I have never seen a ghost, and I have not experienced a paranormal event.  So what is a ghost, what does it look like, the process of stating a precise meaning seems to differ depending on where the information comes from.

The definition of a ghost is said to be the apparition of a deceased person, frequently similar in appearance to that person, and usually encountered in places he or she frequented, or in association with the person's former belongings.

 The definition is lacking an accurate description, at best it only relates to something existing in perception, a ghostly appearing figure. A definition must show and have an exclusive meaning, so there is no confusion.

Example: I lived with a bitch for eight years she was malicious, I gave her love, she neglected me, snapped at me for no reason and finally one day she ran away.

You thought I was talking about an X wife or girlfriend, I simply described a term for the female of a canine species in general. This is the Importance of knowing the correct definition.

 Definitions that are too narrow will exclude some things that must not be omitted from the object of the definition you are trying to describe. To say a ghost does (or does not) exist you have to know what ghost means when writing, describing or talking about a ghost.

So any meaning of a ghost, must have a definition long before you can say if one of them ghost things exist or not This is where the belief in ghosts falls flat on its face.

Without a definition of a ghost, then there is NO WAY to discuss, or describe a ghost. How can you expect to prove something to exist if you cannot give a definition of what to look for? — To go looking for something but have NO idea what to look for is not logical , you would not know it if you found it because you have no idea what you are looking for.

Im poking fun at the definition of a ghost because their is the probability that someone has given a definition to something that does not exist.

 Shouldn't a spirit be naked