Haruhi
New
So replies are necessary to points, otherwise there is no point in making them in the first place. What I see at your link is an aggregator website for undemonstrable stories. The same old routine.
Therefore I said that a replica was not necessary.
*What?*
Your reply was predictable, so it was not necessary.
Any advance yet on finding a case from psychic research that is in any way actually checkable?
In any case, this isn't really against you. I know it from my own self-questioning on the subject, for many years.
Search on the Internet.
Ok - your warranted belief that demonstration can not be equal to subjective evidence is: that your subjective exploration proves it.
(I'm spinning now and I must fall down)
No, don't point me towards a *search*...point me towards the evidence that you yourself claim exists.
I already did it and not served at all, so let's leave.
Kai,What I see at your link is an aggregator website for undemonstrable stories. The same old routine.
Kai,
Your belief in this assertion must lie in your specific definition of demonstration. Happiness is a subjective experience, but facial gestures are indirect evidence. They are patterned data enough to be able to judge a happiness level from a photograph of faces. Testing for subjective feelings and states is reasonably well-developed science. Why are these not demonstrable in your take of how to observe natural phenomena? Their subjective states are both a narrative and fully subjective.