|
Goto page :  1, 2 |
| Author | Message |
|---|
Ian
Admin
Age : 35
Joined : 24 Aug 2007
Posts : 768
Location : Carlisle, Cumbria
|  Subject: Re: Ghostly Categories  Wed 05 Mar 2008, 1:33 pm | |
| "The visible disembodied soul of a dead person" is a definition I have found for a ghost and one I think we can ignore. But it does illustrate Matt's point that culturally the term ghost is related to dead people and is associated as such by the the general population.
As people who have looked more closely into hauntings as Mysteryshopper is saying we can see that there is no evidence really to associate ghosts with the dead. So should we be using the term ghost? Should we just stick with apparition? This restricts it to just one aspect of a haunting, the actual visual experience.
| Quote: | | I think definitions of types must rely on witness descriptions. This isn't unscientific - animal species were originally described purely on appearance and behaviour. |
Of course you are right with your comment on observations, but I think the quality of the descriptions have to play a key part if it is possible to narrow catagories down further.
_________________
"Sometimes I just sit and think, and sometimes I just sit". |
|
  | |
mysteryshopper
Joined : 05 Feb 2008
Posts : 158
| | Subject: Re: Ghostly Categories Wed 05 Mar 2008, 2:11 pm | |
| | matt.h wrote: | | Are we not better served accepting that "ghost" will always be a rather slippery concept and instead concentrate on classifying phenomena rather than the manifold intepretations of the causes behind them? |
| Ian wrote: | | Of course you are right with your comment on observations, but I think the quality of the descriptions have to play a key part if it is possible to narrow catagories down further. |
I believe we have reached some sort of agreement that any definition of paranormal phenomena should be based on observation rather than on supposed explanations, whether from popular culture or not. 
So, Ian, do you still want to classify types of ghost or should we be looking more widely? Personally, I think the concept of a haunting, whether it includes apparitions or not, is a phenomenon that can be usefully defined. The most important point about it is that it stays in one location which is surely important to understanding its true nature. |
|
| | |
agricola
Age : 29
Joined : 26 Feb 2008
Posts : 72
Location : Edinburgh
| | Subject: Re: Ghostly Categories Wed 05 Mar 2008, 7:39 pm | |
| How about;
Ghost - the appearance of a non-corporeal entity formerly believed to have previously been living. |
|
| | |
Ian
Admin
Age : 35
Joined : 24 Aug 2007
Posts : 768
Location : Carlisle, Cumbria
| | Subject: Re: Ghostly Categories Wed 05 Mar 2008, 8:20 pm | |
| | Quote: | | So, Ian, do you still want to classify types of ghost or should we be looking more widely? |
I'd be happy to carry on trying to define the whole haunting experience. However, whilst having a bath, re-enacting the battle of Trafalgar with my glow in the dark Darth Vader Rubber Ducks (yes plural) and trying to remember the Rubby Ducky song I learned from Seaseme Street as a kid, I had a thought. What about ghost ships as are reputed to haunt the Solway Firth
http://www.mysteriousbritain.co.uk/england/cumbria/cumbria8.html.
And what about ghostly aircraft and carriages? Do we need to change the definition to include inanimate objects? Does anyone know of a recent sighting of a ghost ship, carriage or aircraft? Are all ghost aircraft from WWII? Phantom vehicles would probably make a great topic to discuss on their own. If we are talking hallucinations then technically there is no limit to what can be experienced, person, animal, vehicle, ghostly vegetable even.
_________________
"Sometimes I just sit and think, and sometimes I just sit". |
|
| | |
mysteryshopper
Joined : 05 Feb 2008
Posts : 158
| | Subject: Re: Ghostly Categories Thu 06 Mar 2008, 11:43 am | |
| | agricola wrote: | | How about; Ghost - the appearance of a non-corporeal entity formerly believed to have previously been living. |
If I saw a ghost, I wouldn't 'believe' it had been previously living. That's because I know (i) there are ghosts of the living and (ii) that I can hallucinate an entity that has never existed, from my brain.
Does that mean I am destined never to see a ghost? And if I see a human figure in front of me that subsequently vanishes, what do I call it? |
|
| | |
agricola
Age : 29
Joined : 26 Feb 2008
Posts : 72
Location : Edinburgh
| | Subject: Re: Ghostly Categories Thu 06 Mar 2008, 12:53 pm | |
| | mysteryshopper wrote: |
Does that mean I am destined never to see a ghost? And if I see a human figure in front of me that subsequently vanishes, what do I call it? |
An apparition?
And don't forget animals! |
|
| | |
mysteryshopper
Joined : 05 Feb 2008
Posts : 158
| | Subject: Re: Ghostly Categories Thu 06 Mar 2008, 1:43 pm | |
| So an apparition is different to a ghost! Can you explain the difference please?
(can we take animals as read, we can't even agree a definition for human yet!) |
|
| | |
Ian
Admin
Age : 35
Joined : 24 Aug 2007
Posts : 768
Location : Carlisle, Cumbria
| | Subject: Re: Ghostly Categories Sat 08 Mar 2008, 6:47 pm | |
| Everytime we include something along the lines of "beleived to have been living" or "from the past" etc we are falling into the same trap as the "visible disembodied soul of a dead person" definition I mentioned above, which is we end up showing a bias toward an unproven theory. I think this is exactly what Mysteryshopper has been getting at and he is right.
Ghosts are part of a haunting but there aren't really any links between the visual experience appartion and for instance banging doors, foating armchairs (I wish) or flying crockery (I'd love to see some of that going on). I don't think anyone has seen an appartion manipulate a physical object.
Therefore for a ghost I think we are looking at the visual experience, but the word ghost does conjure in most people a preconcieved notion of a visible soul, so we either ignore this or replace the word with appartion.
As for defining each aspect of a haunting or the haunting as a whole, that would be good too.
_________________
"Sometimes I just sit and think, and sometimes I just sit". |
|
| | |
Ian
Admin
Age : 35
Joined : 24 Aug 2007
Posts : 768
Location : Carlisle, Cumbria
| | Subject: Re: Ghostly Categories Sat 15 Mar 2008, 9:21 am | |
| I just want to tie this up with the ‘Do Ghosts Go Woo’ topic slightly. If apparitions are silent then should that be included in the definition of one. If some apparitions are silent and others have been seen making a noise then do we have two different categories?
_________________
"Sometimes I just sit and think, and sometimes I just sit". |
|
| | |
|
Home
Mysterious Britain mainpage
Mailing List
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
