Skeptics and Believers

(posted on 27-Mar-2000)

I've spent quite a bit of time rotating between believer boards and skeptic boards -- so I can assure you that believers give as good as they get.

The thing you have to understand is that the skeptics truly do not believe in a life after death. And oddly enough, neither do the believers, though they sincerely hope otherwise. Perhaps the most intelligent observation that Pierre ever made is that if one truly "believed" they would be content with the knowledge that the deceased exists in another form. The continued pursuit for ADC's via mediumship tends to indicate that the survivors are looking for "proof" in much the same way the skeptics are -- albeit in another form and with much less restriction (in terms of scientific proof).

Where does that leave us? Interestingly enough, I've come to see that a lot of these debates pivot on the characteristics of individuals. Some people will be offended no matter what is said and others will say anything without measuring its effect on others. I have never seen the skeptics mock grief in and of itself. I have, however, seen them become somewhat irreverent at some of the more outrageous claims made in the name of after death communications.

The question of whether the end justifies the means has been one that I've had to consider at length. If the skeptics can illustrate ways the believers can protect themselves from possible fraud, is that necessarily a bad thing? Whether the subject is approached straight on or dealt with humorously tends to be a facet of the individuality of the poster.

Although I personally believe in life after death, I have never and would never consult a medium. Nor would I obsess upon whether or not an ADC would come my way because I personally think that area falls within the will of God. And truthfully, I don't believe in "signs" in terms of songs, pennies, dog barks, or what have you. When one begins to consider anything and everything a "sign" from the deceased, that idea borders on mental illness. I don't mean that unkindly. Let me clarify. It is a clear break with reality and should be treated as such. I think people can be driven to such illness due to an inability to cope with grief. Such things are medically treatable and I personally consider it an act of kindness to suggest these people consider seeing a physician.

Please understand that if one reaches the point where a pigeon feather becomes a "sign" -- it's a good bet that the survivor's entire life has become focused on their loss. Consider this, where is the quality of life in such instances? I would hope that the grievers could come to terms with their loss and find some measure of solace. I truthfully don't think sitting back and watching someone go off the deep end is nice thing to do -- so in that respect, I do admire the skeptics for their attempt to bring the grievers to consider medical assistance in such cases.

What I have found over time is that skeptics do not think like believers and consequently, they've their own ways of doing things. In their own way, they're being as caring and loving as any of the believers. It just manifests in a different fashion.

I don't know if I've made a great deal of sense, sometimes my communication skills can be out of whack. Particularly because I've been ill for the past month and don't seem to be shaking it. For that reason, I've tended to limit my posts and email in recent days. However, I felt obliged to speak on defense of the skeptics when I read your post. If I don't answer any reply you might make, please don't feel you are being ignored. I truly am not online much recently and when I am it's very been very limited.

Debutante