Psychic abilities and phenomena: the scientific/skeptic analysis
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Saturday, August 26, 2006 22:49
VIEWED: 10059
PAGE 9 of 11
First of all, CUnknown, thanks for the shift in your rhetoric, it makes a huge difference to me. To me it's the difference between saying, "You guys are totally full of crap!" and "I have to say, given what I've seen, that what you're talking about sounds like crap to me!" May not seem like a big difference to you, but it is to me. Thanks for making the effort to connect.
Quote:
Originally posted by CUnknown:
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.
Answering your questions is very difficult, because the world I see and the world you see are like night and day; same world, only one of us sees much farther, with more clarity and in color and the other sees only the immediate surroundings in stark black and white. It's as if there is a sun up in the sky that you've never seen. You see things come out of the dark and recede again without knowing where they come from or where they go when they vanish, while I have seen the whole landscape and talked to the folks on the other side of the mountain. For you, any story you hear about the world beyond what you can prove is equally suspect, but not for me.
From where I sit, this truly is a sensory problem. They call it the "sixth sense" for a reason. Animals demonstrate this sense so constantly that people don't even notice. You ever try to walk silently through the woods? It's impossible, right? But animals do this all day long. In order to do it with only 5 senses the animal would have to make complex estimates of the oncoming terrain practically in the instant of contact with the earth. They certainly don't cogitate their way thru the underbrush. Is it echolocation? Do they have radar in their feet?
What sense is the deer using to move silently through the forest? Not sight, because she can't even see her back legs. Not sound, because hearing cannot predict what sound her hoof is about to make. Not touch, for the same reason. Which leaves smell and taste, which are as useless as sight. None of the five senses has the necessary predictive capacity. They are essentially passive and receptive.
Ever notice how superstitious professional athletes can be? Ever wonder why? They know they can't think their way to victory. At their level, the conscious mind is a real hindrance. So what power, sanctioned by science, do they use? They have to rely absolutely "on their own experiences." Up until 1954 it was the understanding of medical science that running a mile in under 4 minutes was physically impossible (shoot, missed the past 50 years by one!
)Here's a fun interview with Rupert Sheldrake:
http://www.sheldrake.org/interviews/bark_interview.html
Quote:
Sheldrake: Yes, exactly. I think science is full of closet holists.
Bekoff: Absolutely. I was thinking about how the notion of holism is so daunting because scientists get paid to dissect things, whether they're animals or neutrons. Science aims to break things down, level by level by level. But then when scientists try to reassemble larger systems, they find they can't do it. I was really taken by your whole notion of the different levels of self-organization. You said that it was very difficult to really write about or demonstrate the evolution of these morphic fields, but I think that this is a very hot area. The way you bring this stuff home is by talking about animals such as cats and dogs and horses and cows, the animals with whom most people are familiar.
Read the whole
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
CUNKNOWN:
There is light in your post of 14:55, 26 Sep. However, the one glaring fact (which I have been pounding out for long and long now) is that you can't "publish" if your conclusions go against the establishment, which CANNOT have its base of operations THREATENED in any way. In other words, the ones whose base of information you challenge with new ideas are the very ones who are essentially PAID to laugh off anything that comes up against established thought. If something goes against the FUNDERS of scientific inquiry, it ain't going to get published.
The link to which you pointed seems to be one person's dismissing the clear-cut conclusions of another person, who derived clear-cut conclusions from a GOVERNMENT-controlled series of tests. The tests were funded largely by the government, which has a long-proven history of lying and hiding truths it does not want the great unwashed to know about. Prime example: free energy. So that was not the best example of the failure of science to prove psi; quite the opposite. Try again...?
CAVALIER, so eloquent, so open, so clear. Your wonderful commentary with the deer as an example puts all the "scientists'" b/s to shame. One pities the hide-bound limitiations of those who cannot SEE, in the full sense of the word. Thank you.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think one problem here is that many people dismiss their own 'flashes' of psychic ability- knowing who's gonna call you, 'cause their thinking about you is 'picked up'. "Oh, that's just coincidence" is the common review of the situation.
But the evidence is everywhere! People are so brainwashed against it's existence...they want PROOF that someone can melt you with their brain or something, and they miss all the simple and subtle indications. Psychic ability can manifest itself in something as small as believing a person telling the truth to you when common sense tells you not to, then finding out later (with hard evidence) they were indeed not lying, or in something as big as psychic healing and beyond.
To varying degrees it's all around us much of, if not all of the time, but minds with hardened opinions need to poo-poo it.
Just my two credit's worth...
Chrisisall, who looks into the future to see Serenity making Joss look very good to Hollywood....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:This is some hokey stuff, man. I wonder how common it is for supposed psychics to view themselves as having a superior perspective on the world. A person who believes that they are ‘all knowing and all seeing’ may be inclined to view a purely chance event as validation of their self-described omnipotence.
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Answering your questions is very difficult, because the world I see and the world you see are like night and day; same world, only one of us sees much farther, with more clarity and in color and the other sees only the immediate surroundings in stark black and white. It's as if there is a sun up in the sky that you've never seen. You see things come out of the dark and recede again without knowing where they come from or where they go when they vanish, while I have seen the whole landscape and talked to the folks on the other side of the mountain. For you, any story you hear about the world beyond what you can prove is equally suspect, but not for me.
Quote:How do you know they don’t cogitate their way through the underbrush? I would think that is exactly what they do. I don’t think we need to invent some elaborate ESP explanation to explain how animals can walk in the woods. And incidentally deer aren’t magically silent. I’ve heard underbrush break under a deer’s foot just like it breaks under mine. Deer appear to be silent in the woods because they have a much stronger sense of hearing and smell. Deer can hear and/or smell you long before you’ll know they are there, and as such they can keep a safe distance from you, unless you are familiar with the wilderness and can use things like wind direction to mask your scent. There’s no mysterious sixth sense needed to explain this.
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
In order to do it with only 5 senses the animal would have to make complex estimates of the oncoming terrain practically in the instant of contact with the earth. They certainly don't cogitate their way thru the underbrush. Is it echolocation? Do they have radar in their feet?
Athletes often report achieving a high mental state where perfection and resilience become easier. Colloquially this is sometimes referred to as “being in the zone.” Chris mentioned this with regard to his kungfuing. But there is no elaborate explanation needed for this, either. It is well documented that under high degrees of stress (or when the body has been appropriately trained) the body reacts by releasing endorphins, adrenalins and other biochemicals that enhances physical and mental ability and suppress pain and increase resilience. Furthermore psychologists often speak of the human brain having inherently more perceptive ability or faster reasoning then is typically found under common use. That’s not extrasensory or psychic ability; it’s just regular ability.
There are studies that show that expert shooters enter a state of calm just before they pull the trigger. Under normal conditions the human arm is not strong enough to hold a 30-06 Remington rifle still enough to make consistent shots from long range; nor is the human eye perceptive enough to identify a target from the distances that many expert shooters can bull’s eye. Yet they do it, because the brain has been trained to suspend other reasoning faculties briefly and concentrate intensely on the target. When this intense concentration begins, an expert’s hand is steadied so that he can hold the riffle nearly perfectly still and his sense of vision is improved and concentrated in such a way that many shooters report seeing nothing but the target in the instant before the triggers is pulled. As a sharpshooter, I can attest to this intense concentration. It is real and uncanny the way the human brain can be trained to such high degrees of perception and physical control, but it is not magical or extrasensory. Humans, all humans not just those who seem to think they have some magical insight on the world, can train their minds to be “in the zone” for some reason or anoth
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
FINN, you're doing it again. You are dismissing what you can't comprehend, much as you and the other naysayers on this thread commonly dismiss the clear-cut and widespread evidence that the current U.S. administration is a lying bunch of crooks worthy of tar and feathers, not respect. (Anyone else notice the similarities between this discussion and political discussions as to who takes which "side"?)
You have dissed HKCavalier's thoughts as "hokey" (a grave insult and uncalled for) because it looks like you've never been to the places in the mind he has. Are you not aware that to approach a game animal, once spotted, you must NEVER look at it? It's the same as watching someone's back in a roomful of people. They will sense you and turn around. The deer and other wild animals feel that a hundredfold.
As I suggested to another poster in this (LONG but very interesting) thread, give meditation a chance. Are you aware that NASA directed its astronauts to meditate? It heightens the senses and helps you on the path to recovering the lost (as Cavalier so aptly pointed out) "sixth" sense. You have it; it's really submerged, though.
Finn, do you think animals are capable of reasoning? I would really like to know your thoughts on this simple question.
Is Sammy Sosa still using a "cork" bat? I'd swear that Michael Jordan can fly, because I've seen it, but it's not psychic.
I'm not sure you and the Cavalier are talking about exactly the same things. I can't disagree with your examples of shooters or athletes being "in the zone," and the concept of a musician or martial artist being able to play better by getting outside himself might not be psychic abilities. But the ability of a musician to be able to conjure up new stuff on the fly, that he has never played before; or a martial artist KNOWING what his new opponent is going to do before he does it; or the ability of the deer to know you're there. and know you intend to do it harm are all psychic. I've gone walking (long ago and far away) among a group of ptarmigan with no firearm, and could easily walk up to them. But when I picked up a rifle to kill one of them, I could no more approach them than I can fly. They KNEW, and you cannot dismiss that as saying they knew the rifle meant them harm, because these were "unsophisticated" birds that had never heard a rifle. I could approach them carrying a stick that LOOKED like a rifle, but was not. This is the stuff that Cavalier's post discussed, which you overlooked.
To verify your sharpshooting statement, I killed a caribou in Alaska with an elephant rifle, iron sights, at about 250 yards range. I had, as you noted, a perfect sight picture on the animal, though my eyesight was even then not "young." The rifle, which is extremely loud, was a pleasant pop to my unprotected ears, and the normally horrendous recoil was entirely unnoticeable. There was absolutely nothing psychic about that shot. The fact that I knew the unseen animal was there before I left the cabin with my rifle, which I didn't normally carry anywhere, was indeed psychic. I KNEW I'd eat well that night BEFORE I LEFT THE CABIN.
It's things like that you and others so easily dismiss. I wonder why. There is no coincidence to them.
The deer uses ALL SIX (at least) of its senses to move silently when it NEEDS to. If a whitetail knows you're there, you'll never hear it unless it's running blindly from you. It uses its senses to move absolutely silently. So does the elephant, the Cape buffalo, and most particularly the leopard, all of which I've seen in the wild, all of them absolutely silent movers when need be.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
How about me and Finn and Citizen and the Cavalier and Cunknown and one or two others write a book? Any subject. Man can we crank out the words, or what!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Finn:
If 'ESP' was everyday for everybody, it would be mundane, taken for granted, normal. Maybe the zone is just a form of 'psychic phenomena' where the mind over comes the material body/world, of course, thats just conjecture.
Ruxton:
Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
(Anyone else notice the similarities between this discussion and political discussions as to who takes which "side"?)
heh, you and I see that one way...
I'm guessing others would see it totally different...
Problem with psychic phenomena is it requires you to experience it. In no small way it would be like trying to explain to Aliens with no sense of sight what its like to see. They likely wouldn't believe you, its ridiculous they'd say, show us proof you can 'see'.
To creatures that have never experienced sight its existence would seem ridiculous, but to us, its taken for granted.
My point is that you experience it, its real, you can't dismiss it with out dismissing the experience. It's as tangible as a rock. If you haven't experienced it though, then it will sound fanciful.
Quote:
It's things like that you and others so easily dismiss. I wonder why. There is no coincidence to them.
Coincidence, is one of the very few tools people have to dismiss these things. Or maybe your crazy, making it up (for what reason escapes me), or you know, just plain wrong.
The thing I love the most is often coincidence will be sited as reason when its ridiculous to do so, and thourghly against the postulate of Occam's Razor.
All the arguments levied upon those who profess to have had scientific expereinces can be turned around. Scientists say:
"Prove you did it, or we'll assume its coincidence/your nuts/lying etc..."
Well prove I'm nuts, prove I'm lying, prove its coincidence...
Of course, you can't.
The blind don't dismiss eye-sight, and they have no direct evidence that others can see, beyond the fact other people find it easier to get around. One wonders why others do...
Quote:
How about me and Finn and Citizen and the Cavalier and Cunknown and one or two others write a book? Any subject. Man can we crank out the words, or what!
Yep, I vote for:
Psychics, The Supernatural and the Bush administration, are they all for real?
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you Beeeer Milkshakes!
Zen Buddhist to the Hotdog Vendor:
"Make me one with everything."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Finn, I would consider this to be highly offensive, except that since we're not talking life or death here, it'd be pretty darn hard to offend me.
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
This desire to redefine psychic ability to some flowery peter-pan bologna is as disingenuous, from a scientific perspective, as asserting that such ability exists contrary to the evidence.
Nothing in you post about the deer, shooting, or athletics was in error, I just don't see that it also rules out a 'sixth sense' which works on an un-quantifiable level (at the moment). What if when shooting your gun, you also unconsiously tap into energies that augment your awareness in ways that you aren't totally aware of? What if supreme concentration like you describe naturally engenders a natural, simple psychic level of thought and understanding?
Heh, you know where I'm going with this, don't you?
I accuse you, FINN, of having and unknowingly using PSYCHIC ABILITY!!!! Yeah, that's right, I said it!!!!!!
Prove that you don't!!!!!
now...uh, do we , like, see if you float.....?
Quote:
So yes, I want proof that someone can melt me with their brain.
Have you watched Firestarter lately?
ChrisisallabouttheBDM
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Highly offensive wasn’t what I was going for at all. I was going for brassy and politically incorrect sort of offensive. But maybe I overstated it; I thought the Futurama quote would point people in my direction, though I fear I may be the last Futurama fan alive. In any event, I don’t think I agree with myself completely, with regard to the above quote. I’m not sure it is necessarily disingenuous to attempt to redefine psychic ability to something insignificant. It may be a quite genuine attempt to make the theory fit the evidence. Since the evidence is a basically nonexistent, a definition to suit this may seem appropriate. But if psychic ability is negligible or indistinguishable from normal mental ability then it begs the question: what’s the point? It seems that if this is the case then psychic functioning can be more simply described with normal psychology and there is no need for parapsychology or a definition of psychic ability at all. Effectively anomalous cognation doesn’t exist since, by definition, there would seem to be nothing anomalous about it.
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Finn, I would consider this to be highly offensive, except that since we're not talking life or death here, it'd be pretty darn hard to offend me.
Quote:If psychic ability is nothing more then normal mental functioning, then I’d have to admit to being one hell of Miss Cleo since I do a lot of normal mental functioning.
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Heh, you know where I'm going with this, don't you?
I accuse you, FINN, of having and unknowingly using PSYCHIC ABILITY!!!! Yeah, that's right, I said it!!!!!!
Quote:If I had a daughter that could do that I would make her sit at my desk while I worked and keep my tea hot all day.
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Have you watched Firestarter lately?
-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:When you turn to look at someone who's staring at you, I would consider that a 'normal' use of psychic ability, and as such, would probably not even merit a connection to the term para-psychology.
But if psychic ability is negligible or indistinguishable from normal mental ability then it begs the question: what’s the point? It seems that if this is the case then psychic functioning can be more simply described with normal psychology and there is no need for parapsychology or a definition of psychic ability at all.
But when I watch an olympic event to see someone do the seemingly almost impossible with their bodies, the term para-physicallity comes to mind....
if ya see what I'm sayin' here....
nudge, nudge
Exactly 48 hours now....Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME