Psychic abilities and phenomena: the scientific/skeptic analysis
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Saturday, August 26, 2006 22:49
VIEWED: 10059
PAGE 6 of 11
HK
Quote:Of all the quotes in the Gospel of Thomas, this is my personal favorite, and the one I remember nearly verbatim. I haven't made a study of religion, but that one quote, and the Tao (the way that can be named is not the way) have had the biggest impact on me.
Jesus said, "If those who lead you say to you, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the Kingdom is inside you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living Father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and you are poverty."
Now, how they fit in with my 'just enough' philosophy by which I live my life, I couldn't say.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:How do you know it’s not true? Psychic powers? I think your comments are much more impolite.
Originally posted by Ruxton:
No, clown boy, you were NOT polite, which is why I called you out. Your opening statements here again clearly show you believe you know more about science than anyone posting. That's NOT polite, it's bloody RUDE, and also not true.
Quote:Have you ever considered the possibility that scientists don’t accept these ideas because they have been determined to be scientifically invalid? CUNKNOWN is a rude know-it-all for asserting an opinion that differs from yours, but you seem to be asserting that you know more then evidently all the scientists, including Stephan Hawking, who is about as expert in the area of theoretical physics as you’re going to get.
Originally posted by Ruxton:
Do other scientists of today embrace these concepts? No, not even Stephen Hawking, because to do so would be to essentially put themselves out of business through cut funding.
Quote:That’s part of the reason why we have archeology. There is a lot of anecdotal and circumstantial evidence in history; that is true. That is also why historians and archeologists are very quick to label the information they present with an appropriate degree of confidence. You’re not likely to find many professional historians accusing another historian of being “insensitive” or “insulting” because that person refuses to accept an idea based on anecdotal evidence. The problem that I have with the whole psychic powers and mysticism stuff is not that I think it is impossible, but rather that what I often find is that people who support this kind of stuff, generally do so attributing way too much confidence to the information. Some of them become mired in a zealous depiction that compels them to insist that there experiences are true, even though they have no evidence, and if someone suggests that it is not true, then some will even become enraged. It is not really the idea of psychic powers that I have problem with, but the fanaticism displayed by some of its proponents. As I said before, you must be prepared to accept the fact that, regardless of how strongly you feel about a conclusion, it is just as possible that it is not true, if the only evidence that you have to support it cannot prejudice one conclusion over another. The same kind of reasoning exists in historical analyses. Ask a professional sub-Roman British historian what he thinks about King Arthur. Despite King Arthur being one of the most widely documented and popular figures in Early British history, the historical community will not accept King Arthur as historical fact, because the evidence is simply not conclusive enough.
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
BTW, you folks who are big into scientific analysis, what do you make of most of history, seeing as it's mostly anecdotal and neither double blind nor repeatable?
-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Uh...no.
Originally posted by rue:
A SINGLE failure will disprove a hyothesis even in the face of billions of positive results...
Science puts everything in context and interprets results with appropriate qualifiers and levels of confidence, especially a SINGLE result that is inconsistent with billions of other results.
Quote:I believe that is an oversimplification, but ok, yes. We have no argument on this score. Yes, we can have a billion "not yet false" results, and then have one single "false" result that some can interpret as "disproving" the hypothesis.
Science provides two answers - false and not yet false.
If you would read my post more carefully (3rd paragraph, about what science can REALLY do...), you would see I DO understand how hypotheses testing works, and how they are not "proven," but "disproven"--though I would not use those terms myself.
But getting hung up on the word "proof" does nothing to advance this dialogue. So let's take it out. You said that in order to believe your friends, you had to reject scientific findings. My original comment was just because scientific findings couldn't find the paranormal yet, doesn't mean those findings conclude the paranormal doesn't exist. Therefore, you don't have to reject those findings in order to believe your friends.
I hope that makes it clearer.
Can't Take My Gorram Sky
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:First of all, most of what I do amounts to councelling. Sadly, the number one question I've gotten over the years is "does he love me?" Don't need any psychic powers to know that if you have to ask the question... A lot of people crave control. They think knowing the future, or knowing how others feel about them will give them the edge they need in life.
Originally posted by SimonWho:
What sort of information do you give in your readings? I'm genuinely interested.
Anyway, you want to know what kind of psychic info I give out. When I was working on a psychic phone line (I know, seemed like a good idea at the time) the info tended to be short and sweet--that toddler of yours, got an infection in his throat, yes I know he's had a bad cough for weeks now, take him to the doctor, no arguments! And your mother and you haven't spoken in over 3 years, you need to call her...
Towards the end of my stint with the psychic phone line I started getting pretty detailed info about my clients' bodies, liver problems, pinched nerves, sexual disfunction, diabetes. Usually my guides are pretty concerned with the client's relationships, children and parents; career stuff, life plan stuff.
On rare occasions I get visuals. I described the house a woman was gonna move into once. Brick house, single story, picturesque little iron gate on the side. She called me back to thank me when she moved into it.
I read people's pets. A friend of mine had a dog who was getting aggressive for no apparent reason and she asked me to read him. Animals tend to communicate in images and emotion. I saw in my minds eye a black lab and then for the first (and thankfully only) time in my whole life I started getting, ahem, sexually aroused by a dog. I asked my friend, "Is there a black labrador in the neighborhood? Well, she's in heat. Your boy's horny."
A woman called me back during the Lewinsky scandal, said she worked for the administration and wanted to know if she was gonna have a job in the near future. Don't often get to make predictions of national importance, so that was fun. I saw Hilary standing with a knife in her hand and was told that it was a matter of her choosing; if she stood by Bill he would be fine, looked like she was gonna stand firm. I told the caller that she had nothing to worry about, that this thing would blow over.
Guy called me about the same time telling me that he was the reincarnation of the Egyptian god Ra and furthermore that Bill Clinton was the reincarnation of Ra's enemy, the god Amen. Had to do a lot of councelling with this guy. The info was that this guy had been a priest of Ra in ancient Egypt and he was so devoted to his god that in this life he mistook himself for Ra. He was kinda crazy.
I know perfectly well that all of this could have happened by chance, by inference, "having a good imagination." I really don't need to be given clever mundane explanations for these stories. I'm sure I've thought of all of them already. You asked me what kind of info I got, so I told you.
And yes, a whole lot of folks, particularly the ones working the phones are big fakers. I can't tell you how many callers would say stuff like, "Well, the other psychic said I'd win a red convertible!" Seriously, red convertibles! I'd ask these people, "You enter any drawings for red convertibles lately? Then how you gonna win one? Do people do that?"
One example from my experience seems particularly appropriate for this thread in it's simplicity and straightforwardness. A young woman came into the shop where I was doing readings at the time. I'd certainly never seen her before. She was a bit solemn in her demeanor, but nothing too remarkable on the face of things and so we sat down to do the reading. I don't tend to ask my subjects for any information up front, and she didn't give me any. When reading someone in person I generally use tarot cards as a jumping off point; I find their symbols tend to clear my mind of prejudices and agendas, opening me to "the in
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thanks for standing up for me, Finn. I'm sort of insulted that they think I was being insulting.. I mean, I can do soo much better than that, if I was trying. It's tempting, too.
There probably isn't much point in responding to Ruxton anymore (if there ever was). He seems incapable of a calm discussion on this topic.
Cavalier, you seem to be relying on your own personal experience and nothing else to form your opinions. I think it's good to have a more balanced..uh.. truth-seeking strategy, I can't think of a way to put that better right now. The problem is, your personal experiences could be completely off-base, and you wouldn't realize it unless you use logic as a guide. How do you know you're not wrong, Cavalier, about your psychic abilities? You might say "I just know." But, that isn't good enough, is it? It's often the case that people are completely sure about something, and completely wrong at the same time.
I know a little something about irrationality from personal experience, heh. I used to do psychidelic drugs a lot, and I really got into just thinking and believing the things I'd think. Your mind just goes a mile a minute, and you think that everything is sort of coming to you from somewhere special (your inner self, or maybe God). And you certainly can have a lot of great thoughts that way. You can realize things that you'd never thought of before. But, a lot of the stuff that was in my brain was just junk. Totally worthless shit that I believed when it was brought out by this drug-induced mental state. I couldn't judge it for what it was. When I came out of it later and re-thought the same thoughts, I realized the nonsense I'd been carrying around with me for a while, and I cast it aside. So, it was a positive experience.
Among other things, it taught me that we're irrational creatures, and we need logic as a guide. Logic is also limiting, so you can't get too reliant on it, but it's there as a tool. With regards to psychic powers and drug-induced craziness, the tool tells you it's pretty much bogus. Not that it doesn't have some positive elements, but that it probably shouldn't be trusted.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn Mac Cumhal:Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
No, clown boy, you were NOT polite, which is why I called you out. Your opening statements here again clearly show you believe you know more about science than anyone posting. That's NOT polite, it's bloody RUDE, and also not true.
How do you know it’s not true? Psychic powers? I think your comments are much more impolite.
Interesting, how we don't need evidence to back things up if its you thats saying them, Finn.
Erm, Ruxton knows its not true because CUnkown said so.
Quote:
Originally posted by CUnknown:
Ruxton, your point was what, again? That I didn't know all the details about "Remote Viewing?" Well, thanks to your links...
Seems clear that until Ruxton gave CUnknown links, CUnknown knew next to nothing about remote viewing.
Anyway, is it particularly likely that CUnknown is a scientist working on paranormal phenomena? No, it isn't, so lets see some proof before we believe that CUnknown is this great eminent scientist shall we...
That would be your argument turned back on you, BTW Finn.
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn Mac Cumhal:
That’s part of the reason why we have archeology. There is a lot of anecdotal and circumstantial evidence in history; that is true. That is also why historians and archeologists are very quick to label the information they present with an appropriate degree of confidence. You’re not likely to find many professional historians accusing another historian of being “insensitive” or “insulting” because that person refuses to accept an idea based on anecdotal evidence.
For crying out loud Finn, please! Yes, your right, but you won't find proffessional scientists calling each other illogical or making sweeping statements like "many psychics are millitant or charlatans ergo all are" either.
No one here has suggested that SimonWho or CantTakeSky are insulting or insensitive, and neither of those individuals have supported psychic phonomena. But they haven't said that those who do are inherintly flawed, illogical or irrational, which *IS* insulting, either.
No one has labeled you that, as you havent said anything downright insulting on the matter, even though you have been using the intellectual equivelent of poking a bee hive with a stick.
But we've made our thoughts on the subject of whether CUnkowns comments were insulting clear now, and we're all just repeating ourselves. So lets just drop it and get back on topic, shall we.
Quote:
Originally posted by CUnknown:
Thanks for standing up for me, Finn. I'm sort of insulted that they think I was being insulting.. I mean, I can do soo much better than that, if I was trying. It's tempting, too.
You just don't get it, do you CUnknown. You said psychic phonomena was hoaxed. So anyone who professes to experience it is lying, or a hoaxer of some kind? You then say that anyone who even believes the possibillity is irrational and illogical, which in itself is an irrational and illogical standpoint. Its like the man who refuses to believe elephants exist because he's never seen one.
Quote:
Among other things, it taught me that we're irrational creatures, and we need logic as a guide. Logic is also limiting, so you can't get too reliant on it, but it's there as a tool. With regards to psychic powers and drug-induced craziness, the tool tells you it's pretty much bogus. Not that it doesn't have some positive elements, but that it probably shouldn't be trusted.
We are irrational creatures, your right. And that goes for your good self as much as anyone. Your logical reasoning says that psychic Phenomena doesn't exist in any form, mine says otherwise. Notice how I don't say that makes you illogical or irrational, which is a label you placed on those of us who do believe in such things.
Lets get this out of the way right here and right now. You BELIEVE psychic Phenomena doesn't exist and I BELIEVE it does.
Unless your saying you have some div
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There is no real way to dismiss all psychic phenomena in its entirety, mostly because as you've said, psychics don't want to be studied under scientific conditions. For example, your predictive dreams, you would have to write each one down every morning and then you'd also have the problem that you might not remember them all or that they were from dreams before you started writing them down.
The scientific explanation is merely that your brain has gotten its sense of timing wrong. There's a rather good article about it here:
http://chronicle.com/free/v50/i46/46a01201.htm
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thanks for the interesting link.
I'd say that déjà vu and what I've experienced aren't the same thing at all, though. When the event occurs it's not a 'false' sense of "I've been here before". It's a very true sense of "I've experienced this event before", and so much so that when it takes place I could tell you what happens, is said, and what thoughts I'll have next.
Zen Buddhist to the Hotdog Vendor:
"Make me one with everything."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The nature of "belief" is that you hold an idea in absence of- or sometimes even in direct contradiction to- evidence. The vast majority of people do not experience reliable "psychic" phenomena. If they did, far fewer would die in tsunamis, mudslides, or in the many other sudden unexpected disasters that befall us. The vast majority of studies have not been able to provide evidence that "psychic" abilities exist. So either the phenomena is so rare and so inconsistent as to be buried in noise, or its due to chance.
For those who experience convincing psychic phenomena, I realize that it is strongly counterintuitive to think that it's merely chance. The strongly felt conclusion is that there MUST be a cause - similar to the rationale that leads to "intelligent design". But out of six billion people in the world, there will be those one-tenth-percenters - approximately six million people- who experience things that can't be explained in the normal scientific sense. Like the lady in Britain who has had seventeen electrical applicanes fail in the past few years.
I think I posted this idea before- one of the ways to possibly determine if physic phenomena are subjective, culture and chance-related phenomena or not is to see if the same phenomena persist throughout various cultures. For example, while in some European traditions "ghosts" may be helpful, and in many Asian cultures ancestors are helpful, in the Navajo culture ALL ghosts are evil. Do any Navajos experience helpful interactions with ghosts? Just curious.
Still- I gotta respect HK's profound intuitive grasp of things. Maybe the psychic phenomena is simply being open to ideas and nuances. BTW- if there is such a thing as an anti-reader- that's me. Thick like a brick and unintuitive in the extreme. I doubt I could even be "read".
Please don't think they give a shit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I've been practicing Kung-Fu and Karate since 1974, and in those years there have been moments where when sparring with an opponant, a real 'knowing' manifests itself- usually at a time when all thoughts cease, and every second lasts minutes. It's been my habit not to look at any particular spot, nor to think about any particular thing, nor to feel any particular emotion. And in those moments I've reacted in ways that might be considered unusually aware about what my opponant was about to do.
* It's due to my seeing his arms or legs move!
No, it's mostly a blur as I do not focus on any one point.
* It's automatic response due to rigerous repetition as to how to respond to specific attacks!
No, 'cause I've done it with people who's styles I was unfamiliar with, and with whom I hadn't trained before.
I am no Master, I've seen teachers blindfolded take down three and four students at a time this way, I'm not anywhere near that.
What I describe might be a psychic ability at it's simplist level: becoming sensitive to 'energy' and its motion and direction. And like HK states, when I try to do this to impress, it never works; my mind gets involved, and to tune into things beyond your immediate senses you need no-mind.
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME