dont you even remember what you type? "Well, no one has ever built a Turing machine as Turing himself proposed (as far as I know)" Turing proposed a Universal Turing Machine.

Turing proposed Turing Machines, and then showed that with a few more uncontroversial assumptions, a Turing Machine can be a UTM.

FreedomFromAll said:
But you are right that is neither here or there and has zero to do with ghosts.

I don't know why you say that I'm right, since that's not what I said.

FreedomFromAll said:
SO does any of this have anything to do with ghosts or are you just trying to sound smart?

How many times do I have to draw the connection? It's super-easy to grasp. The usual objection to the existence of ghosts is that materialism wouldn't allow them to exist. Materialism (it is supposed by those who argue this way) is true, so ghosts (being non-material) cannot exist.

But: materialism is probably not true. So those grounds for objecting to the existence of ghosts are bad ones.
 
The usual objection to the existence of ghosts is that materialism wouldn't allow them to exist. Materialism (it is supposed by those who argue this way) is true, so ghosts (being non-material) cannot exist.

But: materialism is probably not true. So those grounds for objecting to the existence of ghosts are bad ones.

Great your argument is against materialism. But that wasnt my argument. Anymore strawman that you want to construct?
 
Physics may explain things but they aren't material.

The brain may be mass, but that isn't really relevant.

But not material.

it's really a shot in the dark, a guess.
See what Michio Kaku (a famous physicist) says about it.

Michio Kaku: What Is Dark Matter?: Michio Kaku: What Is Dark Matter? - YouTube


They are all non material. You made squat.
Physics can explain those things because they are physics in a a physical universe. But alas you are stuck on the simplistic concept that if something isnt equal to a rock then it is non-material in your opinion. Apparently you know nothing about physics I am not even sure how far back I would have to go to teach you where you are going wrong.

Lets look at light. What are the properties of light? Is it a Solid, liquid, gas, plasma, or Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC).

Light is part of the electromagnetic spectrum, it ranges from radio waves to gamma rays. Electromagnetic radiation are a stream of photons that are massless particles each travelling with wavelike properties at the speed of light. A photon is an elementary particle, the quantum of light, its the substance of electromagnetic radiation.
Photons have Physical properties making them material. This can be expanded on by discussing special relativity.

But no something isnt non-material just because you cannot see it or whatever. When something is described by physics it belongs to the physical universe because that is the point of physics. All the things that you mentioned (including dark matter) belong to physics hence why I asserted that they were all physical.

Pop-physicist Michio Kaku said 'here are some ideas but I dont really know what dark matter is except that its an excuse for gravitational forces'. None one though thinks that dark matter is a non-material thing.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Great your argument is against materialism. But that wasnt my argument. Anymore strawman that you want to construct?

Are you not a materialist?
 
Are you not a materialist?

I'm a realist. When you can demonstrate that there is anything outside of the material realm, when you can provide objective evidence to prove that you're correct, then I'll reconsider your claims, but not until.
 
Cephus said:
I'm a realist. When you can demonstrate that there is anything outside of the material realm, when you can provide objective evidence to prove that you're correct, then I'll reconsider your claims, but not until.

Well, wait a minute. What do you mean by "objective"? And what counts as evidence?
 
Well, wait a minute. What do you mean by "objective"? And what counts as evidence?

Anything that can be freely studied by anyone without having to have a belief in it first. Look up words that you don't understand.
 
Mass energy equivalence? How is that relevant?

You know, that formula you learn in high school showing that mass and energy are the same thing? :roll:
 
Are you not a materialist?

Jump forward a century to Non-Reductive Physicalism. Though I am not really a physicalist either but more of a realist. As a realist though physicalism seems to work very well in reality.

But still souls and ghosts are not real and I also seel no reason to be agnostic about it.
 
I have been working at a cemetery at night alone and where I don't see ghosts myself I don't necessarily believe that they are entirely made up.

The place where I stay on the cemetery is a shed that houses digging equipment landscaping and earth movement equipment. Inside there is an office, and a break room/lounge. There are also stacks of head since plaques in this room. I was the only person who would work there because everybody else reported strange noises and odd occurrences.

One night I was ****ting in the break room and I heard a loud thump. I got a little nervous and went to investigate. Just outside the break room there is a back hoe. I used to work on these machines years ago and I was familiar with them. I heard the thump again and realized it was the boom in the back hoe settling. Panic relieved I returned to the lounge. And I heard what sounded like a creaking door. Still reeling from the thumping noise I leapt up and looked at the door. It hadn't moved. Sitting five feet away from me was this old refrigerator, really old refrigerator. And I heard the creaking start again and it turned out to be the refrigerator.

Now I wonder did people see ghosts because they heard these sounds and couldn't explain them? Or where they just genuinely creeped out by being in a cemetery alone at night?

What do you think? Share your paranormal experience or even your skepticism.

I've never had a paranormal experience and don't believe in ghosts, but like most people, I've always had that small desire to see a ghost or something and be convinced otherwise.

As for the people in the cemetery, even if I believed in ghosts, I wouldn't say they experienced anything paranormal. Why would ghosts hang out in a cemetery? Unless they actually died there, seems like they'd probably hang out somewhere else. But I guess I'm speculating on something I don't even believe in, so ionno.
 
So then non-material things do not exist? If it occupies zero space then how was it that you know that it exists?

You have been given several examples of non material.. what was your word? Actualities?

Does the number 5 exist? If so, where is it?
 
You know, that formula you learn in high school showing that mass and energy are the same thing? :roll:
Wow, that formula doesn't say anything of the sort. Mass energy equivalence doesn't state that mass is energy.

If it does, how much does a cubic foot of heat weigh?
 
You have been given several examples of non material.. what was your word? Actualities?

Does the number 5 exist? If so, where is it?

While in reality 5 things can exist the number 5 is a mental construct which exists in the human brains mind, which is made of matter.
 
I've never had a paranormal experience and don't believe in ghosts, but like most people, I've always had that small desire to see a ghost or something and be convinced otherwise.

As for the people in the cemetery, even if I believed in ghosts, I wouldn't say they experienced anything paranormal. Why would ghosts hang out in a cemetery? Unless they actually died there, seems like they'd probably hang out somewhere else. But I guess I'm speculating on something I don't even believe in, so ionno.

yeah, I thought it was kind of funny. I had read all the reports from the cemetery, explained every one of them. But then again I don't see them, I don't experience paranormal things and though I had a cautious outlook upon starting out here, I quickly realized that people were to quick to blame paranormal sources for noises that were unfamiliar. Likely due to the pop culture phenomenon.

Old appliances and earth moving equipment makes some unusual noises. One particular sound was a thump from the back ho. I insisted that it was the back ho to one of my co workers. We stood next to it when the noise occurred. He wasn't convinced. So I wonder if it's just people's imagination getting away from them. Meanwhile I am really curious, I am seeing beavers, snakes, opossums, skunks owls and all sorts of really cool stuff.
 
Back
Top Bottom