Emotions are intrinsically good and bad

[Silver]

I am open minded towards the idea that there really is evidence out there for these things.  The nde researchers as well as other paranormal researchers would claim they have actual evidence on their side while the skeptics would say they have no evidence at all.  The afterlife/paranormal proponents would then say the skeptics have no evidence on their side.  So, that is why I give up since it is nothing more than an argument that leads nowhere.

If there was real evidence, there would be no need for skepticism. Instead, the real evidence would allow everyone to believe similarly. Believers claiming real evidence alone does not make it real or even evidence.

[Transcended Dimensions]

I am open minded towards the idea that there really is evidence out there for these things.  The nde researchers as well as other paranormal researchers would claim they have actual evidence on their side while the skeptics would say they have no evidence at all.  The afterlife/paranormal proponents would then say the skeptics have no evidence on their side.  So, that is why I give up since it is nothing more than an argument that leads nowhere.

If there was real evidence, there would be no need for skepticism.  Instead, the real evidence would allow everyone to believe similarly.  Believers claiming real evidence alone does not make it real or even evidence.

I am still open minded regardless of what you say here because how would one of the nde/paranormal researchers respond to this post of yours?  I am quite sure they would have their own valid objections to this based upon their years of expertise.  So, can you see where I am going with this?  It is still nothing more than a back and forth argument that leads nowhere because it doesn't matter what arguments you or the proponents make; it will still be nothing more than an ongoing debate.

[Silver]

I am still open minded regardless of what you say here because how would one of the nde/paranormal researchers respond to this post of yours?  I am quite sure they would have their own valid objections to this based upon their years of expertise.  So, can you see where I am going with this?  It is still nothing more than a back and forth argument that leads nowhere because it doesn't matter what arguments you or the proponents make; it will still be nothing more than an ongoing debate.

So long as you want to continue to think illogically via an open mind that allows any sort of vacuous nonsense into it, then who am I to stand in your way?

[Transcended Dimensions]

I am still open minded regardless of what you say here because how would one of the nde/paranormal researchers respond to this post of yours?  I am quite sure they would have their own valid objections to this based upon their years of expertise.  So, can you see where I am going with this?  It is still nothing more than a back and forth argument that leads nowhere because it doesn't matter what arguments you or the proponents make; it will still be nothing more than an ongoing debate.

So long as you want to continue to think illogically via an open mind that allows any sort of vacuous nonsense into it, then who am I to stand in your way?

What it all comes down to here is looking deep into the research and debates to draw your own conclusion.  I have done so and, personally, I just can't decide one way or the other.  If there is a conclusion to be reached there one way or the other, then it has not made itself obvious to me in any sense of the word.  There are just so much highly intelligent arguments and research being put forth that there is not only any way for me to decide one way or the other, but there is no way I can even begin to comprehend and understand some of the technical information being put forth in their research/debates.

[Silver]

What it all comes down to here is looking deep into the research and debates to draw your own conclusion.  I have done so and, personally, I just can't decide one way or the other. If there is a conclusion to be reached there one way or the other, then it has not made itself obvious to me in any sense of the word. There are just so much highly intelligent arguments and research being put forth that there is not only any way for me to decide one way or the other, but there is no way I can even begin to comprehend and understand some of the technical information being put forth in their research/debates.

That seems like a personal problem.

Fortunately, I don't suffer the same affliction.

[Transcended Dimensions]

What it all comes down to here is looking deep into the research and debates to draw your own conclusion.  I have done so and, personally, I just can't decide one way or the other.  If there is a conclusion to be reached there one way or the other, then it has not made itself obvious to me in any sense of the word.  There are just so much highly intelligent arguments and research being put forth that there is not only any way for me to decide one way or the other, but there is no way I can even begin to comprehend and understand some of the technical information being put forth in their research/debates.

That seems like a personal problem.

Fortunately, I don't suffer the same affliction.

If you are implying that I shouldn't rely on my personal judgment and that the tools of skeptical thinking are what need to be implemented when attempting to draw my conclusion, then I have tried my best to keep an open, rational mind.  I still can't decide one way or the other.

[Silver]

If you are implying that I shouldn't rely on my personal judgment and that the tools of skeptical thinking are what need to be implemented when attempting to draw my conclusion, then I have tried my best to keep an open, rational mind.  I still can't decide one way or the other.

I'm merely suggesting that your personal judgment needs some major fine-tuning, preferably to a channel that is not tuned into poppycock.

[Transcended Dimensions]

If you are implying that I shouldn't rely on my personal judgment and that the tools of skeptical thinking are what need to be implemented when attempting to draw my conclusion, then I have tried my best to keep an open, rational mind.  I still can't decide one way or the other.

I'm merely suggesting that your personal judgment needs some major fine-tuning, preferably to a channel that is not tuned into poppycock.

When attempting to draw any conclusion, then it needs to be tuned to an intermediate channel (what I call an open, rational mind).  As long as you draw your conclusion based upon a biased mindset, then you would be likely to draw the wrong conclusion.  I could either be having an open, rational mind and just can't decide one way or the other.  Or, I could be having an open, irrational mind.  I don't know which one I have, personally, since I am undecided on that one, too.  But I have tried my best to keep an open, rational mind though.

[Silver]

When attempting to draw any conclusion, then it needs to be tuned to an intermediate channel (what I call an open, rational mind).  As long as you draw your conclusion based upon a biased mindset, then you would be likely to draw the wrong conclusion.  I could either be having an open, rational mind and just can't decide one way or the other.  Or, I could be having an open, irrational mind.  I don't know which one I have, personally, since I am undecided on that one, too.  But I have tried my best to keep an open, rational mind though.

You seem to not be properly grasping the difference between an open mind and rationality. Rationally, a mind open to anything is unreasonable, for it prescribes the allowance of clearly irrational thought the notion of realistic validity.

My mind is open to believing in the existence of something supernatural when the proper evidence is provided. Until that time, someone's claim of evidence remains just that, a claim with no evidence to rationally support it.

[Transcended Dimensions]

When attempting to draw any conclusion, then it needs to be tuned to an intermediate channel (what I call an open, rational mind).  As long as you draw your conclusion based upon a biased mindset, then you would be likely to draw the wrong conclusion.  I could either be having an open, rational mind and just can't decide one way or the other.  Or, I could be having an open, irrational mind.  I don't know which one I have, personally, since I am undecided on that one, too.  But I have tried my best to keep an open, rational mind though.

You seem to not be properly grasping the difference between an open mind and rationality.  Rationally, a mind open to anything is unreasonable, for it prescribes the allowance of clearly irrational thought the notion of realistic validity.  

My mind is open to believing in the existence of something supernatural when the proper evidence is provided.  Until that time, someone's claim of evidence remains just that, a claim with no evidence to rationally support it.

But when the nde/paranormal researchers claim evidence on their side and skeptics say they have no evidence, then the researchers could also have their own skeptical way of thinking while the skeptics have their skeptical way of thinking.  These researchers would be skeptical of the skeptics and the skeptics would be skeptical of the researchers.  But whose skepticism draws the right conclusion?  I am undecided here. The skeptics might not be real skeptics at all and it could be the researchers who are the real skeptics since they draw the right conclusions. I don't know here.