Seen and thought, yeah, it should be that, ideally. Holding opinions simply because he or she said so is a very dangerous way to live!
Some people talk about what they've seen but most talk about what they've heard. It sounds the same but it's a big difference.
Submitted 10 months ago by DominatorX1@thelemmy.club to showerthoughts@lemmy.world
Comments
ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 10 months ago
DominatorX1@thelemmy.club 10 months ago
Not to be a negative nelly but that’s like the whole internet. Our whole nodern culture even.
cloudless@piefed.social 10 months ago
[deleted]TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zip 10 months ago
Let alone someone touching the ghost.
frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 months ago
I have met people. I still need more proof of ghosts than “we all saw something we couldn’t explain”.
entropicdrift@lemmy.sdf.org 10 months ago
Come to Pennsylvania, we have tons of alleged ghost sightings. I’ve met several people who claim to have seen ghosts.
generallynonsensical@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
My grandfather always said, “Believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear”. I thought it was stupid when I was younger but holy jebus does it ring true these days.
DominatorX1@thelemmy.club 10 months ago
Heck yes but. Seeing is better but hearing is more efficient. Like, it takes less energy, portable, transmittible.
So inevitably the hearing is gonna win. You’re gonaa have this hige mass of people connected by hearing. And this relatively little bunch of people who sensibly stick with seeing, looking around going wtf.