Paranormal investigation will never make any progress if you

>Do you want to explore the intriguing mysteries and anomalies of the world, or do you want to live in a fantasy dreamland where reason doesn't exist and you can just believe whatever the fuck you want without truly rigorous, non-anecdotal evidence?
Do you really have to fucking ask?

>>19343167
To be honest, number two: I wish it were possible. :p

>>19343175
>>19343176
From my view, this kills any sense of mystery, because if you can just believe whatever is convenient, then effectively everything is true, and therefore, there are no mysteries. It's just boring as fuck child'splay, and there's no insights to be gained from it, just LARPing and more LARPing.

>>19343167
OP has balls, I completely agree with you, one question, what are your opinions on the bad quality research that some people do when looking for abnormal phenomena?

>>19343167
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDJVwPev33c

Nuclear power was unimaginable to a cave man. Just because one area of research dead ends doesn't mean we should stop exploring. You're right that some people like to dive into fantasy land and some people are completely delusional.

But that doesn't completely rule out discovering something new. Maybe the next great leap in science is something you can't even conceptualize right now.

>>19343294
To use anthropology as an example, it started off with preposterous methodology and nobody took it seriously as a field, nor did the majority of the scientific community ever think it would (or should) gain traction. It took some time of fruitless meandering, but eventually a few people came along with their ruthless overhaul with a strict allegiance to the scientific method, and gradually the field gained respect and ended up surviving. Perhaps something similar can happen with paranormal investigation. But for now, the methodology is incredibly, demonstrably flawed (see: Project Alpha) and we won't learn anything close to the truth using it.

>>19343348
If we're just gonna be dropping links and not using our words, then here you go.
https://thrivedebunked.wordpress.com/tag/robbert-van-der-broeke/

>>19343386
When exactly did I say we would never discover anything new? My post is explicitly saying that if we want to learn the TRUTH about the mysteries of the world, we need to approach it with science and rationality, not with anecdotes, confirmation bias and relentless LARPing.

Fantasy dreamland, please.

>>19343167
Same can be said for science because they keep avoiding the spiritual and mysterious.

>>19343582
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Alpha
For those interested

>>19343762
>spiritual
Spirituality isn't in the domain of science because as spontaneous subjective experience, it can't be tested and measured in a lab. Science just can't say anything useful about spirituality, and it's not its job to do so.

>mysterious
Lol, science is literally made and used to explore the mysterious.

"Reason" is such a bullshit concept. Logic, sure, but Reason is subjective, baseless, and relative as they come.

File: mulder shrug.png (201KB, 500x373px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 500x373px

>>19343167
You're not saying anything new or revelatory to me. This is the same shit I've been saying for years now.

I want to believe, but in order for it to be taken seriously, we need hard, solid evidence. Summoning demons is useless if it's all in your head, Bigfoot isn't proven if it's just a blurry photo of a brown blob that could for all intents and purposes be a guy in a gorilla suit, and sleep paralysis and hypnosis-induced memories are not evidence of extraterrestrials.

Ghosts are particularly frustrating. Orbs are so easily debunked as dust, bugs, etc. and most EVPs are easy to fake, or pretend that shuffling noises are some kind of voices saying "Get out" or something. Really, I do think there's a possibility there, but the research is just inundated with so much garbage.

By all means, I want to explore, but it really is difficult to sieve through the nonsense.

>>19344055
How is it subjective, baseless and relative?

>>19344095
>I want to believe
Well, you'd make a terrible scientist.

Ever seen that episode of The Office where the Scranton branch might be closing and Michael Scott distracts them with a board game? Jim is like "Hello!? Stop messing around and mildly enjoying yourselves and pay attention to the shitstorm!!"

Michael pulls him aside and says "They NEED this! For godsake, let them have this one stupid little game!"

The paranormal is interesting and fun. Nobody believes all the stuff we talk about on here. A couple theories or stories here and there, but the 'normal' is shit out there - have you noticed? Exploring, believing, and considering the 'paranormal' (literally: "above" "normal") lets us break away, if only for a bit.

Let us have this stupid little game, Jim.

>>19344101
Define Reason and you'll see.

>>19344127
I'm curious as to what definition you're using for it, actually. Me offering a definition wouldn't do nearly as much in the way of illuminating what you mean by reason being subjective, basless and relative.

File: Fox_Mulder_(1990).jpg (48KB, 1153x861px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 1153x861px

>>19344106
Well, I'd also like to believe we can cure cancer but that doesn't necessarily mean I'd just presume something will do it. The trick is to not let your personal interests get in the way of the actual research.

Houdini wanted to believe in an afterlife, and spent his final years debunking charlatans. In order to find the real thing, you have to eliminate everything that isn't. And if you end up with nothing but evidence to disprove it, so be it.You can take your disappointment and publish it.

Am in it 4 da spooks!

>>19344154
>The trick is to not let your personal interests get in the way of the actual research.
I think you're placing way too much faith in your brain. Intentional or not, our cognitive biases sway our perception far beyond our acknowledgment.

>>19344142
"Logic" says "use empirical facts and figures to arrive at a conclusion." "Reason" is pretty much just "come on bro, it's obvious" but doesn't actually substantiate anything.

For example, if I am hungry, logic says "obtain food, eat food and you will not be hungry." Reason says "obtain food this way because it makes sense." What Is sense? Does that not change entirely by environment, circumstance, and conciousness? If I'm hungry in real life, I might have to hop in the car, drive to the store, buy an apple, and go home, then eat. If I am hungry in, say, Skyrim, I might have to make my avatar steal a cheese wheel or pick a cabbage and select it from my inventory to subtract values from my hunger meter. Logic says "food decreases hunger" no matter the circumstance. Reason says "X because it makes sense."

Reason can be altered culturally, religiously, scientifically, grographicslly, etc. I could write an obviously fake religious text right here and now, and you could apply logic to make sense of it. Reason, however, is a purely opinionated response to the subjective emotions individual readers would feel.

Reason is not a bad thing (in fact it can be good) but it is highly subjective, ever changing, and is a shit way to convince, perpetuate, or articulate an idea.

File: potato.jpg (44KB, 853x480px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 853x480px

>>19344172
Perhaps. But I never said I do believe. Just that I want to.

It's so strange that when it comes to skeptics, I'm too credulous, and when it comes to believers, I'm too incredulous.

Thankfully though, and fittingly, I don't have to prove a goddamn thing to you.

>>19344178
Sorry to just dump a dictionary definition like an asshole, but it's really all that needs to be said here.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/reason
>Rational thinking (or the capacity for it); the cognitive faculties, collectively, of conception, judgment, deduction and intuition.

>>19344204
>LITERALLY proving his argument

Congrats, ya played yourself

>>19344203
Wanting to believe is a gateway for your cognitive biases to blur your perception, especially confirmation bias. It's not anyone's fault, it's just how our brains work; we aren't quite evolved to be that great at consistently thinking and behaving rationally.

>>19344212
He says reason isn't logical, or at least not related. I post a definition saying that reason is rational.

The relevant definitions of rational:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/rational
>Capable of reasoning.
Man is a rational creature.
>Logically sound; not contradictory or otherwise absurd.

>>19344224
>Man is a rational creature.
Whoops, that was the sample sentence from when I copypasted.

>>19344224
This has to be satire

>>19344239
Can you elaborate?

>>19344249
Anon probably could, but his logic wouldn't appeal to your reasoning.

>>19344258
Not really sure what you're talking about, sorry. Can you be more clear? I'm honestly trying to get to the truth about what we're discussing.

>>19343167
>If you retards keep denying controlled distractions
If the true Creator revealed itself to you and gave you the ability to do fantasy-type magic, you still wouldn't believe he exists.

>>19344393
If that happened and I had fantasy-type magic powers lasting longer than the encounter, that would be a decent chunk of evidence in his favor, I suppose. I'll let you know when that happens.

>>19344420
It won't happen, especially if you keep saying "This needs evidence or ELSE IT DOESN'T EXIST"

Figure out where you are and understand why not everyone can know the secrets of the Creator.

>>19344432
Oh, so it only reveals itself when there's no way of providing a shred of evidence for its occurrence, and furthermore, only to people that don't ask for evidence to believe in something. That's convenient!

>>19343167
>denying science and rationality
scientism is just another cult
Darwin is the prophet

>>19344458
You keep asking for evidence instead of searching for the answers yourself, that's part of the problem. Your standard for evidence is too large. Realize that you are in Hell and the real Creator has no obligation to show himself to you or make you understand 'His' ways.

>>19344463
I don't subscribe to whatever notion of scientism you seem to have, I have some fairly spiritual beliefs, and I understand that science has no place being used on them. But simply proving that paranormal phenomenon occur in the first place concerns the physical universe and the things in it which interact with one another, and is therefore, very uncontroversially, subject to science.

>>19344473
You seem to be steeped beyond reason in the cultish ideology that there is a god which is a separate epistemological source of knowledge than our perception (I think?), and I know there's nothing I can say to actually communicate with someone who fundamentally rejects rationality, so I don't see a point in talking to you any further.

>>19344498
That just speaks on the level of programming the Elite have successfully enacted on the people of this Earth. Don't worry, your time will come, you will wake up maybe not in this life but one of the others.

>>19343167
>science and rationality.
SOMETIMES SCIENCE IS LIES REEEE
(V) (O_0) (V)

>>19344106
Why wouldn't a scientist be able to believe in a God that has made the Earth, and then do research on things / events that are on that Earth?

Biggest problem is how the average Joe literally cannot replicate the results of most mysteries and therefore is left to believe or not on the information available. I can't just go and pick up a plane to fly over Antarctica, or just fly above and find the truth about the moon. It's impossible to believe in reason alone as if reason is some sort of magic the same way of religion.
Science has come to a point that we're left with a belief system similar to the mythologies of the past. You can't be sure of anything anymore if you even consider that the basis for logic is flawed such as how gravity actually works (possibly disproving distances between stars and dark matter altogether) and spirituality since we cannot perceive tons of shit that 'are here right now' but science says it is.

>>19343167
>do you want to live in a fantasy dreamland where reason doesn't exist and you can just believe whatever the fuck you want without truly rigorous, non-anecdotal evidence?
Yes, ever since I was a child. Doesn't everyone?

>>19343167
Fantasy dreamland. Fuck reality for the most part.

>>19343905
Laboratory conditions aren't necessary to test hypotheses. Science didn't start in, nor does it need to be in a lab to have control variables.

>>19343167
b-but muh pendulum ):<

>>19347267
can you without a lab measure fucking electrons and shit?

>>19343167
Dont sell it short man.

Sometimes the paranormal can be a lot of fun, especially when it comes to rational conclusions for people like you and me.

Sometimes weird shit totally happens.

Ill give you an example I read about a few weeks back:

There was an african tribe that lived near a lake. it was "Well known" that at night, sometimes evil spirits would rise from the lake and eat the souls of the people on shore. They knew to build their homes and settle on higher land away from the lake.

When European settlers came they set up camp by the lake despite the warnings of the locals about the evil spirits.

They were all found dead one morning very shortly after settling.


Fast forward to future technology and investigation, and its been found the lake is carbonated (Probably yeast if you ask me). Sometimes it becomes over saturated with CO2, and then releases it in large amounts.

Because the lake is low lying it displaces the oxygen and suffocates anyone near by. I cant remember why it happens at night.

Now.. tell me you cant get behind paranormal shit like that?

Sometimes there are wild claims that are actually true and it turns into a mystery with an actual solution...

>>19347281
Probably. To say something about one hypothesis says nothing about all hypotheses.

>>19346317
God isn't under the umbrella of paranormal investigation, so that's irrelevant.

>>19347218
>Biggest problem is how the average Joe literally cannot replicate the results of most mysteries and therefore is left to believe or not on the information available.
Having a lack of observations isn't an excuse to believe in a thing with minimal evidence... It's the opposite, it means that it's not very likely to exist, or else it would be repeatedly observable. If you don't have enough information, you SHOULD NOT make conclusions. Science permits things to be unknown if there's insufficient evidence, I hope you realize.

>It's impossible to believe in reason alone as if reason is some sort of magic the same way of religion.
But reason is not magic or religion, it's simply aligning your beliefs in accordance with our closest possible collective perception of reality, as realized through rigorous experimentation and repeated, predictable observations.

>Science has come to a point that we're left with a belief system similar to the mythologies of the past.
Except mythologies were based on... myths; stories people made up, whereas science is based on rigorous experimentation with control groups.

>You can't be sure of anything anymore if you even consider that the basis for logic is flawed such as how gravity actually works (possibly disproving distances between stars and dark matter altogether) and spirituality since we cannot perceive tons of shit that 'are here right now' but science says it is.
We can still measure invisible shit using scientific instruments... What the fuck are you talking about? The reason science permits radio waves but not ghosts is because radio waves are observable using instruments, and we have yet to record a ghost interacting with matter. And if you don't believe in electromagnetic radiation, well, I guess your wifi is run by magic.

>>19347237
Not scientists and skeptics, who happen to be the people responsible for computers, the internet, antibiotics, and basically all modern amenities.

>>19347245
Grow up. Your world view affects more than just yourself.

>>19347267
Record for me a ghost or demon or magical phenomenon in any condition you choose, then get back to me.

>>19347291
>Now.. tell me you cant get behind paranormal shit like that?
How is that evidence of the paranormal? What you told me is a story about science explaining a phenomenon that was until then explained by stories, nothing special or new about that.

>>19347342
No, you cannot measure individual electrons outside of lab conditions, there is non-artificial location in the known universe where it wouldn't get drowned in the noise.

>>19348059
Starting to believe that anti-science people shouldn't be allowed to use any inventions that were made possible with science. After all, I'm perfectly willing to give up anything that was provided to humanity by "magic" and "psychics".

>>19348086
Please elaborate.

>>19348101
>I don't have to.
You don't have to argue logically? I suppose you don't HAVE to, but that behavior isn't very conducive to getting closer to the truth.

>I know magic created the universe. I was there when it happened.
Gonna need some proof for that. And if you "don't have to prove anything to me", why post in the first place?

>>19347237
>>19347245
These guys get it. Even for normal people, the real world can be quite boring compared to the stuff we can imagine. And for me, personally, I'm stuck in a fucked up situation that no amount of logic, reason, science, or medicine can fix, so my fantasies are all I have to keep me from complete despair-fueled insanity, even if they don't succeed at that very often. A 15% success rate with my imagination is better than a 0% success rate with what the real world has to offer.

>>19348052
>Grow up.
"Growing up" is the most overrated shit in existence. Not to mention that whenever someone says "Grow up", what they really mean is "Become like me."

>>19348118
Why can't anybody prove their supernatural powers when they're being observed through even the most slightly skeptical lens?

>>19348052
>basically all modern amenities
Give any of them a portal to the Faery realm and I'm sure you'll see them make the same choice.

All those modern amenities mean shit when you're confronted with an opportunity to journey to a world where the problems we face in this world don't even exist. The mysterious qualities of this world might be intriguing, but there's way more magic and mystery in any magical setting.

Your point is right, but you picked a stupid way to ask the question. If given the choice, many of us would choose a fantasy world. Sadly, we haven't been given that choice. People believe in science and rationality whether they believe in the paranormal or not. Don't be one of those faggots who thinks everyone on /x/ believes in flat Earth, when even the most trivial analysis would reveal that only a fractional minority of regulars actually entertain the idea.

>>19348127
>These guys get it. Even for normal people, the real world can be quite boring compared to the stuff we can imagine.
I find the real world extremely interesting and constantly stimulating. The notion of finding the source of actual paranormal mysteries with science is very exciting to me.

>And for me, personally, I'm stuck in a fucked up situation that no amount of logic, reason, science, or medicine can fix, so my fantasies are all I have to keep me from complete despair-fueled insanity, even if they don't succeed at that very often. A 15% success rate with my imagination is better than a 0% success rate with what the real world has to offer.
I know what it's like to be in despair and feeling the need to lie to yourself to get through each day without fucking blowing your brains out. But at least in my case, it was actually SOLVED by reason and skepticism. I accepted the truth as little bias as I could actually manage, and it was extremely refreshing, and not at all as bad as I imagined. Maybe for you, lying to yourself is literally the only way you can get through life, but I'm a little skeptical of claims like that, from my own experiences.

>Not to mention that whenever someone says "Grow up", what they really mean is "Become like me."
Under normal circumstances, the only excuse for someone to willingly believe in fantasy without evidence is if you're a child, and your views on what is real and what isn't don't deeply impact the lives of others, hence the need to "grow up" and acknowledge reality. I assumed you were under these circumstances, but I wasn't considering the fact that you may be depressed, or whatever your problems happen to be, and you use it as a coping mechanism, rather than for fantasy fun time. So I'm sorry for assuming that, but still, I can't really get behind the notion that ignoring reality is a good long-term solution for anything.

>>19348178
I'd venture to guess that if someone exhibited super powers, then it happened entirely by accident. And in most of those occurrences, they probably didn't even recognize it as something supernatural. Of the few that do recognize it as supernatural, they have absolutely no clue how to reproduce the action and will wonder about it for the rest of their lives. Any other person not falling in that category claiming to have controllable super powers is a liar and a hoax.

>>19348327
until proven otherwise

>>19348026
You are mostly right.
My point is that what you know of science right now has been filtered to be revealed and to reach the average Joe. Whatever is said to have been tested and proved is still up to belief. The same way someone said the priest has had his visions, some site makes an article about some scientist proving something based on their own theories which there's no way to disprove or even challenge without a lab, team and funding.

We have no instruments to measure lots of things people for millennia have been talking about, that's exactly the problem. We hear sounds so sound is pretty easy to create something to detect it's existence, that ain't true for a whole lot of shit.

>>19348179
>I find the real world extremely interesting and constantly stimulating.
Well, I don't. It's a subjective thing.

>The notion of finding the source of actual paranormal mysteries with science is very exciting to me.
By that, do you mean using science to discover that paranormal stuff is real and learn about it, or using science to *debunk* the paranormal and reveal that it's all infrasound and swamp gas? Because I've found that most people who talk a lot about "science and reason" in relation to the paranormal fall into the latter category.

>I know what it's like to be in despair and feeling the need to lie to yourself to get through each day without fucking blowing your brains out. But at least in my case, it was actually SOLVED by reason and skepticism. I accepted the truth as little bias as I could actually manage, and it was extremely refreshing, and not at all as bad as I imagined. Maybe for you, lying to yourself is literally the only way you can get through life, but I'm a little skeptical of claims like that, from my own experiences.
Like I said, there are things wrong with me that nothing in the real world can fix. The only hope I had left was that there was another world to go to after death, where I could be healed and forget about everything that tormented me on Earth. The only thing that "reason" and "skepticism" and "accepting the truth without bias" did was convince me that this world, where my life is one of inescapable misery, is all there is, and that this shitty fucking state I'm in now is the only way I'll ever get to exist. It stripped me of all hope and made my mental state even worse. So I look around at paranormal stuff, mostly related to consciousness beyond death, looking for evidence, and I think there *is* some stuff, like NDEs, that seems pretty legit, but I'm usually too afraid to actually start hoping. So I play video games, browse the CYOA threads on /tg/, and compulsively eat to try to dull the pain.

>>19343167
>Paranormal investigation will never make any progress
You're not wrong

>>19343223
You seem very interested in accruing knowledge. You should look into epistemology.

>>19343167
science and paranormal dont work together senpai

>>19344118
Some might say it's the other way around!

>>19349798

THIS

I rediscovered this word a week ago and it has led me to many places

Epistemology is the word of the year for /x

I have tried to get X into it with making threads about semantics but nothing ever worked

but epistemology, now THAT is a word with potential

>>19351224
>making threads about semantics
I hope you understand WHY that was a total flop.

>>19351248

too much time is spent arguing over the meaning of words/ talking past one another, and not enough on the thread topics

the different meanings of words and how certain people interpret them can be traced through epistemology

the study of the spread and transmission of knowledge

>>19343167
Yes, yes I do.

>>19351266
You're thinking of etymology, but okay you obviously didn't get it.

It failed because nobody questions what magic is when people ask if we believe in magic. It's not an issue, and if it were, it'd be easily noticed. If the board, on whole, actually had a problem with people talking past each other *because* they were using different definitions of words with vastly different meanings, then we'd see constant strife and a total inability to coherently argue. Not even the flat Earth threads, where such strife/flaming is a near-constant, suffer from debates of semantics. (Instead, they suffer from each side not understanding how vastly different the physics supposed by the other side is.)

If someone would actually make a nice-sounding Alternate Geography General, this, too, might be fixed.

>>19346317
In fact, that's exactly how many scientists in history saw themselves. They figured that God created a logical world and gave us the intelligence to study it, so they decided to do just that. The scientific method itself was basically created by the Catholic Church. The guy who came up with the Big Bang Theory was a priest, and a lot of scientists actually rejected the theory at first because it sounded a little too close to "Let there be light" for their liking. The whole idea that science and religion are necessarily in conflict is very recent.

>>19343167

x is filled with too many sensation seekers who just need to take drugs and stop spamming the board. In fact, maybe they should have their own containment board to talk about their infantile degenerate shit that stems from their sexual frustration

and maybe then a few get through their deficency and actually take serious interest in the topics at hand

>>19343167
Most people on /x/ are here for a reason. Science doesn't give all the answers, especially once you stop forming your ego around the facilities it propagates. Society is largely unknowing of the supernatural... and it's not because we've been spending all of our time "researching" and developing our knowledge of the supernatural.

Maybe science is the one to be looked at?

>>19353411

and how much of the knowledge given here is plecibo metaphores for schizos/ LARPers?

>>19353423
All of it. Now go somewhere where you blatant rejection of possibility is useful.

>>19353442

see this is the problem with x, even if you find something you agree with you still have to find a way become outraged at the other poster in the end

>>19353452
LARP is a term used by newfags to conceal their utter disbelief. It takes a weak mind to reject ideas without considering them first.

>>19353466

this is disingenuous

>>19353482
Pay attention to how others are using the word. Stop using it for the period that you're observing how others use it. You don't even need to check the archives to see when, where, and why the term was picked up. Don't take my word for it; analyze for yourself.

File: y4oyul13w35z.gif (738KB, 247x235px) Image search: [Google]

738KB, 247x235px

i'm just here for spooky images and videos to be honest. i don't give a fuck about the rp or made up stories

>>19353494

here are a couple more vocabulary words for you:

disinformation,deceptive presentation and epistemology

your time would be better spent pondering these terms

>>19353509
You're clearly a newfag. I don't know why you fight this. Everyone was a newfag at some point.

>>19353527

No. Just no.

as for LARP, perhaps this is what we are up against,. "Post LARP depression"

http://analoggamestudies.org/2014/08/post-larp-depression/

because people have crappy lives and find escape in larping on the internet in order to deal with their LARP on the internet withdrawal, a vicious cycle to get out of when the real world they live in isnt changing for the better

the majority of x has or is currently going through an existential crisis in a world where god is dead and the devil is alive and well in various forms. Believing in the paranormal is still belief in something, or as much as people believed in religion beforehand because it did at least provide community and paths to other practical areas of neglected knowledge that people need in their lives.
Others are just bored people who have done drugs and feel like sharing shit (because why so serious) or probably are considering drugs because they seek sensation to make themselves feel better from the void of nihlistic emptiness inside of them

>>19353573
There. Does it feel better to get that off your chest? Has the full variety and diversity of /x/'s userbase come into focus? Do you think you can handle people not holding the same exact beliefs you're used to seeing in other contexts?

It was disingenuous. I chose you because it seemed like you wouldn't be an indignant faggot about your beliefs. If I decided to go off on some other faggot who actually thinks overuse of the term "LARP" will somehow fix this board and make RPers go away forever, it would have been a much less interesting dialogue.

Can you still find it within yourself to continue this dialogue despite that?

>>19344106
It's pretty difficult for most people to be completely objective and unbiased when dealing with issues like whether or not there's an afterlife, because questions like that have huge (and very personal) implications for literally everyone. These are issues that are very emotionally-charged. It's not like studying chemical reactions or something.

File: How science works.png (318KB, 1920x1048px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 1920x1048px

>>19343167
Explain pic related

>>19344214
>we aren't quite evolved to be that great at consistently thinking and behaving rationally
Nor should we ever be, because if we were, we'd be nothing but robots. Pure logic and reason is empty as fuck.

Hermetic Axiom:

Magic is Mystery, Science is Understanding.