At first, we discussed his “credibility” as an actual psychic. One of my friends seemed to take the position that he is “for real,” but he quickly realized that I wasn’t going to buy any of that. I’ve been hanging around here, and thinking critically on my own, for more than long enough to figure out that John Edward is full of s**t.
At first I thought that he was simply playing Devil’s Advocate - something that he really likes to do a lot. This quickly gets tiring when he spends half an hour “debating” a point with you and then you find out that he couldn’t care less, he’s just trying to get a rise out of you. But I’m pretty sure that this isn’t the case right now.
He realized that I wasn’t going to agree, so he switched tactics: “Well, I’ll concede that John Edward isn’t really a psychic medium… but who says that no one is?” Well, I would be the first person to get really excited and interested if it was proven to be possible, but I’m not exactly holding my breath over here. I mentioned the Randi Foundation etc… and after more debating, with me obviously not willing to “agree” with him, he switched to yet another topic.
And here’s the debate.
He’s willing to concede that all “psychic mediums” are complete frauds. But (he says), if people find comfort in these “messages” then what’s the harm?
I say he’s bilking innocent, grieving, gullible people out of their hard-earned money, and quite possibly doing psychological damage to these poor people when they figure out that the “Granny forgives you for all those times you argued” message was fake. Why would you possibly want such false comfort? And from some con artist who’s just toying with your emotions to make money?
“But,” my friend said (there’s always a but, isn’t there?) “they don’t know that he’s a fake. What if some poor person had a loved one die, and they sincerely find comfort in the words/lies of John Edward, and this helps them move on in the grieving process?”
I called bulls**t on this idea. Personally, I wouldn’t want such false comfort, even if I didn’t know that it was false. And if this happened to me, and say that it did actually help me move on from my loss, what if I found out later on that it was all a lie? I think that I would feel even more violated and upset than I was in the first place.
So now my friend and I are at an impasse. I refuse to believe that it is in any way beneficial for people to receive fake “messages” from their deceased loved ones, even if it helps them “cope.” Because it’s fake in the first place, and no real good can come from this. He, obviously, disagrees.
So what do you Dopers think? Who do you agree with? Why? Is there some big concepts behind this that I’m just missing out on?
FWIW, a couple of other people in the room agreed with him, which just baffled me. I mean, I don’t think I’m out to lunch here…
Here are a few recent SDMB threads on the subject of John Edward, mostly dealing with his credibilty as a psychic. I couldn’t find any threads dealing with this twist on it, sorry if I missed any.
“The harm” is that people like JE don’t do any of this for free. Grieving people keep the “psychic lines” here in business - at a cost of $5 or more per minute to the caller. There have been cases here of widows clocking up INDIVIDUAL phone calls of over $200 to these lines where the person who’s answering the call has been directed to read from a script and keep the caller on the phone as long as possible.
Do I think there’s any real harm in saying to someone “the person you’re asking about is on the other side and says to tell you that they are fine and love you”? Not really. But that’s pretty much what any church would also tell you for free.
It’s the financial exploitation of the incredibly vulnerable which really pisses me off about these people.
That’s because you’re a Doper. There’s lots of Dopers out there, even if they don’t know it.
And being Dopers, most of us will agree whether or not we would LIKE something to be true, if all the evidence point to it being false, it doesn’t matter if it’s funnier or more satisfying or more comforting to believe it to be true.
“The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.” (George Bernard Shaw)
Pretty much sums up my opinion on the matter.
But there are a lot of other people in the room who prefer to believe what most comfortable, regardless of any evidence.
And the more uncomfortable not knowing makes us, the less willing people become to look at the bits that are confusing and contradictory and may not lend themselves to what we’d like to believe on that particular topic…
More harm is that not only do people lose some of their hard-earned money on false comfort, some of them lose a lot of it. Some of them are already in dire financial straits, and calling psychic hotlines for an hour every couple of days at $3.99/minute eats up the income they could spend on say, rent, or food, or something to actually help them. (This applies not only to the grieving, of course, but to people having trouble in life who call the Psychic Friends.)
Anyway, what Cervaise said sums it up quite nicely.
As I alluded to in this thread, Penn (of "& Teller), who has recently suffered some personal losses, makes the same point on an episode of his new Showtime program…entitled “Bullshit”.
So this is a real guy. I only just heard of him on last night’s South Park. People think SP is just a foul-mouthed cartoon show, but they shot him down in the most perfect way:
[ul][li]First they just dismiss him outright.[/li]
[li]Then, when they see some people believe him they explain in common sense, matter-of-fact terms why it’s ridiculous.[/li]
[li]And finally:[/li]
They conclude by having aliens give him the Biggest Douche in the Universe award!
Well, most churches ask for offerings but there is no quid pro quo for services. If you go into a Catholic church and ask for counsel from a priest, you will get some advice (for whatever you think it’s worth) and you will not be charged. It’s not the same as the selling of (worthless) advice by assclowns like Edward.
My favorite part was when Edward said, “If you say I’m a fake, I’ll sue you,” and Stan responded, “Okay, I say this to your face, John Edward, you are a fake. And a douche.” I wish I could remember the exact quote; anybody have it on tape?
And that makes me wonder how, indeed, the real-life Edward will react to this. If he has half a brain, he’ll just keep his mouth shut, and when people ask him about it, he’ll say, “Oh, you mean that cartoon show,” all dripping with self-serving sarcasm. That would be his best strategy for continuing to perpetrate his eeeeeeeevil.
Naturally, I’m hoping he overreacts, sues, and shoots his career in the head. It’s a long shot, though.
So at what point did you decide that you were the standard by which all emotional processes should be measured?
Seeing as you are hostile and dismissive of the entire idea to begin with, it makes perfect sense that you would be hostile to any such “comfort”, but that makes you a poor test case for the effectiveness of it, doesn’t it?
Death is the most profoundly terrifying and heartbreaking thing that we experience. Nothing is more deserving of respect, privacy, and a general “hands off” attitude than the manner in which each person confronts it, both their own and those of their loved ones. When dealing with other people’s deaths, the healthy goal is to be able to move on and remember the person with joy and love and not too much paralyzing sorrow at the loss. If it takes John Edwards to help some people do that, so what? Why would you want to interfere?
I think it’s completely whacked to believe that some guy died for your sins 2000 years ago and as a result you can live forever after you die, but for many people that is a very comforting belief. And sometimes they give every nickel they can spare to religious organizations that promote this idea.
One is no better than the other as far as I’m concerned. And I wouldn’t presume to intrude upon either.
You’re right that one is no better than the other. But religion, in general, should be left alone if for no other reason than that is so profound a part of most cultures. Also, as Diogenes the Cynicpointed out in answer to my admittedly snarky little jab, most religions do offer their advice or comfort without actually charging except for donations (which, DtC a few are pretty heavy-handed about obtaining).
However, people like Edward (real name John MaGee Jr.) who charge for their services individually, or only forego their fees to individuals for the really big haul from a TV deal, should be dealt with like any other con artist.
You and others seem to think that because some people derive comfort from his scam that John Edward is somehow an analog to established religion. The fact that he’s picking their pockets doesn’t bother you, even though his victims may be trading desparation for destitution at his hands. What he offers is nothing more than a placebo. While the placebo effect may benefit some people temporarily, quacks who sell nostrums have always been considered criminals. Quacks who sell “peace” by appointment are no less so, in my opinion.
What the hell are you on about? “Nothing more than a placebo” - yeah, and? If the placebo relieves the pain, it makes no difference if it’s really aspirin or chalk, the end result is the same.
Well, I prefer to think that I am a honestly skeptical person (ie. not to the point of ridiculous closed-mindedness that most people call “skeptical”), and that I’m not “hostile and dismissive.” Maybe you read the OP that way, but that’s not how it was intended.
I don’t think that this “comfort” is a good thing, and it can probably be extremely harmful to some people.
And if not believing that John Edward is an actual psychic medium with real supernatural powers makes me “dismissive” in your eyes, well so be it. But in this case, it also makes me “right”. It has been pointed out in other threads (I think some of them were mentioned in my OP) that John Edward isn’t even a “good” con artist. He has a much lower percentage of “hits” than people who admit to doing cold readings. He has to edit his tv shows in order to change the order of certain sections (so his “question” comes before the “answer” that the audience member told him.
However, I wasn’t expressing these opinion in a “hostile” manner - I was just explaining my point of view in a calm manner. My friend actually quite liked the quote that I told him (he hadn’t heard it before): “It’s important to have an open mind, as long as it’s not so open that your brain falls out.”
Then you go on to say…
Well, this was the basic disagreement that I had with my friend, the disagreement that prompted me to post this GD. Basically, I believe, like you, that “nothing is more deserving of respect, privacy, and a general “hands off” attitude” than how people deal with death. However, I don’t think that this “hands off” attitude should extend indefinitely.
We allow people to generally live their lives how they wish, but if something can be genuinely harmful, then I think that it would be irresponsible not to intercede with a loved one and try to have them get help in a more healthy manner. This is why people have interventions, why people suggest that friends get counselling for severe emotional issues, why people who sell quack “remedies” are prosecuted, etc…
I would hope that if I was doing something as self-destructive as spending large amounts of money on a fraudulent psychic in a misguided coping mechanism to deal with grief, that my family or friends would step in and help me out.
I also agree with DesertGeezer, who said:
To which you said:
But the end result isn’t the same. People who take placebos, even though they may “feel” better, are not doing themselves any favors, and are not getting equivalent treatment with the same end result. The treatment most definitely isn’t equivalent, as it has no active ingredients. And the end result isn’t the same either. Even though a psychosomatic effect improves their feelings and may have some physical benefit, it definitely isn’t the same as receiving actual treatment.
They waste valuable time and money in pursuing something that makes them feel better, but doesn’t treat the underlying problem (and can end up costing them a lot of wasted money and time that they can never get back - not to mention the emotional cost).
I agree with genie. If you want to check out a John Edward taping just for kicks, or you call up the psychic hotline because you’re curious or you think it’ll be funny, or even if you think they work but it’s just something you do occasionally, more power to you.
But there are people who are in need of serious comfort and help, who don’t receive any real help from this fraud and who get bilked for lots of money. Unless he’s certifiably crazy, John Edward is a simple con man who knows what he’s doing. He isn’t actually trying to help these people move on - he’s trying to get high tv ratings and make a lot of money. Therein lies the difference.
On preview, lekatt said:
Well, sure, “to each his own” - but not if it’s actually harmful to the person to follow their choice.
And I think it’s incredibly condescending to say that there is no such thing as false comfort and “when you get there you will understand.” I have been there. I have lost loved ones, even in bad situations such as suicide (even though I was pretty young at the time). I don’t think that anyone would want false comfort. Who would actually go to see a psychic if they didn’t believe that they were the real thing? And even if they do want to see a psychic, they are being done harm (as I mentioned above). They aren’t getting any real help, and they’re losing money.
If you never want to see a psychologist/psychiatrist, fine. I’m not sure if I’d want to either. But at least they’ve received appropriate training to deal with individuals who are in a crisis situation. I have several friends who volunteer at the Student Distress Centre at my university, and they receive over 50 hours of training in just how to talk to people in an emotional crisis. I’m willing to bet that this is at least ten times as much training as “psychics” have.
You may or may not believe that psychological counselling is wonderful, but at least it doesn’t involve intentional fraud.
I’m sorry you can’t see the difference between actually aiding the grief stricken though counseling and offering a quick and phony fix through spiritualism. The only reason people like Edward are not in jail is that you can’t prove they don’t “feel” the spirits of the dead. The therapist teaches people how to deal with the inevitible and permanent loss we all suffer eventually. The spiritualist merely soothes the suffering with lies, while providing no actual help in dealing with life’s certain problems.
The question in the OP was whether such “comforting” was ethical. In my opinion it is not, and its practitioners are safe from prosecution only because the ability of the authorities to read their minds is as limited as theirs is actually to speak with the dead.
It does make a difference, Stoid if the chalk is being sold as the real thing and being bought and paid for. What John Edwards does, he does not do out of a need to help others. He does it for Money. I, myself, would have a whole different opinion about Edwards if he provided this service for free. I would still think he was a fake, as can be easy demonstrated by anyone who understands cold reading, but I might have a small measure of respect for him if he did what he does for free. He does not. He is little more than a despicable vulture, preying on the grief and loss of those with departed loved ones. He is not a douche, as a douche serves a useful purpose. Ghoulish Vulture is a better term for him.
If a person is comforted, then he is comforted, simple enough.
If not, then not. Friends and family always try to comfort individuals in the time of grief.
Also you are assuming that all psychics are frauds, which you have no proof of. When I went to college and majored in psychology, I felt it a waste of time and money. So I quit.
Mostly because people were treated like objects to manipulate. I hope the teaching has progressed since then.
Metaphysics has been around 4000 years and science only 400, but the new kid on the block thinks he has all the answers.
Actually, it’s the mystics who claim to possess absolute knowledge, while a serious scientist will admit the limitations of his own knowledge and only state things he can reasonably believe are true. The fact that you don’t understand how science works doesn’t help your argument.
And I don’t see what your failed academic experience has to do with anything, except to imply a certain bitterness on your part.
If John Edward can demonstrate something really impressive, like a 95% hit rate on a cold reading, with highly specific details, I may change my opinion that he is just a parasite.
