What philosophical evidence is there against believing in non-physical entities?

[Panatheist]

Well, again, there is no way to prove it to anyone.

Yes, there is, you referenced it yourself, in that altered states have been recorded.  There's no way for -you- to do so because you are referring to anecdotes.  You did not have any equipment available.  As such I can't know that they -were- altered states in the sense you previously referenced, and neither can you.  

But literally having the sensation of my environment disappearing and being replaced with an entirely different one on an island is always going to count as altered perception to me, not a mere misinterpretation or whatever.  It's not even similar to you thinking you heard a bump in the closet.

How could you know that, you didn't have any equipment present....you don't know the lucidity of my daydreams...and you can;t even establish that this was a genuine experience rather than a cognitive blip related to memory that you now relate to us.

Much of my background and experience is similar to that of those who report symptoms of dissasociation which I have been treated for although I do not know if all or only some experiences are trauma-related.  Some certainly seem to have been.  Others, perhaps not.  Who knows?  Now someone may infer differently, sure, particularly since I am anonymous here - not that I will typically discuss such things when I'm not.

I've had a disassociative break.  I've been diagnosed.  See..I do have experience with "experiences of this kind" - I;m not dismissing you out of hand, you're simply not presenting anything that we can work with.

But it is really not as important on a personal level.  I do think what research is being done on all sorts of reported experiences usually associated with the paranormal is important for skeptics.  It certainly has helped me understand problems with basing supernatural beliefs on subjective experiences.

There's also a problem in basing "natural beliefs" on anecdotal references to potential subjective experiences or memories of experiences. Such as the belief that you were in an altered state.

I referenced the inability to prove my own past subjective experiences to anyone - because there is not. And I am not saying that - you - personally have not experienced dissosociation or some other phenomena involving unusual visual and audial perception.

Now, various definitions are given for altered states. I have mentioned unusual perceptual phenomena such as seeming to appear on an island as an example. Now I highly doubt this is a day dream because it occurred in a busy work environment and caused disruption until I was able to perceive my surroundings again. That would likely be classified as a hallucination by therapists which is included in some definitions of altered states. In some definitions of altered states are included dreams and day dreams and states induced after meditating, drinking an alcoholic beverage, or taking drugs. What exactly is your definition of an altered state?

I agree that you have a point about false or inaccurate memories. Perhaps I am simply not remembering this accurately -- doubtful given my history I think and some level of verification I have been able to obtain from others that I behaved in some cases as though I was totally unaware of my environment, unless all of that is a case of inaccurate memory as well or a mistaken observation. It is possible my dreams never had the content I think I recall -- they are all false memories.

Even equipment cannot prove anyone is experiencing certain subjective sensations. At most we get a report of them.

It is just as much of a problem if you base a natural belief that you actually experienced a particular vivid day dream on the fact that you think you remember it.

To take an even more startling viewpoint it is possible that my whole life up to this point is simply a dream and that I will wake up soon.

There is an element of belief in what we think we remember and even in what we hold as most certain. There is no problem there at all as long as we acknowledge that.