As I mentioned to Steven Paul last week, I was disappointed in the episode of “Penn & Teller’s [Horse-hockey]” (there! I’m getting closer to the real name) last Monday that dealt with ghost-hunters.

Yes, they made them look like idiots. Yes, by extension, they made a case that anybody that would take them seriously would be an idiot. It’s all the usual stuff for P&T, and they could punch the clock at the end of another hard week, knowing they had done their bit to espouse the virtue of Real Science over the bombastic fakery of myth and superstition and Unreal Science.

As far as it went, I suppose I couldn’t disagree with them, even if I do think that they must occupy a different world where Real Science is always consistent, coherent and speaks with one voice. They ask me to have faith just as the paranormal proponents do — they just don’t call it that.

Which goes to the heart of the bigger issue I have with doing a show that’s supposed to deal once and for all with the rise of spiritualism among ostensibly intelligent people, and that is that you can’t tackle that subject without at least touching on the subject of faith. In a nutshell, I don’t have a problem with spiritualism because it’s bad science; I have a problem with it because it’s bad theology.

Now, of course I should have known that P&T wouldn’t see want to take the argument in this direction. You’d have to be pretty obtuse not to have noticed just how much contempt they have for all That Sort of Thing. But what I thought they might be able to help me understand is if these ghost-hunters really believe this, or are they just con men. And if they do believe this — WHAT do they believe?

This is where that Spiritualists — ghost-hunters and ghost-believers — are infuriatingly evasive. And it’s such a simple thing. So you believe in ghosts. What do you believe?

The modern answer from the ghost-hunters includes a lot of pseudo-scientific piffle, and P&T were quite right to try and express how meaningless almost every syllable of it is. But most Spiritualists are not ghost-hunters, and even the ghost-hunters must be capable of leaving off with the techno jargon. So again, what do they believe?

I’ve never gotten an answer or anything that sounds close. All the Spiritualists I’ve met are vague and sidestep anything that sounds too definitive. But here is what I infer the answer to be:

Ghost-believer’s Manifesto

• I believe that the spirits of the departed come back and visit us in the world as ghosts.
• I believe that ghosts are often the spirits of people who have died so suddenly or under such tragic circumstances that they “weren’t ready” to cross over to the Other Side yet. Or they could be people who just had too much unfinished business to leave quite yet.
• When here, they will haunt places and things, which means that they are just … around. Sometimes. If you encounter them, you may sense them by sight, sound or another sense. But you may also just “feel” them there. Or they may affect things — the temperature, the lights, doors or windows.

Those seem like the things that any Spiritualist would have to agree with. After that, I would think it breaks down. For instance, are all the ghosts good or are some bad? If a place is haunted, should you try to get the ghosts out or not?

But even just sticking to the basics, what I have always wanted to ask a Spiritualist if they wouldn’t just fly off the handle is, “Do you believe in a loving, caring and intelligent God Who has care and concern for the living and the dead?” If they do — and I think that most Spiritualists do, “Why would such a God do this? What lasting benefit comes to either the ghost or the one who witnesses it? The first one is condemned to continue acting out the worst moments of its life without respite or the hope of altering the past. The witness is confounded (or titillated) by something sad or scary or pitiful that he or she can’t do anything about. They’re both passive and the situation seems pointless and endless. Does that sound like something God would do?”

And since I’m being completely self-indulgent, let’s put credulity on hold and imagine that I could say all that and get a logically consistent answer, which is “no.” What follows from that is much more difficult, and I have less certainity that I even know the answer. “On the other hand, if you believe that there are good spirits, isn’t it possible there are bad spirits? And isn’t it precisely the kind of activity that a bad spirit would be involved in — simply putting out vague impressions, never being committed exactly to any set of rules, preying on the emotions of bereaved, bored or perplexed people, occupying some place in a human’s heart that might belong to something more worthwhile, and always confusing, muddling, obfuscating the truths about life and death, salvation and condemnation, heaven and hell?”

The thing is — in case it’s not clear — I don’t say I absolutely know what’s going on. I have conjecture, which is based on my life’s experience and the authority I give to things like church and theology that have no meaning to most Spiritualists. Without getting any closer to their experience, I’m only prepared to go so far. I’m just a little sorry that P&T did such a shoddy job, as I reckon it, of telling me what’s at the bottom of it.

Oh well. Just so I don’t come off like I’m bashing, I’ll say that their show tonight is about the excesses of some environmentalists. Since that one doesn’t touch on anything theological, I might find it a better risk.