Comment on Can a reasonable person genuinely believe in ghosts?
SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 8 hours agoWith all due respect, you’ve latched onto 1. my introductory literary device for framing the argument, and 2. where I dismiss the book based on my argument, but missed my argument, which I would succinctly state as: By definition, we don’t know anything about the supernatural, but we know the natural world extremely well, and we can explain the way that it behaves fully and completely without supernatural influence. Not only do we lack evidence of the supernatural, the evidence that we do have rules it out.
ageedizzle@piefed.ca 7 hours ago
How can you dismiss a book you’ve never read? You have to admit thats a bit shoddy. Even you’re sure that the book is a crock of shit you won’t know why its a crock of shit (and which rebuttals to apply) until after you’ve finished reading at least part of it.
Regarding the other stuff: I don’t have the time to get into the weeds on the matter with everyone here so I’m considering this comment here to be my official statement.
Linktank@lemmy.today 2 hours ago
You seem like an extremely gullible person.
ageedizzle@piefed.ca 1 hour ago
you seem like an extremely close-minded person
Linktank@lemmy.today 1 hour ago
To fantasy creatures? Yes, I am close minded towards things that cannot be proven or disproven because they don’t exist in the first place.
What a ridiculous hill you’ve chosen.
You are an unserious person.
SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 4 hours ago
If a book claims something that’s fundamentally impossible by the laws of physics, I don’t need to read it to dismiss it.
ageedizzle@piefed.ca 1 hour ago
This is literally the same justification the church gave to Galileo when they refused to look through his telescope. His discoveries violated what they thought to be the laws of physics at the time, so they knew he was wrong and therefore was no need to even look fo themselves.