Asklemmy

46336 readers

698 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

-26

I believe in ghosts and aliens because of statistics. What do you think? (lemm.ee)

submitted 2 weeks ago by razorozx@lemm.ee to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

46 comments fedilink hide all child comments

When people ask whether or not they believe ghosts or aliens exist, they typically point to something that is somewhat tangible as proof such as "the government says it is real" or "this video explains it all". I think these responses are valid, but with low confidence in what they're trying to prove. A government can simply be making stuff up and a video explaining it could of simply been misinformed into some false truth.

On the contrary, I think they exist because of statistical improbability. I see that there are an uncountable amount of videos claiming to have recorded proof for ghosts and aliens. Assuming that 99% of them are hoaxes, clout chasers, or misidentified phenomena, that still leaves 1% of all those videos to be true. As long as the percentage is not 100%, it means that there is solid proof out there, weak in confidence or not, it's a lead to the truth.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] orgrinrt@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Okay, well let’s apply that newly specified set of requirements.

Earth must be flat for the same reason. There’s even more evidence for it than for aliens, across history, across continents and cultures, and there’s plenty of content regarding it in the modern world too, independent of any specific locale.

Do you believe the world is flat?

[–] razorozx@lemm.ee -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

In the case of a flat Earth, no. We've developed the appropriate tools to identify the Earth as it it.

It had been proven false. Using solid science.

[–] orgrinrt@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Okay, so now that the requirements are even further defined, let us continue applying them.

God must be real.

Do you believe in god?

[–] razorozx@lemm.ee -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

In terms of God, it cannot be confirmed. There are historical texts with claiming proof, but no evidence to support said proof. There may be modern evidence, but most are known to be hoaxes.

There isn't a staggering amount of evidence being produced in modern times to suggest that God exists either.

I cannot confidently say to believe in God.

[–] orgrinrt@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

But you do choose to believe in aliens and ghosts, despite there being a lot more claimed evidence even in today’s world towards god?

Or do you think that aliens and/or ghosts can be confirmed to a greater extent than a god? What is the difference?

[–] razorozx@lemm.ee 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes, I do believe aliens and ghosts can be confirmed for a greater extent than God.

The difference being that we can use provided recordings, sightings, and reports (as false as many of them may be) to take a lead into discovering more about these phenomena. Using physical instruments to deduce, observe, and hypothesize we can have greater confidence in proof. In terms of God, from what I have seen, there is no way to deduce and observe using physical instruments.

Evidence in God is entirely localized and biased. God, assuming a Judeo-Christian flavor, only accounts for approximately 30% of all belief in the world, which is centralized into more popular locations such as the US, UK, China, and Europe. Other locations may have a more diverse religious background, in which case, a God may be believed in. Evidence in aliens and ghosts are not limited to location. It is decentralized.

[–] orgrinrt@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Fair enough. I’m not going to, nor do I want to, dissuade you from continuing your search and believing what you believe, just wanted to get a better understanding on how you reason about these things. And initially I had hoped also to spark some questions and maybe second thoughts on your part.

For the record, I’m not entirely following your chain of thought here, and I do not believe as you believe, nor do I really see the the distinction you posed just now, but who knows, maybe I’m wrong and it turns out you’re right.

[–] razorozx@lemm.ee 2 points 2 weeks ago

I appreciate the honesty. I can see how my post got so many downvotes. I definitely misused the term "statistics" by not inferring a casual and metaphorical tone.

No, I don't believe that my reasoning is scientifically sound. I don't claim that my observation is the final truth. I claim that my belief in such things are affirmed (albeit faintly) through the improbability that all unintentional reports and encounters all false.