I believe that there's an afterlife and I accept near-death experiences stemming from that. My hypothesis like others is that increasing technology to bring people back from the brink of death is enabling us to have a glimpse into the afterlife more than ever before. I recall Dr. Sam Parnia hypothesizing something similar when he brings up resuscitation. However, I don't accept some of the other paranormal phenomena, like telepathy, telekinesis, precognition, remote viewing, etc. It seems that a lot of people try to lump all of these phenomena together as if you accept one then you have to accept the total package. But do you? It seems harder to form a scientific theory with all of these things being mixed in together. For the record, my position is not that these phenomena are false but rather I don't know if they're false or true but I am open to evidence.
Questions:
Is there a rational basis that shows that accepting one paranormal phenomena means that you must accept all of them? If I accept telekinesis then does mean that I also accept telepathy, remote viewing, etc through logical implication?
If there is a logical implication, where do you draw the line on which types of paranormal phenomena to accept? Do you accept OBEs, prayers, healings, spells, pyrokinesis, ghosts, psychics, mediums, etc?
Questions:
Is there a rational basis that shows that accepting one paranormal phenomena means that you must accept all of them? If I accept telekinesis then does mean that I also accept telepathy, remote viewing, etc through logical implication?
If there is a logical implication, where do you draw the line on which types of paranormal phenomena to accept? Do you accept OBEs, prayers, healings, spells, pyrokinesis, ghosts, psychics, mediums, etc?