Flying chairs are great, aren't they?
Well, Rob, you're basically you're trying to disprove, or at the very least redefine, something millions of people have experienced throughout history. Now, I'm a big fan of the lens analogy. Your beliefs act as a lens. Your rather long post really only makes sense when viewed thru the Objective Lens.
Barring that, there are sub-lenses inside of that. Lenses like Belief in the Paranormal. Your argument is weak because of a common problem, assumptions. Here is where it falls apart for me:
Quote:
A ghost is hereby defined as an entity satisfying the following properties.
1. A ghost is observable* by more than one independent observer.?If there is only one observer, the phenomenon is, by definition, imaginary.
|
Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa.
Quote:
|
Even if it is "real" in another reality, if it can only affect one specific observer over any span of time, and cannot be measured (by physical apparatus), then it does not affect our reality other than that one specific observer.
|
Back that train up, Conductor. Previously we've been unable to measure the mass of an electron. Does that mean the electron didn't exist previously? You don't even need other realities when talking about this. Just because something cannot currently be measure does not negate it's existence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina  When you have direct personal experience that contradicts the notion of objective reality, it can be very unsettling at first, but then you come to realize that we live in a far more wondrous place than previously imagined, and that's when things begin to get interesting. |
And this leads me to the question, if you operate under a subjective reality, why would ghosts exist in the first place? Still trying to understand. Though I have to wonder exactly what personal experience Steve has in mind.