{paginate}
2 of 5
2
{/paginate}
Vivian Grey / Pyschic from Tennessee
Posted: 22 June 2007 12:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1318
Joined  2007-05-06
David B. - 22 June 2007 02:33 PM

Apparently, psychic ability doesn’t like being tested much either. Or rather, it doesn’t mind being tested as long as the test is relaxed enough for it not to have too hard a time doing its psychic thing; but make the test too controlled - say, by eliminating most likely methods of cheating - and it gets all huffy and won’t come out until the test is over and it’s in the presence of decidedly less-critical friends.

I was just going to post something exactly like this but this is funnier than what I was going to write. Good show.

 Signature 

So I can just type anything and it will show up here?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 01:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3214
Joined  2007-05-18
David B. - 22 June 2007 02:33 PM

Apparently, psychic ability doesn’t like being tested much either. Or rather, it doesn’t mind being tested as long as the test is relaxed enough for it not to have too hard a time doing its psychic thing; but make the test too controlled - say, by eliminating most likely methods of cheating - and it gets all huffy and won’t come out until the test is over and it’s in the presence of decidedly less-critical friends.

::snark:: (picture a smiley snorting with mirth)

I’m sure all that’s true. I haven’t looked into the studies in any detail. Basically, all I know about the studies is that there have been a number of them and people who fervently believe in psychics just hate them, which says a lot in and of itself. In particular, I have heard several people explain that of course the ghosts or whatever can’t show up with all those disbelievers and that of course psychics can’t work in sterile laboratories…and so on. You know the sort of stuff. I brought up my friend only because she is pretty much the opposite of the sort of person we (me, too) ordinarily think of when we think of a psychic believer.

David B. - 22 June 2007 02:33 PM

With all due respect to ideacircus, the fallible memories of a psychic reading of 15 years ago amount to diddly over squat in the proof stakes. Now if there was a tape recording of the reading…

Also true. Impressions are tricky things. The “two brushes with death” are particularly difficult to prove. In retrospect, it’s just too easy to find things that might fit.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 04:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1318
Joined  2007-05-06
Kathleen - 22 June 2007 05:45 PM

I’m sure all that’s true. I haven’t looked into the studies in any detail. Basically, all I know about the studies is that there have been a number of them and people who fervently believe in psychics just hate them, which says a lot in and of itself. In particular, I have heard several people explain that of course the ghosts or whatever can’t show up with all those disbelievers and that of course psychics can’t work in sterile laboratories…and so on. You know the sort of stuff. I brought up my friend only because she is pretty much the opposite of the sort of person we (me, too) ordinarily think of when we think of a psychic believer.

Of course they hate those tests. Those tests demonstrate with utmost certainty that there are no psychic powers of any sort. There are never exceptions to this when proper techniques are used (which is why the Randi prize goes unclaimed).

But, these people have faith in their powers. And what do we (as a species) do when something challenges our deeply held beliefs? We throw it away and hold on to our beliefs. The human mind has an astounding ability to rationalize something that been “accepted” by it under irrational conditions. (Such as being told something is true as a child and just accepting it because someone said so.) So, in these situations, instead of agreeing with the science, they find excuses for why the science is wrong despite there being no evidence that that is the case.

By the way, I don’t mean to slight your friend at all. She sounds like a nice and interesting person. smile

Also true. Impressions are tricky things. The “two brushes with death” are particularly difficult to prove. In retrospect, it’s just too easy to find things that might fit.

Confirmation bias, plain and simple.  He’s probably had hundreds of “brushes with death” and the two closest calls stick out in his mind so he’s had “two”.

And haven’t you noticed the numbers are always low? Two brushes with death. Two lawsuits (from another thread). Etc. It’s never, “You will have 34 visitors to your house from May to July”.

 Signature 

So I can just type anything and it will show up here?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 05:26 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3214
Joined  2007-05-18

I’ve been thinking about this, and it seems to me that what my friend (who’s name is Julie—may as well call her that rather than “my friend my friend my friend”) might have been talking about was “instinct” or “gut instinct” or that “I’ve got a feeling” feeling. Which does happen and is sometimes even right—and as for what causes it, who can say? But the thing is, “I’ve got a feeling” doesn’t sound nearly as exciting as “I’m a psychic, and I’ve got a premonition.”

It also doesn’t sound as though there’s any profit in it. Nobody would pay for “I’ve just got a bad feeling about this,” or “I feel good about this,” would they? And the reason is, each of these is unpretentious in the purest sense of the word—each one has no pretentions about arcane supernatural knowledge that can be sensed only by the chosen. It’s just a feeling, and it may not be reliable. And it is also by its nature not particularly detailed. You can get a feeling that a certain action might be dangerous; you can’t get a feeling that someone will have 4 brushes with death.

So in a way, Julie was right. Or so it seems to me. The real problem with these feelings—whatever you call them and whatever you think causes them, be it commonsense or messages from Beyond—starts when somebody starts paying money for them. It’s bad for the feeler because it encourages him to believe or pretend to believe they are more than they really are, and even to pretend to have really strong ones in order to appear to give value for the money. And it’s bad for the feelee (feelee?) because not only is he out some money, but he also might feel compelled to act as though they are worth more than an ordinary “I’ve got a feeling” feeling since he paid for them.

Am I rambling? I hope not. I’m just trying to reconcile how an honest, intelligent, and not unduly credulous person, such as Julie, can say and believe that everybody has psychic powers. Maybe what she’s calling “psychic powers” are the same thing as what we non-believers call…something else. I’ve got a good feeling about that.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 05:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3214
Joined  2007-05-18

I forgot that I meant to respond to this:

Stargazer
Of course they hate those tests. Those tests demonstrate with utmost certainty that there are no psychic powers of any sort. There are never exceptions to this when proper techniques are used (which is why the Randi prize goes unclaimed).

Oh, I know—that’s what I meant. I mean, they give other reasons for hating them, but the plain fact is that they are trying to justify the consistent failures, and the unbelievers and laboratory conditions that mess with the psychic vibrations is the best they can do.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 06:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15023
Joined  2006-08-16
Kathleen - 22 June 2007 09:26 PM

It also doesn’t sound as though there’s any profit in it. Nobody would pay for “I’ve just got a bad feeling about this,” or “I feel good about this,” would they?

I don’t know.  The Star Wars movies have made a lot of money. wink

And another take on the psychic naming names - she might not have.  But something she said may have resonated as being very true in relation to a certain friend.  You then associated that friend’s name to the comment after the fact.  Again, mis-remembering what exactly happened in the reading and prejudicing it after the fact when you’re trying to remember it and write it down.

 Signature 

Attention to detail: An apostrophe is the difference between a company that knows its shit and a company that knows it’s shit.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 09:05 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1313
Joined  2006-02-05

A former secretary / bookkeeper of mine was a believer, she fell for almost everything, including iridology and all sorts of nonsense, and just could not be bothered with any questioning of their abilities or dedication to the advancement of humanity, though they charged a lot of money for their aid.

I could have strangled one psychic, who told her that of her two daughters, the older would be just the most precious daughter any mother ever had, and the younger would bring a lot of trouble and grief.  (The two girls were about 12 and 9 at the time.)

Talk about self-fulfilling prophecies!  My friend, being a believer, changed her attitude towards the younger one, and guess what?

Yep, grief!  Drugs, truancy, petty theft, all the stuff of a young woman crying out for help.

That ‘psychic’ is worse than evil, you know?

Dan, happy to be only evil, not worse than evil

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2007 11:05 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5530
Joined  2007-03-14

Here is one psychic who didn’t see it coming.

 Signature 

Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you’re a mile away and you have their shoes.

Seen on a tshirt - “If life gives you melons you may be dyslexic”

When life hands you lemons make apple juice. Then laugh while life tries to figure out how you did it.

My blog
My Website

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 June 2007 01:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1318
Joined  2007-05-06
Kathleen - 22 June 2007 09:32 PM

Oh, I know—that’s what I meant. I mean, they give other reasons for hating them, but the plain fact is that they are trying to justify the consistent failures, and the unbelievers and laboratory conditions that mess with the psychic vibrations is the best they can do.

Definitely. When else does this happen in science? “I’d like to measure the speed of falling objects, but gravity doesn’t like to pull on objects whenever mean old unbelieving scientists are around.”

That’s one reason why Randi lets people design their own test conditions (so long as they are properly scientific, obviously).

 Signature 

So I can just type anything and it will show up here?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 June 2007 03:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  26039
Joined  2004-11-08
Stargazer - 25 June 2007 05:12 PM
Kathleen - 22 June 2007 09:32 PM

Oh, I know—that’s what I meant. I mean, they give other reasons for hating them, but the plain fact is that they are trying to justify the consistent failures, and the unbelievers and laboratory conditions that mess with the psychic vibrations is the best they can do.

Definitely. When else does this happen in science? “I’d like to measure the speed of falling objects, but gravity doesn’t like to pull on objects whenever mean old unbelieving scientists are around.”

That’s one reason why Randi lets people design their own test conditions (so long as they are properly scientific, obviously).

“I would like to measure this particle’s position and velocity, but the particle doesn’t like it when mean old unbelieving scientists look it at.”

wink

 Signature 

Heaven must be really boring, if you think about it logically.
All the angels must be snoring.  Who could stand perfection for eternity?

Not me. - George Hrab

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 June 2007 04:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Five Star Member
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4243
Joined  2005-06-05

There’s no problem with measuring a particle’s position and velocity; first you measure one, then you measure the other.

Profile
 
 
   
{paginate}
2 of 5
2
{/paginate}