Yes RJKUgly the quote was not silly and it did apply to the topic because you stated that I needed to educate myself on science before I do any research into the paranormal yet is seems very obvious to me that science is not willing to take paranormal phenomena on board because of its lack of stucture. As someone already mentioned these things go outside the boundaries of what science can conceive so I feel the quote sumed that up thankyou.
It’s fair to say that it is a paradox of what I was saying with my own experience with the ouija board but I am no scientist. I was asking for a different explanation other than the ideomotor effect because that just did not apply in my case as far as I am concerned.
For you skeptics out there that are willing to take scientific theory on board, apply the law of probability to the anecdotal paranormal storys from all over the world and over all the ages and lets say that a proportion of these people are rational human beings, don’t you think some of it could be factual?
As for saying silly things
'‘In fact, we can argue that if there is life after death, you should be against laws against murder. Shouldn’t we do you a favor by sending you on your way to your reward?’'RJFKUgly
Wether or not there is life after death who are we to take the life of others into our own hands? That is the point of morality.
How can you be doing someone a favour if you murder (not euthanasia) them anyway, that is a sad and ridiculous statement.
'‘Why is it difficult to prove that somethings happens or it doesn’t, paranormal or not?’'RJFKUgly
Evidence, be it for paranormal research or in a courtroom. Without evidence we can not prove or disprove anything which makes the whole point of the paranormal so interesting because it has not been proven/disproven. Why is it difficult? Maybe we are just not meant to know all the answers.
‘‘Again, this sounds like you back peddling because you know there is nothing to prove, so you hide behind a trite quote. If you want the real truth, put up or shut up. That’s what it comes down to.’’ RJKUgly
With regards to my intuition I can only say that it has served me well but that would just be opening up another can of worms.
I am not back peddling and I am not hiding behind quotes. I am guilty of not phrasing my question properly, had I done that initially I might have gotten more helpful response. Believe it or not I am a sane honest individual who just happened to stumble across this board when I was researching a Ouija board query. As I have already mentioned I am at a crossroads in my life where I am seeking answers, even though I will never find what I am looking for I have developed an interest in pursuing information on afterlife and the paranormal. I will take on board scientific information as I understand the need for science to weed out the fraud or explain what may seem unexplainable. I have no interest in getting into a silly debate about my dabblings with a ouija board as a child and how I have to prove it to others. If you don’t believe me or are not interested in any of this why bother replying to the thread. I was at one point even sorry I bothered posting it as I got well flamed but if you put yourself out there you have to expect that. Like I said before I am a sane individual but I am open minded and to be honest I am glad I am because it saddens me that so many people seem to have their mind made up about life and existence. How fortunate for you that you have the answers to the universe while the rest of us have to think about it.
Well, Delphinus, you’re right, this message board is definitely NOT composed of people who keep an open mind. Most people here, being skeptics by nature, and having the weight of Scientific Theory to back them up, are quite convinced that all of that paranormal stuff is 100% hokum, so if you’re looking for a sympathetic hearing for your views about the paranormal, you’re in the wrong place.
You can go over to MPSIMS, which is the Mundane and Pointless Stuff I Must Share chitchat forum, and discuss the paranormal without having too many people jump all over you, but no guarantees.
But the kind of thing you described doesn’t lack structure. It was in fact, the very epitome of structure. You said every single time you played with board something happened. This is the best kind of phenomenon to investigate using scientific methods.
Could be. That’s why we investigate. But we’ve been investigating for 75 years with people who were just as rational as you, and just as convinced as you. Yet every time the tests have been done under properly controlled conditions, it has turned out the rational human beings were mistaken. Where do those laws of probability point now?
Almost as silly as declaring that some absolute (and by implication divinely inspired) standard of good and evil is required as a basis for civil laws. The silliness was the intent of the statement, but the sarcasm was apparently not clear. My apologies for that. I am not in favor of offing people indiscriminately. (With a few possible exceptions J )
Believe it or not I do believe you are both sane and honest. And I find it admirable that you are willing to entertain scientific explanations for some things. The thing that you don’t seem to understand is how fallible our own perceptions are. All of us can be fooled, and usually pretty easily. Before we can come to any conclusions, pro or con, we first need to find what facts are available. When observations are possible, they must be made with care, under controlled conditions, or there is too much danger of starting with spurious data. And from there all the reasoning in the world doesn’t get very far. This doesn’t just apply to you and observing paranormal events, it applies to all of us and any type of event. Please don’t dismiss the value of this methodology just because “paranormal events don’t have structure”.
I honestly don’t think you’ve been flamed here. You’ve been called on making statements that don’t seem to be consistent and other logical fallacies, but that’s the nature of discussion, especially here.
And which one of us is open minded, which one of us has their mind made up about life and existence, and which one of us thinks they have the answers to the universe: the one who wants to investigate the facts, or the one who says intuition is sufficient?
After thinking about that, you may want to re-direct a little of that sadness.
I’ll speak for myself, although others may agree with me.
I do not completely reject the possibility of the paranormal. But as far as I’m concerned, the evidence is far less compelling than believers contend. Does this mean I don’t have an open mind? No. Show me a series of satisfactorily controlled tests that clearly demonstrate something paranormal and I will accept it. Meet Randi’s challenge and you will get $1,000,000. I’d do it in a second if I thought I could, freak show or not. I’d do more embarrassing things for a million.
I used to believe in poltergeists, Ouija, telepathy, etc. But when I saw the incredibly simple proofs of fraud and unconscious self-deception, I gave them all up.
Hmmm. Upon re-reading, I may be guilty of mis-reading. You said:
It’s very possible that in my first reading I gave too much weight to “I just go with my intuition” (emphasis added), and not enough weight to “having had experience with playing with these boards”. Re-reading with your most recent comment in mind, this could certainly refer to the combination of experience and intuition, and not just intuition, as being your motive for staying away from ouija boards.
My apologies for any misunderstanding. One problem with text only communication is that the nuances sometimes get lost.
Good luck with your search. But please consider giving even those stubborn random seeming events a good going over with your sharpest logic tools. Be sure to ask yourself what are you really seeing, and try to make sure that it isn’t just what you want to see.
One of my favorite quotes is from a Robert Heinlein character, Lazarus Long:
Most things can, though. Even so, a method for determining the legitimacy of this claim has been presented that does not depend on the presence of others (although extra eyes can lend extra objectivity). You could videotape it, for example.
I don’t expect EVERYTHING to be provable, just anything…just once, one tiny little something. Besides of course, “We all saw it.”
or “here’s a photo”, and my favorite…<drum roll>
“not everyone’s lying out of the millions of people, who have experienced…”
Hell, that’s the one I used to use!
I agree that everyone is not lying, matter of fact, I’ll go ya one further. I think most people are actually telling the truth about what they THINK.
I wish I could cite that as proof…it won’t hold up though.
People used to, and still do, think some strange shit. Doesn’t make it so.
I don’t know who got the patent on the Ouija board, but isn’t that a hell of a thing. Cheap and easy to use, I mean does the game even come with instructions/rules.
Next thing someone will put a couple of shot glasses and a quarter in a box…it 'd be a lot more fun than a damned Ouija board! Plus, I guarantee if you play it long enough, things WILL start to move.
Not every statement is necessarily “provable” (nor disprovable – there must be a better word) and not every phenomenon measurable/repeatable/observable (and certainly not given the present state of knowledge). However, if we have a phenomenon that OUGHT to be measurable/repeatable/observable, and if trial after trial after trail fails to produce a conclusive result…then we are faced to conclude:
(a) the phenomenon does not exist;
(b) the methodology of measuring/observing is flawed; or
(b) the incidence is such low probability that we cannot get statistically significant data (perhaps, not even one data point).
You are right that the people expecting a sympathetic hearing for bullshit are in the wrong place here. I mean, fercryingoutloud, this board exists to fight ignorance, not propagate it.
But being a skeptic does most emphatically not mean having a closed mind, which you should certainly know by now. However, having an open mind does not mean we should allow our brains to fall out.
Somebody want to prove the Ouija board to me? Fine. Do it under the proper conditions. Better yet, do it for Randi and get a million bucks while you’re at it. But that hasn’t happened. And in all of the ignorance peddled in this thread, nobody has actually come up with anything to contradict what I said in the original Mailbag item.
No guarantees, indeed. MPSIMS is not meant as a refuge for people to propagate ignorance without fear of the evil Great Debaters. It’s still part of the Straight Dope Message Board.
Y’all have done a good job of self-monitoring, but I would like to remind you (as long as the question of forums has come up) that this forum is neither “Mudane Pointless Stuff…” NOR “Great Debates.” Our standard here for polite behavior to each other is far stricter than in Great Debates. So, well-mannered discussion is great, please continue to play nice.
I’ve got a question for the believers. Let’s try this:
YES NO
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
GOODBYE
Now place your hand on your mouse (use two people if you like, or if you feel it’s necessary), concentrate on a question, and see if the mouse pointer spells out the answer.
Question 1. Have I just turned your computer into a Ouija board? If not, why not? The set up is the same; I’m quite sure an evil spirit would be just as capable as communicating with you through this means as through some mass produced cardboard and plastic.
Question 2. For those who refuse to come into contact with Ouija boards, have I just damned you? Will you have to get rid of your computer now?
Nah, Cabbage, see, the demon is really tiny, and he’s shortsighted. When he’s sitting on the pointer moving it around, he can only see the letter directly under him. The monitor’s too far from the mouse. on the other hand, though, he does a hell of a job separating fast-moving molecules from slow ones.
About skepticism and open minds, by the way: Not only is a true skeptic not closed-minded, but skepticism is synonymous with open-mindedness. Uri Geller’s supporters, for instance, can’t consider the possibility that Geller is a fraud. That’s closed-mindedness, just as certainly as the person who can’t consider the possibility that he’s psychic. The open-minded fellow is the one who considers both possibilities, and then goes with whichever one has the better evidence.
Cabbage, the point is people use Ouija boards to try and divinate the future.
This is forbidden in the Bible, as the only answers to queries are likely to be from the dark side and not God.
THAT is why the board, innocuous as it is being a piece of board, after all, is bad.
And why my computer is a okay.
