Howard the Duck

he works there, I think

__________________


Malaise is THE dominant human predilection.

Freebase Dali

See, this reminds me of another thing that annoys me.
I understand that it's mostly a cultural phenomenon that connects creepy, death-history places with ghosts, but what I don't understand is why people seem to have hardly any affinity for placing as much credence to a belief in ghosts on busy city streets, new and sharp looking buildings, open fields, ditches, and any other non-creepy place where any tragedies or deaths have occurred.
If ghosts were the result of people dying with unfinished business, violent deaths, injustices, tragedy or frequency, then ghostly occurrences should be happening absolutely everywhere, all the time.
So, the next argument would be "Well, it has to have a history of such a thing". Why? Are we saying that there's simply a chance that, say--for an arbitrary statistic--1 out of every 100 horrible tragedies produces a haunting? That would have to be the statement, seeing as how a single horrible tragedy on its own doesn't produce a haunting every time. So if that's the statement, then the reasoning either has to say "yea, it's just a roll of the dice" (which is a pretty flimsy foundation), or has to keep reaching further to rely on some other cause to validate it, using some nonsense like "well, there was more quartz rock in the ground beneath the place where this tragedy happened, and the memory of the event was imprinted"...

I realize that all represents a particular sect of such believers, but the willingness to believe in the concept, regardless of assumed explanation--or lack thereof--is still based on hypothesis and nothing more. While it can be said that a skeptic is relying on nothing more than hypothesis when discounting either a culturally influential belief in ghosts or a belief that "sounds" more scientific, the most objective factor remains that skepticism itself should rely on whichever explanation has the most actual evidence. (We use physics and neuroscience for this sort of thing.)
And that is just not something that happens with a culture that assumes a spooky building or place with a dark history is supportive evidence.

WWWP

Oh man, that reminds me of a story. When I was around 10 years old I thought I had a personal relationship with a "ghost" and my cousin and I ended up breaking in to an abandoned building in my hometown to "investigate" the ghosts death, hoping to set her soul free or something cliche like that. We broke a window to get in and everything. I had an overactive imagination and watched too much tv.

__________________

#DEMODFROWNLAND
#TERMLIMITSFORMODERATORS

Guybrush

Good point and something I've thought about myself. Most civilized places have seen a fair share of death, although some more than others, and you'd think places like Rwanda f.ex where tragedies have occurred in relatively recent times would be teeming with ghosts.

As as you also write, it is strange how a ghost may haunt the house or the barn, but not the outdoors between them and not the surrounding fields. Are ghosts strictly an indoors phenomenon?

__________________
Something Completely Different

jenny111

no i have never seen ghosts.

Howard the Duck

i thought i saw a "toyol" once, though

a toyol is a sort of child demon kept by Malay witches to help punters harass their enemies

__________________


Malaise is THE dominant human predilection.

PoorOldPo

Did you looks at its tits or something?

__________________
https://www.instagram.com/hennas.lullaby/

Howard the Duck

it's usually a boy demon

and if you're curious, no, no genitals

if you meant anybody putting a toyol on me, no, just looking at somebody's tits is not enough to warrant such a reaction

__________________


Malaise is THE dominant human predilection.

PoorOldPo

__________________
https://www.instagram.com/hennas.lullaby/

Raust

i heard what sounded like cats in my walls this one time.