Question Author
Yes, sorry, woofgang, you did answer my question, as naomi reminds me. You said that you divide up irrational things according to how they affected you personally, without, apparently, caring about their irrationality.
That's fair enough. I asked for an answer, not specifying that it had to make sense, and you supplied one. I apologise.
ludwig, what an easy intellectual life you have. You don't know about something, you don't bother to look into the facts about it, you then file it under 'pending'. Do you seriously not realise that if you were to look into those facts you could take the matter out of that pending tray without having to take my word for it? Is that too much trouble? Apparently so.
naomi, I don't know how it happened but you and I seem to have parted intellectual company somewhere along that long line of our debating together. Your attitude now is to accuse me of all manner of attitudes and opinions that I don't hold. And that's fine in a free country. Be my guest.
Where you are wildly wrong (as is ludwig) is in accusing me of holding fixed opinions based on some sort anti-spiritual dogma, refusing to believe in things out of sheer cussedness.
Pompous as it may sound, I arrive at conclusions by using the tools of fact, evidence, reason, argument, logic and commonsense. If those tools had led me to accept the afterlife, the soul, ghosts, ESP, fairies and any of those other things I listed in my original question, then I would have done so willingly. Why shouldn't I? I accept other things where that process leads me.
About one thing, though, you may be right -that my question was daft. I suppose it was stupid of me to expect a rational answer from someone who would have to admit (to qualify as an answerer) to believing in at least one irrational thing.
Ah well, all part of life's rich pageantry.