A friend and I are arguing over ghosts.
I think it’s akin to astrology, homeopathy and palm reading. He says there’s “convincing “ evidence for its existence. He also took up company time to make a meme to illustrate our relative positions. (See image)
(To be fair, I’m also on the clock right now)
What do you think?
Can you disprove all mediums? What if someone has an experience with them that they can’t explain but felt powerful and they made a personal choice to believe that they did talk to a dead relative.
why would anyone spend time to disprove mediums (if not for the fun of it)? like anything in science I have to prove MY hypothesis. so if a medium wants to claim what they are doing is actually ghosts, the burden of prove is on them.
i would claim, that a reasonable person would attribute the medium (not a ghost summoned by the medium), if they are seeing things, hearing things, whatever a medium does… while they are in the room with that medium person. again, the medium needs to prove anything happening is not just them messing around. i guess they could put some LSD into my coffee before leaving and make me see things alone. but i am pretty sure the LSD would be detectable and the person responsible for drugging me arrested.
a medium and other trickery cannot be used as explanation for those people who experienced the third man factor. while it is totally OK for you or anybody to say “{…}, and that’s where I would stop, I can’t explain it, I don’t know what this is.”. the scientific approach would be to form a hypothesis, and start doing experiments to either prove or disprove the hypothesis. the problem is, that i cannot think of an ethical way to do such experiments. which is why, i don’t believe we will be able to prove or disprove such a thing. so let’s go with Occam’s razor and prefer the explanation where people hallucinate things, due to body and mind being pushed beyond limits.