What do you believe?

Sapien

solas wrote:

I guess all these things only exist if you give them permission to (believe in them).

How is this different from saying that they don't exist?

solas

subjectivity.

Sapien

solas wrote:

subjectivity.

I don't follow. Do you mean to say that if one believes in a thing it will therefore be proven to exist?

solas

no...

I guess all these things only exist if you give them permission to (believe in them).

we're talking about fairies.

Sapien

solas wrote:

no...

we're talking about fairies.

I assumed you were including the goat-headed spectre in Roscommon, the topic at hand, in the category "faeries". Either way, do you mean to say that if one believes in a faery it will therefore be proven to exist? If so, are faeries the only kind of thing about which this is true?

solas

no..I'm saying if one wants them to exist then they will. (for them..subjectivity see?)
no..I'm sure you can apply the same thing to much of this kind of phenomena. People communicating with the deceased etc..

Sapien

solas wrote:

no..I'm saying if one wants them to exist then they will. (for them..subjectivity see?)

I don't see. How is this different from imagining something?

solas

I suppose its not that different at all. The word illusion comes to mind, but as I've stated before illusions can serve a purpose in their own right.

Sapien

As is said,

Sapien wrote:

How is this different from saying that they don't exist?

solas

Because of the evidence to the contrary.Some illusions do exist ;P

Sapien

solas wrote:

Because of the evidence to the contrary.Some illusions do exist ;P

An illusion arises from the misinterpretation of evidence. Do you mean that this is the only way in which faeries, and "communicati[on] with the deceased etc." can exist?

solas

An illusion arises from the misinterpretation of evidence. Do you mean that this is the only way in which faeries, and "communicati[on] with the deceased etc." can exist?

mm..I think so.

Sapien

solas wrote:

mm..I think so.

So, the farmers in Roscommon imagined the goat-headed spectre?

solas

well..you seem to be an expert on the subject so perhaps you can discuss in detail what it is how it came to be and what it wants..or as you have suggested how to get rid of it.
I'm interested now.

Sapien

solas wrote:

well..you seem to be an expert on the subject so perhaps you can discuss in detail what it is how it came to be and what it wants..or as you have suggested how to get rid of it.
I'm interested now.

Sure. If you answer my question.

solas

I already have, several times.
do you imagine the sun comming up in the east every morning and setting in the west every night? or is that real..or is it an illusion?

Sapien

solas wrote:

I already have, several times.
do you imagine the sun comming up in the east every morning and setting in the west every night? or is that real..or is it an illusion?

I believe that the observance of that phenomenon arises from a correct interpretation of the evidence. This is different from your description of the nature of faeries and "communicati[on] with the deceased etc." in that you agreed that these things only exist as "the misinterpretation of evidence".

solas

I believe that the observance of that phenomenon arises from a correct interpretation of the evidence.

depends really on your perspective.

This is different from your description of the nature of faeries and "communicati[on] with the deceased etc." in that you agreed that these things only exist as "the misinterpretation of evidence".

if you are out in space you will observe that the sun doesn't rise and set anywhere, in fact its the earth that does the moving. So in a sense from the perspective of standing on earth, this could well be considered "the misinterpretation of evidence"..an illusion.
and yes..the same can be applied to fairies and communication with the deceased etc..

Sapien

solas wrote:

if you are out in space you will observe that the sun doesn't rise and set anywhere, in fact its the earth that does the moving. So in a sense from the perspective of standing on earth, this could well be considered "the misinterpretation of evidence"..an illusion.

In a facile sense. One observing the motion of the Earth with respect to the Sun from any point, were they to correctly interpret the evidence, would realise that the Sun would become visible to a person on the surface of the Earth from the Eastern horizon, and be obscured hours later by the Western horizon.

solas wrote:

and yes..the same can be applied to fairies and communication with the deceased etc..

Except that you agreed that it is necessary that the evidence be misinterpreted in order for them to seem to exist.

solas

yep..so now you know what I think, why dont you enlighten us.

Sapien

solas wrote:

yep..so now you know what I think, why dont you enlighten us.

Hold on! Nearly there...

Do you believe that the farmers in Roscommon imagined the goat-headed spectre?

solas

I believe it was an illusion yes..but I didn't suggest that they imagined it. Perhaps what they saw is merely a misinterpretaion of evidence.

Sapien

Why?

solas

thats why.

Sapien

Wow! You changed that post three times. At least. I think you're having trouble deciding what you believe.

The last addition was:

solas wrote:

Perhaps what they saw is merely a misinterpretaion of evidence.

... whereas you previously agreed that such things as faeries, and presumably goat-headed spectres, can only exist as misinterpretations of evidence.

Do you want to go back and delete the "perhaps", perhaps, or have you changed your opinion?

solas

I edited the post twice..I don't think that the word illuision equates to someone "imagining" something, nor does it mean its not real.

Do you want to go back and delete the "perhaps", perhaps, or have you changed your opinion?

my opinion hasn't changed, if you look through my posts from the beginning you will see that I have at no time suggested that "it does not exist", as if you go to google and look up "pooka" you will find many entries, so in that context the idea of pookas exist.
Are they real? I'm sure to many people they are and I have no objection to that.
But, the whole point of this thread is not about what I believe, while I'm fairly confident in what I believe to be real or not is irrelevant and I've just been sitting here waiting for you to realise that. Just to take you back to the OP...

I've recently heard of a harrowing experience undergone by three seperate people on two seperate ocassions involving some kind of spectral goat on a farm in roscommon.
Apparently the creature, a bizarre manifestation with the body, more or less, of a man and the facial features, apparently, of a goat, can zip from one end of the field to another and moves upright and on all fours.

Just wanted to ask, has anyone ever heard of anything like this? Or is there any place, say online perhaps, that I can look it up?

Just a few points to note about the subject of this thread.
1. the OP is requesting information regarding the phenomena. Whether I believe it occured, whether it is real imaginary or illusory is irrelevant, but I can offer a guideline on the subject..that being the pooka phenomenom.
2.How do we know the three lads were'nt p!ssfaced or suffering from drug induced hallucinogenic trip?

To quote excelsior

Are you here to validate your ego and prove yourself right to yourself or are you here to convince others of an important truth?

and if so..state your truth.

Sapien

I am merely trying to ascertain what you believe, and you have not made it at all clear. I have pursued the matter because you are a moderator of this board, and I am curious as to your perspective.

As far as I can tell, you believe that faeries, spirits, and goat-headed spectres exist somewhere between that which is imaginary, that which is illusory, and that which is real. Beyond that, I'm at a loss. You have tried to circumvent the matter by invoking the word "subjectivity", which, as far as I can tell, was an attempt to draw an element of epistemological scepticism into the discussion. However, without actually making that argument for you, I could not quite see what you mean.

I have corresponded at length with Excelsior, and I believe that he would attest to the fact that I involve myself in discussions in order to further my own understanding, refine my ideas, and learn.

solas

I am curious as to your perspective.

I'm openminded.

I have corresponded at length with Excelsior, and I believe that he would attest to the fact that I involve myself in discussions in order to further my own understanding, refine my ideas, and learn.

thats all well and good but it would be better to start a new thread on the subject of beliefs if you wish to discuss it. As for this thread..have I ever heard of this phenomena? yep.
Is there anywhere to find relevant information? yea..google the word pooka.

Sapien

solas wrote:

I'm openminded.

That's precisely what I would expect of the moderator of a forum for the Paranormal, and so I was surprised at your intitial remarks on this thread which suggested to me a kind of veiled, diplomatic yet unconditional disbelief:

solas wrote:

I guess all these things only exist if you give them permission to (believe in them).

This suggested to me a view which is not uncommon, but I would expect a person interested in the paranormal to, at least, consider the possibility that such entities as a "pooka" could exist in and of themselves. My curiosity was inspired, and it occurred to me that you may be a sceptic, which would make you an unusual but interesting, even laudable choice as one of a number of moderators on a board for the balanced discussion of the paranormal.

To emphasise - the opinions you have described here are not particularly openminded. I, for instance, believe that goat-headed spectres, pookas, faeries, demons, angels, and many more things, all exist, independant of human imagination or illusory phenomena.

When I said that I wish to learn, I did not mean from your own store of knowldege regarding the pooka. I know my way to google, and more importantly, around copyright libraries and my own bookshelves. I wished to learn what you believe.

I do not think it is impertinent to this thread to discuss whether or not posters believe in the entity in question.

Now. What would you like to know?

Sapien

Ah! Moderator magic. The most wonderous kind.

solas

I splt the thread to open up the discussion on the topic of beliefs.

you've obviously had experience with the paranormal Sapien and I gather that much of our beliefs are derived from experience, when I say openminded I mean it to represnt the fact that I respect others beliefs, as I would expect others to respect mine. <edit> note I didn't challenge your beliefs..possibly as you were very busy interrogating me about mine but you obviously have reason to believe what you do, and if you still want to share that info here go right ahead.
I didn't figure my beliefs were relevant in the pooka thread, but feel fee to continue the discussion re that entity there.

Sapien

Fine then. On the topic of beliefs.

I am here to convince you of an important truth.

Goat-headed spectres exist.

solas

ok.
have you seen one, want to share?

Sapien

solas wrote:

ok.
have you seen one, want to share?

I have not, no. Though, it shouldn't be too difficult.

solas

I've experienced a number of psychic and paranormal phenomena, which is one of the reasons why I'm a member of this forum but over the years I've managed to rationalise quite a lot of it hence my current perspective. With regard to goat headed spectres, I can't speak from experience but I would keep an open mind that the experience may have been very real for someone else but as with all paranormal instances, particularly here at this forum "there is always some good in discerning true paranormal experiences from events which may have other explanations".

I'm curious as to why you believe something if you have not experienced it directly.

solas

oh..and btw, just because one is a moderator at a particular forum does not neccessarily mean that they are experts on the subject or that their opinion should not be challenged.
There are plenty of members here who are valuable resources on any given topic.

6th

Sapien wrote:

Fine then. On the topic of beliefs.

I am here to convince you of an important truth.

Goat-headed spectres exist.

Sapien, if you think you can convience anyone of any of your beliefs just by talking about them, you are not showing yourself to be as smart as i think you are. dont be so head on. I believe that energies/spirits etc can, to some people, appear as a goat-headed spectre. I have had experiences for the last 17years or so, 1 was a very negative experience involving something not too dissimilar. Even though i have gone through this things in my head and know them to be "real" i dont for a second think i could make someone believe in them, but to quote Tony Stockwell "if i can make them ask themselve why they dont believe i have achieved something".

Solas: you are guilty ... of being too causious! if you believe in something just say so, your job as a mod is not to tiptoe around subjects but to make sure things dont get out of hand, like people condeming others for their belifs and bullying. You are as free to post what you think as much as everyone else, dont let your responsiblity as a mod hamper this platform for free speach.

6th

oh and now i feel like a third wheel for jumping in on you two guys "stomping it out"

solas

Solas: you are guilty ... of being too causious!

and I have very good reason to be. To be honest if you had asked me a couple of years ago I would have said sure..without question. I worked with spirit for some time but I've had my own beliefs questioned and torn apart so much so that they no longer exist.
I'm practically athiest now, but I wouldn't take anothers beliefs from them. (because I know how wrong that is.)

Oryx

solas wrote:

and I have very good reason to be. To be honest if you had asked me a couple of years ago I would have said sure..without question. I worked with spirit for some time but I've had my own beliefs questioned and torn apart so much so that they no longer exist.
I'm practically athiest now, but I wouldn't take anothers beliefs from them. (because I know how wrong that is.)

Thats sad, but understandable. Even with the limited contact I have with people here, I have had my beliefs questioned and it has shaken me and made me question myself. Im still hanging on to what I believe - but there have been days when its not been easy.

Sapien

solas wrote:

I'm curious as to why you believe something if you have not experienced it directly.

I have not experienced it directly in the same way that I have not directly experienced Venice, though I'm quite willing to concede that it exists. I have encountered a great deal of things very much like it, though it just so happens that none of them happened to have a goat head.

dublin6th wrote:

Sapien, if you think you can convience anyone of any of your beliefs just by talking about them, you are not showing yourself to be as smart as i think you are.

... ... .

I take it you intend this statement in the specific case, rather than the general, because to think it impossible to convince another person through discussion would be to condemn discussion boards as being fundamentally pointless. If you are suggesting that this is uniquely true of the matter at hand, then I say you are no more open-minded that good solas.

dublin6th wrote:

dont be so head on.

How would you have me be? Surreptitious? I grant you, it would be far more difficult to convince a person that pookas exist than it would be to persuade that person of the relative virtues of Marxism, or Capitalism for that matter, provided that person is reasonably intelligent and has had somewhat normal experiences in life. I was, perhaps, struck by a little intellectual ambition in claiming that I could make a compelling argument for the existence of "Goat-headed spectres", something which I may regret, but the principle is the same as that of any other discussion of persuasion.

You understand, of course, that my choice of goat-headed spectres and faeries was arbitrary, serving as a locum for the more general concept of discarnate intelligences, and, perhaps, a deliberately silly and twee one. Had I chosen something more significant to me to serve as the subject of my claim, such as goetic demons, olympic spirits, or qabalistic angels, it would have seemed like proselytisation, as opposed to a general and ingenuous epistemological disquisition.

dublin6th wrote:

I believe that energies/spirits etc can, to some people, appear as a goat-headed spectre.

Then, just to be clear, do you dispute my claim in any way? Many people will, appealing to a humility of understanding of things etheric, excuse any such bizarre manifestation as the peculiar interaction of some such energy/spirit and the perceptual idiom of the observer, saying also that the energy/spirit is all but without attribute in objective terms, which is a polite way of saying that it doesn't exist, or is in reality something very natural and easily explained, like a subconscious complex or endemic spiritual experience. My claim is stronger. It is that there exist spirits with internal and objective characteristics, such as personality, knowledge, will and appearance. Now, often there will be a degree of flux about these things, especially appearance, which may vary from one encounter to another, or in the course of a single encounter, and, over time, may mutate completely. However, many maintain sufficiently coherent motifs in the manner in which the present themselves as to permit the attribution of definite characteristics, such as, say, a goat head.

dublin6th wrote:

Even though i have gone through this things in my head and know them to be "real" i dont for a second think i could make someone believe in them, but to quote Tony Stockwell "if i can make them ask themselve why they dont believe i have achieved something".

Ask yourself why you don't think that you could make someone believe in them. Even the most ardent believers in the supernatural and occult can maintain an odd attitude that these things lie outside the realm of logic, and therefore cannot be impressed upon another through argument, rather can only be accepted through faith. This idea is repugnant to me. I am a magickian, but more importantly, I am a scientist. If I cannot interpret something as being compatible with a broader understanding of existence, then it remains to me nothing more than anomalous information. I have developed an understanding of some of the most exotic supernatural phenomena that humans have experienced in the same logical regimen and intellectual context as I have understood quantum mechanics and moral philosophy. Whether I can expound that understanding in a clear way, indeed, whether that understanding will stand to inspection, is another question.

solas

It is that there exist spirits with internal and objective characteristics, such as personality, knowledge, will and appearance. Now, often there will be a degree of flux about these things, especially appearance, which may vary from one encounter to another, or in the course of a single encounter, and, over time, may mutate completely. However, many maintain sufficiently coherent motifs in the manner in which the present themselves as to permit the attribution of definite characteristics, such as, say, a goat head.

no doubt there are plenty of people here who will be interested in discussing such matters, just be sure to read the charter and stay within the guidelines.

TheStrandRoads

it would have seemed like proselytisation, as opposed to a general and ingenuous epistemological disquisition

.....Did someone just swallow a dictionary?

Only joking! But you do have the unique ability to make sure your readers consult www.dictionary.com a couple of times for each post (I know I had to!). Perhaps you should consider adding the link into your signature to help your future reader's understanding. I get the cringe-worthy feeling that you've gone n' spent way too much time cultivating them - making sure they're.........just right.

Sapien

solas wrote:

no doubt there are plenty of people here who will be interested in discussing such matters, just be sure to read the charter and stay within the guidelines.

Is there anything in particular in the charter you would like to draw my attention to?

Oryx

slightly ot, Im with thestrandroads, your use of language is admirable sapien, but a nod towards those of us without the benefit of such education would help make this thread less of a chore to read

>>> on topic, this is turning into quite a discussion, as I see it, of how/why/ and whether you try to convince people of your own beliefs, especially when they are outside of most peoples regular experience, and open you up to ridicule. My experience has taught me that discussing things such as magick-with-a-k,spirit contact, or premonitions with friends and acquantances who have no experience of same has led to me receiving strange looks at the very least. (here, I have no idea how I come across, but Id imagine its as slightly loopy ) I agree with dub6th, I dont think boards is a good place to really discuss such things, (although we still will ) because no one here can produce proof, and we end up going round in circles with the sceptics!

solas

Is there anything in particular in the charter you would like to draw my attention to?

from the charter: As I have already stated this forum is for those that have an interest in the paranormal as such disparaging statements against posters for voicing their beliefs are not welcome.
I refer you to:

sapien wrote:

If you are suggesting that this is uniquely true of the matter at hand, then I say you are no more open-minded that good solas.

have you have come here to pass judgment on everybody who doesn't think like you?

sapien wrote:

Ask yourself why you don't think that you could make someone believe in them.

we're not in the business of converting people here, this place is primarliyto function as the charter states, The function of this board is to provide a place for those who have a keen interest in the paranormal to discuss paranormal happenings and their own paranormal experiences...so feel free to discuss your own experiences and not the gospel accrording to sapien.

no flaming, trolling, personal abuse or insults.

CodeMonkey

Sapien wrote:

My claim is stronger. It is that there exist spirits with internal and objective characteristics, such as personality, knowledge, will and appearance. Now, often there will be a degree of flux about these things, especially appearance, which may vary from one encounter to another, or in the course of a single encounter, and, over time, may mutate completely. However, many maintain sufficiently coherent motifs in the manner in which the present themselves as to permit the attribution of definite characteristics, such as, say, a goat head.

So you have evidence or personal experience to backup your claim? I'm actually interested in how you came up with this conclusion.

6th

Sapien wrote:

because to think it impossible to convince another person through discussion would be to condemn discussion boards as being fundamentally pointless

Really? ... the point of a discussion board is to bring everyone around to one persons belief system? .... obviously my mum was wrong when she told me i was a clever little boy?

Remember a belief is an incredibly powerful thing, people die for their beliefs all the time, i'm just happy sharing mine with a few close people and dont feel the need to push them on other people. I have no "proof" that my way is the right way, i just know its right for me.

6th

Sapien

Solas old man, I'm very confused.

... this forum is for those that have an interest in the paranormal as such disparaging statements against posters for voicing their beliefs are not welcome.

I took this to mean that it was not permitted to ridicule people for their belief in the paranormal. How in Hades could I be accused of that?

solas wrote:

have you have come here to pass judgment on everybody who doesn't think like you?

No, but I reserve the right to disagree.

solas wrote:

we're not in the business of converting people here

...

Exclesior wrote:

Are you here to validate your ego and prove yourself right to yourself or are you here to convince others of an important truth?

Are we no longer working in accordance with this credo?

solas wrote:

so feel free to discuss your own experiences and not the gospel accrording to sapien

I refer you to the title of the thread.

no flaming, trolling, personal abuse or insults.

That would really not be my style.

CodeMonkey wrote:

So you have evidence or personal experience to backup your claim? I'm actually interested in how you came up with this conclusion.

I cannot think of a way in which to present evidence in this format. I will, of course, be happy to relate certain aspects of my personal experiences of these phenomena. The point I have been labouring to make is that if one accepts that belief in the paranormal is valid then one should not consider it any more difficult to convince people that it is so than it would be to convince them of anything more mundane.

And Dublin6th, I am not saying that the objective of all discussion is to harmonise and homogenise the beliefs of the participants. However, I will say that discussion is more than simply putting forward one's ideas and leaving it at that. There must be interaction, diversivolence and disagreement, otherwise beliefs can never be challenged, developed or refined. If you say what you believe, I will comment, perhaps disagree (comme ca), and I would expect precisely the same in return. What a boring exercise it would all be if people simply declared what they believed.

KatieK wrote:

My experience has taught me that discussing things such as magick-with-a-k,spirit contact, or premonitions with friends and acquantances who have no experience of same has led to me receiving strange looks at the very least. (here, I have no idea how I come across, but Id imagine its as slightly loopy ) I agree with dub6th, I dont think boards is a good place to really discuss such things, (although we still will ) because no one here can produce proof, and we end up going round in circles with the sceptics!

This is another important aspect of discussion - not merely to hear what others believe, but to discover what one believes oneself. I would argue that if one cannot even begin to make a reasoned argument in favour of one's ideas to another person, then one really does not really believe them at all. This happens frequently with the topic at hand, where people, out of romanticism, would dearly love to think that magick is real, that faeries exist, or that we continue to exist after death, but cannot logically arrive at these conclusions. The response is often to decide that these things inherently defy logic, not because they are wrong, but because they are in some way beyond human understanding, or to suppress the underlying feeling of disbelief and incredulity to the point where it almost ceases to exist. Not until one can confidently argue one's case does one truly believe. I urge people to try. It may happen that you will be disabused of your belief in the paranormal, be convinced by the sceptics. If this is so, then it is meant to be, you do not really believe. Conversely, you may find a deeper understanding of the supernatural, a more complete, edifying and meaningful belief that does not have to hide in the murk of faith.

It is precisely because of this tendency of believers not to discuss their beliefs that makes it so easy for the sceptics. Believers do not discuss, do not develop their arguments, are ill-equipped to survive in debate. I offer myself as a sounding board to any who wish to test their theories in defence or attack of the contention of the existence of the supernatural.

Oryx

sapien wrote:

Solas old man, I'm very confused.

Oh, dear, someone else thinks solas is a guy. I think you need to feminise your avatar or something....

sapien wrote:

I would argue that if one cannot even begin to make a reasoned argument in favour of one's ideas to another person, then one really does not really believe them at all

Oh, I can really, but up to now Ive chosen not to do it on boards as it is a public forum, and because details cannot be given out here. Weak argument but valid, just the same.

solas

sapien, the charter was updated to allow for discussion and debate. Of course you can disagree and put forward your point of view but try not to ridicule others in the process.
While I respect your beliefs I would ask you to extend that respect towards others and if you want to openly discuss in a valid way your understanding please do so, I'm sure many would appreciate it.
(if another came in here to blatently belittle you and your beliefs I would refer them to the charter too)

If you say what you believe, I will comment, perhaps disagree (comme ca), and I would expect precisely the same in return. What a boring exercise it would all be if people simply declared what they believed.

So far all I have ascertained is that you find that belief in the paranormal is valid. The rest seems to be a lot of semantics

Conversely, you may find a deeper understanding of the supernatural, a more complete, edifying and meaningful belief that does not have to hide in the murk of faith.

Unless you have empirical data which proves your claim then it is a belief, therefore it is faith based.
I openly welcome any experiments you can provide in which we can observe any claims which demonstrate or validate the paranormal.

Oh, dear, someone else thinks solas is a guy. I think you need to feminise your avatar or something....

I must have a very strong masculine persona

6th

Sapien wrote:

It is precisely because of this tendency of believers not to discuss their beliefs that makes it so easy for the sceptics.

I thought it was the lack of evidence?