I hear that story and become curious about why this person experienced "ghosts". It is relevant information, although without using a judging function it has no inherent meaning. Without adding the judging function, it is neither true nor false. It isn't about the credibility of the existence of ghosts. I see an individual with an experience and there is some reason for that experience. Letting go of all morality and logic, the reasons could include the existence of ghosts or it could be a psychological phemonmen. Regardless of whether it is a tangible fact or not, it is interesting that a human being would have that experience. I would take that and draw no conclusion, but just tuck it away. I've had similar "feelings" at various times in my life and being a strongly Ni- perceiving dominant person, I don't pass judgment on those experiences. They do not make me believe in ghosts and they don't make me not believe. It provides another instance when a human being believes they have perceived a loved one in a non-tangible form. That's interesting to me because I don't have an explanation as to why people keep experiencing such things. It doesn't prove that their perception and manner of describing it have any basis in concrete fact, but that doesn't mean it has nothing to do with reality. Imagination is part of reality even though it is intangible. Such information ends up in my metaphorical pile of puzzle pieces that don't fit into the internal frameworks that make sense to me. I'm equally interested in the intangible, metaphysical, abstract, and metaphorical as having meaning and information about reality as I am interested in the measurable and verifiable. Different sorts of data require different tools to process. Some tools deal with identifying concrete "facts', other tools are useful for processing speculation.