acs.ucalgary.ca!bishop (Lionel Richard Clark) writes:
>Original-Sender: acs.ucalgary.ca!bishop (Lionel Richard Clark)
> I have noticed a few things as well... just as an aside..
> There are two general classes of readers for oobe...
>1) the people who believe in OOBE and related phenomena (Telepathy, et al)
>2) those who do not, the skeptics.
> There are also two general classes of people.
>1) those who have experienced OOBE and related phenomena
>2) those who have not.
> What I wouls like to know is, why is it that the people who are in group one
>above, are almost sure to be in group one, below?
This is not necessarily true, just more frequent.
It seems that the only way
>to make someone believe in something like that is for them to be the one who
>is actually experiencing it.
This is only logical. Is that the way science works? Even against itself
(If I may be allowed to use the fallacy of pesonalization of science).
It seems that the most powerful evidence is the
>ONLY evidence here. Those that have not experienced anything of the sort seem
>to be constantly searching their minds for the scam-angle of these events or
>tales that must surely exist. Those who have experienced what, to them, appear to be an OOBE or similar type of experience, believe with everything they are
>worth.
Again this not necessarily true.
> Why is there no middle ground?
What would that be?
If you mean 1 in the top and 2 in bottom, there may be.
If you mean 2 in the top and 1 in bottom, there are.
If you mean people who have experienced, but are unsure, there are.
If you mean anything else, please explain yourself.