Skeptics might be jumping to conclusions

[Silver]

Kinda hard to be skeptical and jump to conclusions at the same time . . . .


Somebody want to Venn diagram that one for me ??

Indeed.

[Transcended Dimensions]

I am just saying keep an open mind to it because it is a fact that human beings are close minded and limit themselves to their particular worldview.

There is a reasonable distinction between keeping an open mind and accepting just anything.  

Wouldn't you agree?

I will go ahead and repeat what I said earlier because I don't think you have read this one yet.  There are basic facts of life we all know to be true such as that an orange is a juicy fruit or that we will all grow old one day and our physical bodies will die.  There is no debate about these things.  But then there are things that have a lot of debate about them such as the paranormal or the idea that vaccines are harmful or that they cause autism.  These are the things I have to remain undecided on.  I don't think there are any shortcut methods to arrive at the truth in these scenarios because, as I said earlier, these shortcut methods of reasoning and logic are very close minded and only serve to limit people to their particular views as opposed to arriving at a conclusion the right way through full research into these things.

[Silver]

Yet, I find it quite logical that your short-sightedness in relation to your inability to properly arrive at a reasonable conclusion leaves you posting nonsensical word salads.

Why be open minded about the silliness of anti-vaxer stupidity? Why be open minded about the ignorance of Scientology? Why be open minded about a president who is destroying the country?

Your problem is that you think open mindedness equates to knowledge somehow. It doesn't, as you've already pointed out and quite proven through your inability to properly arrive at any decision lest you appear close minded.

At this point, I am done with you. Also, I need to go to bed.

May you become smarter.

[Transcended Dimensions]

Yet, I find it quite logical that your short-sightedness in relation to your inability to properly arrive at a reasonable conclusion leaves you posting nonsensical word salads.

Why be open minded about the silliness of anti-vaxer stupidity?  Why be open minded about the ignorance of Scientology?  Why be open minded about a president who is destroying the country?

Your problem is that you think open mindedness equates to knowledge somehow.  It doesn't, as you've already pointed out and quite proven through your inability to properly arrive at any decision lest you appear close minded.  

At this point, I am done with you.  Also, I need to go to bed.  

May you become smarter.

As long as a particular topic is debated by intelligent people and researchers, then we should keep an open mind to any given claim no matter what it is rather than jumping to conclusions through shortcut methods.  But, if it was a debate between a person who said that drinking poison would be lethal as opposed to someone who says that drinking poison would make you live forever, we can give up on this type of debate immediately since the person who thinks that would be very dumb and/or crazy. One last thing here. Go ahead and read my post below this one since it expands on this.

[vorlon13]

Mark 16 (KJV)
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

[Transcended Dimensions]

Mark 16  (KJV)
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

As long as this claim is not that of a dumb, crazy person and is being said by a researcher who has a lot of knowledge and training, then we should keep an open mind to it rather than jumping to conclusions through shortcut methods.  Sure, drinking poison would be lethal for you.  But we should keep an open mind to any addressed objections and research these trained, educated researchers would present.  If these are researchers claiming that the power of god can somehow do this and that there is a way to harness god's power within you to accomplish this, then we should remain open minded to it.  Perhaps people who have attempted this and failed just weren't doing it right as these researchers would claim.  Or, maybe there were some other factors preventing this from working as these researchers would claim. Sure, there are researchers who believe dumb, crazy things. But the very fact that they are trained, educated researchers is enough to warrant an open minded, full research into their claims.

[The Valkyrie]

Mark 16 (KJV)
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

18.5 And they will take the cash of the gullible and make it their own.

[Fireball]

It's a super short journey in the absence of any evidence that they exist.  Cool story, though.

Gotta love how a ton of bullshit sentences can get the the air let out with only one poke. If one will pardon this mixed metaphor. I've been up too long, and moved a few tons of earth yesterday.  I'm tired, going to sleep now.

[Transcended Dimensions]

I would like to say something new and important here now.  From having this whole entire discussion, I came to realize there was a much better way of getting my point across.  The way I did it was ineffective and I am now going to present an effective way of doing it that gets all my arguments across:

Quote:  "The road to truth can be a long journey and there are no shortcuts."

Always Keep An Open Mind And Never Jump To Conclusions:  I am going to share my own personal view when it comes to drawing a conclusion in regards to whether the afterlife, paranormal, god, soul, etc. exist or not.  This personal view of mine also applies to every other topic that has a lot of debate.  I personally think that human beings are very limited, close minded creatures and limit themselves to their particular views.  They use shortcut methods of reasoning and logic to arrive at what they think is the truth rather than doing full research and looking at all the objections being said and addressed.  I think this shortcut method is flawed and is a very simple, close minded, and limiting approach.  People should do full research into both the paranormal and the skeptical/materialistic research before drawing any given conclusion as to whether the skeptics have real evidence or the paranormal has evidence.  

I think this is the truly right and open minded way of drawing a conclusion.  I will give you an example here with how these shortcut methods are flawed.  Skeptics would claim that their scientific method clearly demonstrates paranormal evidence to be fake.  But the paranormal researchers would say that the scientific method does not demonstrate the evidence to be fake and that there is, in fact, testable, repeatable evidence for these paranormal phenomena.  From there, these paranormal researchers would say that the skeptics have no evidence for their claims and that they are just being close minded and refusing to accept the paranormal evidence.  I, myself, have no way of knowing whether the skeptics are right in their conclusions or whether the paranormal researchers are right since I have not done full research into this myself.  

I have no interest in this research and am merely keeping an open mind here.  I will continue to say some more things here.  There are basic facts of life such as the fact that an orange is a juicy fruit or that we will all grow old one day and our physical bodies will die.  These things have no debate and these are things we all know to be true.  But then there are topics that have a lot of debate about them such as the paranormal or the idea that vaccines are harmful or that they cause autism.  I have to remain undecided on these things since I have no interest in fully researching these things and I think it is close minded for me to draw a conclusion through any shortcut of reasoning and logic.  

As long as a claim is being made by researchers and people who have had a lot of training and education, then this is enough to warrant an open minded, full research into their claims rather than dismissing them through shortcuts.  It doesn't matter what that claim is whether it be the Earth being flat, the idea that we are eternal souls, or anything else.  Just because an idea sounds crazy and dumb at first glance does not mean we should dismiss it.  Neither does it automatically mean that the rest of the arguments these researchers make are dumbfounded and warrant no further research into them.  There is a big difference between well-trained, educated researchers making claims as opposed to a very dumb, crazy person making a claim.  

If someone claimed that we can rip our heart out and still live, then we can just give up on the debate with that person since he would be very dumb and/or crazy.  But if a researcher made this claim and said that there was somehow a way to achieve this, then we should keep an open mind towards that claim.  Sure, there are researchers who believe dumb, crazy things.  But the very fact that these researchers are people who have a lot of education and training is enough to warrant an open minded, full research into their claims.  I will say one last thing here.  That is, I do make certain decisions in life despite not knowing the truth.  I still decide to not take vaccines despite not knowing whether they are truly harmful or not.

What Would An All Knowing Being Say?:  I am going to give a hypothetical example of an all knowing being.  If this being were to exist and we were to ask him whether the paranormal, soul, and afterlife is real or not rather than taking the words of skeptics and paranormal researchers, he might say something radical and unexpected.  He might say that human beings limit themselves to their particular worldviews through their shortcut methods.  From there, this being would give us the real answer as to whether those mystical phenomena exist or not.

I Will Not Fall Into Anyone's Trap.  I Cannot Trust Humanity:  My personality also plays a major role in my lack of trust in humanity.  I am someone who really wants the eternal blissful afterlife of my dreams to be something real.  Living forever in the blissful afterlife of my dreams would be the most profoundly beautiful and joyful existence for me.  But skeptics would come along and tell me that I have every reason to think the afterlife and paranormal is all woo and bull crap.  They would present their shortcut methods in order to try to convince me.  They would attempt to trap me into their skeptical worldview (bubble). 

But I do not fit into anyone's bubble or box. I am outside the box/bubble which means I cannot trust anybody.  Another example would be fundamentalist Christians who would tell me that I have every reason to think hell is real and that I will go there unless I repent my sins.  I would tell these Christians that I will not be fooled by their methods of trying to convince me of their worldview.  I have this exact same mindset in regards to anybody making any given claim.  This would even include people and researchers who claim that there is an eternal blissful afterlife for us all after we die even though this is something I really want to be true.

[robvalue]

Not just one sceptic jumping to conclusions... apparently every single one is.

This is entirely backwards. Sceptics are not jumping to conclusions, they are awaiting firm evidence. That's what being a sceptic means. The idea that none of them have noticed this evidence or even tried to find it is rather absurd.