Who & what are the demons ?

If demons do exist and have a demonstrable effect on reality then denying that they exist because we don't like the idea of such things would just be an act of denial. It would be like denying that viruses exist because I don't like them. I don't see how denying reality is conducive to a rational approach to life. Fortunately we don't have to deny reality in order to reject the notion of demons as particularly likely. If the events and experiences that are attributed to demons would occur whether demons exist or not then on what basis are demons being postulated as the cause of anything at all?

In my case, there is no logical explanation for the multiple voice reply that we heard.

HUH?How about trickery or hallucination or just plain lying?

So, whatever you believe may have caused this event, do you consider belief in demons as the cause of such an experience to be a reasonable conclusion?Do you consider those who believe that demons are responsible for similar experiences or events to hold false beliefs?What do you think forms the basis of these beliefs if it is not based on the actual existence of demons?

Although I cannot rule out trickery 100%, I will say that based on my understanding of my three friends present, their behavior and corroboration of the events, and the sincerity of their testimonies, I highly doubt that they tricked me. Possible, but unlikely.Hallucination? It would have had to have been a shared hallucination, also highly unlikely.Lying? I can state that I myself am not lying...to the best of my knowledge. I cannot vouch for anyone else. (Though again, I judge them as honest to the best of their capability.)

I'm not asking about proof and falsification here.I am asking if you consider those who believe in the existence of demons to be wrong?

No. I dont feel that a belief can be wrong. Misguided, perhaps. Illogical? Most certainly. Psychotic? Occasionally. Wrong? Definitely not. In my world view, absence of evidence must never be linked with evidence of absence. Science and proof are not the only tools in the satchel.

Dude that is bonkers. And, if you think about it, not a logically consistent approach.There are some who believe that president Obama is the anti-Christ. There are some people who believe he is not the anti-Christ. If president Obama is not the anti-Christ those who believe that he is the anti-Christ are wrong. If president Obama does turn out to be the anti-Christ those who believe he is not the anti-Christ - Are wrong.Either way there are currently people who hold a belief regarding president Obama’s status as the anti-Christ which is wrong.Likewise demons either exist or they don’t. So there are necessarily people out there who hold beliefs about the existence of demons which are wrong (some believe they exist and some believe they don't) Yet you say you don’t believe this event was caused by demons. Which means you must consider those who believe that a demon did cause this event are wrong in this belief. Regardless of who is right or wrong somebody’s belief regarding this matter has to be wrong. You can’t believe opposite things and both be correct. That makes no sense whatsoever.I am not sure why you are so resistant to the idea that a belief can be wrong?

This whole idea that a belief can not be wrong is ludicrous. This belief pervades this site and has gotten me in trouble more than once.From forum guidelines.

quote:

---

The sincerely held beliefs of other members deserve your respect.

---

Bullshit. Some beliefs are only worth derision and abuse.Are the beliefs of a member of NAMBLA worthy of my respect. Neo-Nazi and Klan beliefs?Beliefs should be ridiculed and tested. If a person can not support their beliefs then they should reexamine them. Happens to me all the time.

I wouldn't have put it quite as belligerently but I agree in spirit.But, to be fair, anyone who is a regular here can probably not be accused of refusing to engage with people who will challenge their beliefs.i think what Phat said about belief is silly. But Phat remains 'one of the good guys' here all the same.......

Why is that the case ?In some circumstances, I can agree - you cite neo-Nazi and Klan beliefs, and I would agree with you there.But I think that we need to have a harm based assessment of beliefs, before we feel that there is an absolute need for them to be ridiculed and tested.If someone believes in something which we feel is demonstrably wrong (YECism, demons, an athlete tying their shoes in a particular fashion to improve their chances of winning), then I think that we act disrespectfully in attacking those beliefs, unless the belief (or the desire to promulgate it in science lessons, for example) can cause harm to others.Life's a difficult old course, a lot of the time, and if someone's belief helps them through it, without harming others, then I don't begrudge them that belief.

Demons can't be demonstrated to be wrong any more than they can be demonstrated to exist. When will you people understand that absence of evidence never proves evidence of absence.

And when will you people understand that absence of evidence is evidence of well.. let see... uh..oh yeah. Nothing.This whole idea that since there is no evidence we should seriously entertain the idea that something is possible isn't just ridiculous it is assinine.

But demons either exist or they don't.So regardless of whether we ever know whether demons exist or not some people are going to be wrong in their beliefs about the existence of demons aren't they?Either those who believe demons do exist are wrong or those who believe they don't exist are wrong. We may never know which. But we do know for a fact that some beliefs are just factually wrong.How can it be otherwise?