A metaphysical question!

[LadyHenryofRawlinsonEnd]

Perhaps this is similar to 'one hand clapping', but just say we are debating whether a metaphysical or 'supernatural' event had validity, the general agreement would usually be: this is obviously not true because there is no proof
But then I thought so if I run an idea through my mind without telling anyone, does it therefore not exist because nobody can prove I did it?

A lack of proof of existence isn't the same as definitive proof of non-existence.

There is definitely a mindset that would argue against the validity, or even the potential validity of anything that can't be evidenced.

It's perhaps more cultural than scientific, true.

It popped into my head after reading a debate about a writer in the 70's who claimed to channel a 'personality' which led to a series of books. The general theme was 'this can't have occurred' because it is too subjective. The writer must have been a charlatan due to the nature of the claim itself.

I'm just musing

If someone claims to have run an idea through their mind then, while not provable, it’s something that almost everyone has done at some point and therefore knows IS possible; it just becomes a truth/lie situation regarding whether they did that normal thing or not.

That’s different to not believing supernatural events which many have never experienced or seen, and so in their mind cannot exist without proof.

@Same360

If someone claims to have run an idea through their mind then, while not provable, it’s something that almost everyone has done at some point and therefore knows IS possible; it just becomes a truth/lie situation regarding whether they did that normal thing or not.

That’s different to not believing supernatural events which many have never experienced or seen, and so in their mind cannot exist without proof.

So it's largely a question of familiarity. We gravitate towards and tend to agree with what we already know.

I'm fairly flexible with my beliefs, but they have to resonate with me, and I prefer to work out why I believe a thing, whatever it may be! But it intrigues me how, as a culture (or species even), we are quite resistant to new ideas and concepts unless they are agreed upon by a majority.

Btw, this is fairly lighthearted.

An amusing one that was on a birthday card my DP received a few yrs ago: If a man is alone in a forest and no one can hear him, is he still wrong?

I wouldn’t say familiarity - if I’d only seen a ghost two or three times in my life I wouldn’t be ‘familiar’ with it, but I’d believe that it could happen! Whereas if someone claims something like ghosts, or aliens, which I’ve never experienced, and never seen any proof of, it becomes a matter of faith…

Good thread though, I love a discussion line this!

Nobody has been able to come up with scientific evidence that ghosts exist. On the other hand, nobody has been able to prove that they don't.

hth

Yes, faith is the right word, or subjectivity. We have come to tie the word 'faith' up with religion though, so it is a loaded term for some.

I remember reading those creepy threads on MN over the years, most go along with the spirit of the chat, but there's always the occasional poster who gets seriously upset about it, demanding that everyone is either mentally ill or fantasising. I wonder why they are so invested in drawing that line in the sand..