When somebody goes to a movie, they expect fiction and get it. When somebody goes to a psychic, they expect facts but get fiction. There is quite a bit of difference.
I don’t make that distinction, SimonX, because a psychic is not an essential part of my spiritual life. Regardless of another’s ability (or not), that has nothing to with me.
David B
Do you agree with Meatros statement?
If my word of cannot is technically incorrect, it can be replaced by “does not”. If that changes the weight of my question, is your response to the psychic world any different? I don’t think your response would be.
Am I wrong in my assumption?
Edlyn, cannot or does not, either way nobody (or very very few) here is suggesting that without scientific proof things don’t exist.
(For example, many people on this board, myself included, are quite certain there must be extraterrestrial life, even though we haven’t found proof yet. Our world, as uncommon as it may be, is likely to be far from unique. Plus the potential for inorganic life is still open for consideration.)
All that’s been asserted here is that, barring scientifically verified evidence that psychic ability does exist, and furthermore, is significantly different in either cause or effect, from the skillset known as “cold reading,” instances of psychic ability must be considered to in fact be examples of cold reading. Cold reading is in effect, a baseline against which psychic claims can be compared. If there is no difference between any claim and cold reading, the simple explanation-which requires no alteration of our understanding of mental ability, the possibility of communication with the dead, or energy manipulation-holds.
Edlyn, do I happen to think that psychic power exists? No. Why? Because there is no evidence that it does. So how would one go about convincing me? Provide me with evidence. I fail to see how this in any way makes me like a fundamentalist Christian with his bible. And I still fail to see how after all this time you still cannot understand this simple point.
When I go to a doctor I don’t care if he gives me a pill that actually does something chemically or a placebo that I believe will cure me, as long as he cures me.
Perhaps more to the point, when I go to a psychologist, I don’t care if he makes me happier by telling me some things based on a good theory or a discredited theory of psychology. Just as long as I’m happier.
photopat, Do we know enough about phychic ability that it cannot be genuine if it touches upon a “cold reading” in any way?
David B
By what method is this evidence supplied? Keep it simple.
Princhester said:
Ah, but that’s it – as long as he cures you. If you have an actual physical ailment, you’d better hope he gives you something more than a sugar pill.
And you know what, when I go to the doctor, I want him to tell me the truth. If I have a cold and nothing will help, I want him to tell me that. I don’t go in so he can lie to me and give me a placebo.
But you go in there knowing what you are getting – psychological help. You go to a psychic expecting to have a real psychic reading. That’s called “fraud.”
Edlyn asked:
So far, it hasn’t been supplied at all. Do you have a point?
Obviously not one you’re getting.
I personally don’t know. The thing is, there must be some difference. It may be small, but there should be some specific difference between a real psychic event and a cold reading, which could be identified. So far it appears that none has been found. I don’t deny the possibility that a true psychic event may be found, but the probability is, I believe, extremely remote.
I don’t know how the hell I find myself defending psychics
I take your point David B, but firstly, I don’t know if everyone would want to know the truth from a doctor if they were being given a placebo treatment and it worked. I probably am a bit like you, but I know plenty of people who just like reassurance, and they don’t really care if the doctor is fibbing when reassuring them.
I once had a series of headaches (that were stress related I now suspect). No one could find what was wrong. My usual doctor was away, so I went to some other guy. He straight away said he knew what was wrong, spun me a really good line of (what I now know to be) BS and prescribed a certain “treatment”. I fell for it and had no more headaches. I’m pretty sure now that he figured that my headaches were arriving because I had come to expect them to. His “treatment” worked a charm though. I am grateful for his fraud!
I seriously wonder if most people (and the type of person who would go on Edwards show in particular) really want to know the truth as badly as you or I. There comes a point (at least for me) where I am quite comfortable with saying “fuck them, they could figure out it was all a fraud if they wanted to, they are at the least wilfully turning a blind eye, they love whatever it is they are getting out of it, why should I get uptight about a bit of friendly loving smarmy fraud?”
If you make no distinction between a fake psychic and the genuine article, why do you expect others to?
Why do you think it is close-minded to expect evidence for an extraordinary claim?
Why is Lekatt’s sincerity an issue? Sincere people believed the sun orbitted the earth. If I had to guess, I’d guess that Lekatt believes what he says. He just isn’t really saying that much. He says he believes in paranormal psychic abilities because he can verify them with his paranormal psychic abilities.
“touches on” implies sharing only some or only a few properties, as if psychic readings shared only some properties of cold-readings. As it is, there is no method for making a distinction between cold-readings and psychic readings.
The question is whether or not feats of paranormal psychic ability are distinguishable from cold-readings, (or similar techniques). If the phenomena aren’t distinguishable from one another, why should a distinction be made?
Until there are a criteria to make a distinction between real paranormal psychic abilities and parlor tricks there can be no standard of evidence.
If you change you statement to:
… if you don’t believe that something exists because there is no evidence and no method of establishing evidence of it…
I would be more inclined to agree with it.
I hope you can recognize the difference bewteen believing that something does not exist and not believing that said thing exists. I’m perfectly willing to believe in paranormal psychic abilities.
Princhester,
The “Useful Lie” conundrum might deserve it’s own thread.
Indeed
IMO, this is the crux of the issue. If psychic phenomenon exists, then at least in my mind it, shouldn’t it produce better results then people who are doing “cold readings”? Shouldn’t it produce better results then just random guessing? I fail to see why there is as big an error margin as there is with psychics.
To clarify: I fail to see why there is as big an error margin as there is with psychics-if they are genuine.
I’ve just finished reading this thread (whew!) and I’d like to agree with Meatros. In fact, I’ll agree more strongly…why are these psychics so rubbish?! Really, reading these transcripts is embarrassing.
I’ve just been browsing a website about Derren Brown, who I’ve seen on TV and heard of radio a couple of times. Listen to the Sound section on that site. He makes these guys look like total amateurs. Now if he claimed he was psychic, I might believe it! 
::::looks around for a gold star, or something, as an endurance award::::
So you’ll settle for psychics who make you feel good? That seems to pretty much allow all of them to continue to function as they currently function. Are you saying it’s okay to make things up for people as long as the customers leave with a smile on their face?
hmmm
With my “psychic” powers I can see a new tv show arriving soon: The Psychic Psychologist. How long will it be before the networks put something like that on the air?
I can see it now, he shows up at a strangers door saying, “you need help”.
It’s already been on. Twice. Once with Michael Landon and once with Della Reese.