If it was a brief flash/picture why would they be convinced that it was from the spirit world? I mean, isn’t it a common phenomenon (sp?) to see things that aren’t there-occasionally? Also I agree, for the most part they don’t portray themselves that way. I suppose my question is, what’s so special about being a psychic if being a “really good guesser” proves just as accurate?
I hate that crap too. Another common trick is to make the prediction really broad, that way they can worm it to fit a lot of circumstances.
I agree. Although, IMO the accuracy level would have to be high, upper 80% range, and consistent.
When I see something that I can’t explained, I consider it “not yet explained.”
“He is using a technique of which I am not currently cognizant.”
Actually, this is a classic trap, discussed (IIRC) in Martin Gardner’s classic Fads and Fallacies.
The way it works is this: Start with 50 people. Administer the famous “five-card” psychic test — y’know, the cards with the circle, star, wavy lines, etc., like in Ghostbusters. Rate the 50 according to how well they predict the unseen card, and eliminate the bottom half. Repeat with the next 25, then the next 12, and so on.
Basic coin-flipping probability tells you that out of the 50 people, one of them will almost certainly do much better than chance over the series of five or six trials. This doesn’t tell you anything about the individual’s psychic ability; it merely validates probability theory. It’s a variation on “confirmation bias,” and well-designed studies don’t fall into this trap. Most tests of psychic abilities, needless to say, are not well designed, though it takes more than simple common sense, often, to see why.
A better study would not eliminate the low-performing group. You would then see, at the conclusion, how the bell-curve distribution matches random chance. An even better study would use double-blind methods, a longer trial period, and statistical techniques to reduce or eliminate observer influence and/or measurement artifacts.
People have tried to prove the existence of psychic abilities for hundreds of years, all with zero success. I think it’s safe to conclude it’s all a lot of bunkum, a quirk of psychology mixed with imagination. We can imagine what it would be like to read the hidden card, or see the future, or hear somebody else’s thoughts, and we have a strong desire to be able to do so, and it’s thus a small leap to believing that because we can imagine it, it must be somehow be possible. All available evidence, however, points directly and unmistakably at the contrary.
I believe in psychic phenomeonon but not in any of the ways that people here seem to believe in them. I don’t believe anyone can accurately tell the future though I practice divination. I don’t use divination to tell the future. I use divination as a very personalized prayer tool. There is no psychic phenomenon there.
Now for the parts that I believe that others could arguable call psychic powers. I believe in a form of astral projection. I don’t believe the mind ever leaves the body though. I believe astral projection to be a form of self guided meditation through the different annals of one’s unconsciousness. I also believe that everyone can do this and most likely does it whether they are conscious of it or not. I liken it to dreaming.
I also believe in psychometry. I believe some objects have long histories attached to them and that the psychometric pressure can be available to a few specific people to which that object has meaning. It is like the pocket watch that was passed down through the eldest sons for ages, the special piece of jewelry your grandmother gave you, all sorts of things. Those objects signify something to the owner. Something most likely very personal and conjure up a lot of memories for them. They won’t for us unless we know the stories or are directly related to the objects lineage but that is beside the point. Yet again, something I believe everyone can do.
I also believe in empathy. I believe those of us who can put ourselves in other people’s shoes can tell basically how they are feeling when we encounter them. It is relatively simple and easy for the observant individual. Can you tell when your spouse has had a bad day even before he/she hasn’t said anything? How about siblings, friends, parents, or coworkers? Again, through observable phenomena we make deductions on how we believe they are feeling. In fact, I believe their mood can also influence our own especially in times of tragedy. I don’t know anyone who didn’t feel heartbroken on the morning of 9/11.
So basically, I don’t use the criteria that skeptics would use to evaluate what they be a psychic to believe in. I change the bar and make what is considered to be psychic considerably more encompassing.
It is completely possible for someone to fake a paranormal experience. I think most of the professional psychics out there abuse the psychic powers they have to con and/or delude people. There is no need to fake a psychic experience if they are being honest with themselves. All of the paranormal I believe in can rationally be explained through science in a way that even skeptics can agree with assuming they aren’t playing completely dense or bereft of emotions.
Notice how what I call psychic is very subjective and personal to the individual. A lot of the hoo ha that you see going around with what people generally call psychic, I (and many of my pagan friends) would call cinematic showmanship taken from the movies or from the stage.
Well, assume I said that all paranormal events are either elaborate hoaxes, magician’s tricks, imagination and the like, or that there is some credibility to them, and that there are instances which are valid. In this case, too, I would assume the latter, simply because of the large range of evidence for situations like these. The object magnetism thing, at first, I decided was unexplained, so I researched what it was and who did it and such, and found that it hadn’t yet been disproved. After much investiagtion, I concluded that while no scientific theory had been created to explain these accomplishments, it was certainly possible that they are valid. Most skeptics would dismiss the events entirely and call everyone a fraud, without realizing that they themselves have no reason or evidence to back up that claim.
Shouldn’t extraordinary claims have to be proven, rather than just assuming they are valid until they are disproven?
Possible is not the same as probable.
But there is ample reason to believe these people are frauds. Many have already been exposed as frauds. And the ones who haven’t yet been exposed all seem to fear scientific scrutiny. If these things are real phenomena, they would be reproducable under objective conditions. Why do you think magicians put a screen in front of an object before they make it “disappear”? Because it’s not really magic - they are just moving the object out of view, which would be obvious without the screen there. A magician would never submit to scientific scrutiny because he knows his “magic” would not work without subterfuge. And it’s the same with psychics; the “magic” just isn’t there when you look at it objectively. Skeptics dismiss the claims of psychics because there is simply no valid reason to believe them.
I have not met but two other believers on this board.
I don’t think you will get much of anything positive about what you seek. I suggest you take the question to a more spiritual board if you really want to know. There is a board on my site.
First, spiritual people don’t use the word paranormal, all life is normal and as it should be.
Psychic abilities come from accessing your spiritual nature.
So, that is the first criteria.
When you access your spiritual nature you find inner senses that at least somewhat match the physical senses. Spiritual seeing, hearing, communication through thoughts, are the main ones.
These can be developed by practice.
So, that can be the second criteria, practice.
You will also discover spiritual energy, it will pass through your body and feel like an electric current, sometimes it creates heat and you feel warm in areas where it passes or even all over your body. Holding and working with this energy is accomplished through love. The more you love, the more of the energy you can control. This is used mainly for healing yourself and others.
So, identifying and working with the energy can be another criteria.
If someone knows and uses the above criteria, then I would consider them psychic. But psychics don’t all do readings, some are teachers, healers, and other things.
There are many ways to access your spiritual nature, meditation is probably the most common.
Near death experiences, out-of-body experiences, visions, and other spiritual experiences can also cause the spiritual to come into focus.
Now, what I have written here will certainly be destroyed by the skeptics that make up 99% of this board. But you can get at least some info from it.
SimonX, did you read both of my posts? It doesn’t matter what person B believes because person A’s experience is individual. Try summarizing what I said and I will respond back to you then.
Actually, there was no reasoning at all in Leroy’s post - just dogmatic statements. He is right about two things, though: 1. His statements most surely will be shot down by skeptics, because he never substantiates anything he writes. And 2. If you just want “feel good” stories about the paranormal, and aren’t interested in looking at the matter objectively, then Great Debates is indeed the wrong forum for you. You will probably enjoy Lekatt’s site: http://www.ndeweb.com
Sorry if I sound harsh, but Lekatt has a history in this forum of making rash statements and being particularly intolerant of dissent.
That isn’t how I read it at all. Since I find psychic phenomena to be completely subjective and personal it works out well for me. I will take his points out and say why I agree with them.
I can agree with this. Primarily because I believe the interpretation of psychic and paranormal events is completely personal and subjective. The definition of spiritual from the second sentance is where a lot of naysayers will likely find fault. For myself, a person’s spiritual nature is being true to themselves and their emotions. It fits nicely into my worldview.
I believe I described some of these above. I don’t think there is anything nearly paranormal attached to them. Heirlooms that are deeply personal like lockets with dead relatives pictures that one was particularly attached to that elicit emotions individually are an example of something that can fall into this criteria.
[/quote]
You will also discover spiritual energy, it will pass through your body and feel like an electric current, sometimes it creates heat and you feel warm in areas where it passes or even all over your body. Holding and working with this energy is accomplished through love. The more you love, the more of the energy you can control. This is used mainly for healing yourself and others.
So, identifying and working with the energy can be another criteria.
[/quote]
This has some new agey phrasing which is probably what turns peope off. Basically it boils down to if it is eliciting an emotional response of some kind then one is experiencing what it is like to be psychic.
I don’t see anything wrong with this statement. I would expand upon it and say that everybody uses some form of psychic sense at some time during their life. It is the way others define psychic where the problems arise. A profession that I would consider involving a high degree of psychicness would be a therapist. They should be empathic towards your needs. They take that form of empathy and help the individual through a healing process.
I wouldn’t say that is a comprehensive list. Anything that helps one get in touch with their inner feelings and self would access the spiritual nature even if it is a complete disassociative process that makes one feel insignificant to the power of the universe or multiverse at hand. If it feels that it gives you purpose then you have accessed the spiritual side.
I don’t see any problems with these statements. Taking them to a cinematic extreme would be a problem in my mind. For what it is worth, I don’t believe in people who practice cold reading type of techniques, future divination, or spiritual phenomena to manifest in a physical way (like telekenisis).
Now Blowero, point out the faulty logic within my posts or places where I am not making sense. I will do my best to accomodate you with answers as I see them.
You will also discover spiritual energy, it will pass through your body and feel like an electric current, sometimes it creates heat and you feel warm in areas where it passes or even all over your body. Holding and working with this energy is accomplished through love. The more you love, the more of the energy you can control. This is used mainly for healing yourself and others.
So, identifying and working with the energy can be another criteria.
[/quote]
This has some new agey phrasing which is probably what turns peope off. Basically it boils down to if it is eliciting an emotional response of some kind then one is experiencing what it is like to be psychic.
I don’t see anything wrong with this statement. I would expand upon it and say that everybody uses some form of psychic sense at some time during their life. It is the way others define psychic where the problems arise. A profession that I would consider involving a high degree of psychicness would be a therapist. They should be empathic towards your needs. They take that form of empathy and help the individual through a healing process.
I wouldn’t say that is a comprehensive list. Anything that helps one get in touch with their inner feelings and self would access the spiritual nature even if it is a complete disassociative process that makes one feel insignificant to the power of the universe or multiverse at hand. If it feels that it gives you purpose then you have accessed the spiritual side.
I don’t see any problems with these statements. Taking them to a cinematic extreme would be a problem in my mind. For what it is worth, I don’t believe in people who practice cold reading type of techniques, future divination, or spiritual phenomena to manifest in a physical way (like telekenisis). **
[/QUOTE]
Thank you for your kind response.
Would like to say that skeptics do not think personal experience is valid, so they do not understand.
Actually, personal experience is not a choice, it is all there is, the whole game. Nothing can be learned without it. Without it we would not exist.