# Ouija Boards - I used to think it was bull until...... **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 19, 2009, 9:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528 "2009-02-19T09:46:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 33
**Author:** ![dinoboy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/65b543/32.png) [@dinoboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dinoboy)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/641 "2009-03-02T20:25:01Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > One descriptive term is as good as another. Expecially when the “why” is not known. Science worships materalism because they can usually measure it. Does not mean there isn’t something else besides materialism in this world. If science continues to claim only materialism it (science) will be bypassed for other organizations that are willing to study all possibilities. One term to describe an effect is not as good as any other. In our example there is the nebulous term, “the supernatural” (spirits cause it) or the more specific term, “ideomotor effect” (physiology causes it): we can test and refute physiological causes, we can not test the supernatural - this is a truly meaningless explanation for us as it is ceases the possibility of any further inquiry (We can, however, rule out supernatural causes by finding a natural cause). What other current system of gathering knowledge is privy to studying the supernatural? I’ll await your answer while meditating at my scientific shrine… praying to the universal laws for a grant > [@](#): > > a sailor offered to use a pendulum on the map. He had been good at finding water and things. A sailor good at finding water… I just found that funny. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Lanzy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/74df32/32.png) [@Lanzy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lanzy)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/642 "2009-03-02T21:29:32Z")
> [@appleciders](#): > > Has anyone else here ever intentionally manipulated a ouija board session? > > I have, and it’s absurdly easy. The slightest little bit of pressure will overturn the random motions from the other participants, and once you’ve started a word, you can take your hands off entirely and the other people there will continue to spell out that word that you’ve suggested by pushing it towards the first couple letters. One evening of doing that ruins any faith in the process, believe me. People’s minds really are pretty predictable once you’ve laid the suggestions out. Post 89 And I think the OP has whoosed us all ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/643 "2009-03-02T21:40:38Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > Which, if it did, would have been the result of ideomotor effect, as has been explained to you, seemingly futiley, a number of times. > > We don’t have to wonder why it swings. Science has already explained it to us. If you believe science has explained it with the word ideomotor, then more power to you. To me they have explained nothing. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/644 "2009-03-02T21:44:13Z")
> [@dinoboy](#): > > One term to describe an effect is not as good as any other. > > In our example there is the nebulous term, “the supernatural” (spirits cause it) or the more specific term, “ideomotor effect” (physiology causes it): we can test and refute physiological causes, we can not test the supernatural - this is a truly meaningless explanation for us as it is ceases the possibility of any further inquiry (We can, however, rule out supernatural causes by finding a natural cause). > > What other current system of gathering knowledge is privy to studying the supernatural? > > I’ll await your answer while meditating at my scientific shrine… praying to the universal laws for a grant > > A sailor good at finding water… I just found that funny. 😃 You are a person that does not believe in spirits. So you ridicule those that do. Shame on you. There are nine times more believers in spirits than those who don’t. I am glad you were entertained. ---
**Author:** ![Hakuna\_Matata](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a88e4f/32.png) [@Hakuna\_Matata](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hakuna_Matata)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/645 "2009-03-02T21:48:14Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > If you had followed the directions you probably would have a different movement of the pendulum for the yes answer than for the no answer. > > Don’t you wonder why it swings at all. I think Newton would have. > > Several years ago I read some of the writings of an Admiral during WWII. He stated the allies had made a landing and were barely holding on. They knew the Germans had reinforcements on the way but didn’t know where they were. > After exhausting all logic as to where they may be a sailor offered to use a pendulum on the map. He had been good at finding water and things. The Admiral allowed the sailor to do so, and he quickly pointed to a spot on the map where he said he was sure the Germans were grouping. After swearing the sailor to secrecy, the Admiral ordered all the guns of the fleet to that spot and the 14" Battlewagon guns pounded the spot for an hour. The sailor was right and the German reinforcements slaughtered. The Admiral related this story about 8 years after the war was over and he had retired. I am only passing the information on, don’t care what you think about it. Well I did follow the directions–not sure why you are questioning me or my motives? There was no difference in the movements. I am very open to different things in life, but I need more then a ‘just because’ for me to accept them. You seem to ascribe to me a Science bent–untrue my friend, as I tend towards the Artistic side of life. If one goes into a beautiful Cathedral one often experiences a rush of feelings based on the Architecture. The compression of space and use of light tied together with what most people is a spiritual place contribute to that feeling. I wouldn’t tie it to some mythical explanation when I, as the creator of that space, know what is causing those feelings. There is no need to find a spiritual explanation where one doesn’t exist. Do I wonder why it swings at all? Not really–why would I? And even if I did, why would I ascribe some mythical relationship there when a substantially more likely reason would explain it? Do you walk around the earth each day and wonder why some mythical magical thing keeps you from floating into space? Or do you accept Gravity as a more likely and logical explanation? As to your story–again why would you tell me this unless you wanted me to gain something from it? What do you gain from just passing it on? Certainly you aren’t saying you told me this story without a purpose? ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/646 "2009-03-02T21:49:01Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > If you believe science has explained it with the word ideomotor, then more power to you. To me they have explained nothing. How about an entire [article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideomotor_effect) complete with 18 cites … does that make a dent? It’s not like someone couldn’t explain something and said, “Hey, I know. I’ll come up a term for something that hasn’t been tested or proven at all and I’ll call ‘the ideomotor effect’ … that ought to shut them up.” No, the person who did that came up with, “it’s the spirits.” ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/647 "2009-03-02T22:06:41Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > There are nine times more believers in spirits than those who don’t. Do you believe this makes the beliefs of the majority more likely to reflect reality than those of the minority? ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/648 "2009-03-03T01:11:03Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > How about an entire [article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideomotor_effect) complete with 18 cites … does that make a dent? > > It’s not like someone couldn’t explain something and said, “Hey, I know. I’ll come up a term for something that hasn’t been tested or proven at all and I’ll call ‘the ideomotor effect’ … that ought to shut them up.” > > No, the person who did that came up with, “it’s the spirits.” Really, says it is a psychological thing. Only problem is, what is a psyche? Do you know? ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Robson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gary_robson/32/3448_2.png) [@Gary\_Robson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Robson)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/649 "2009-03-03T02:02:54Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > One descriptive term is as good as another. Expecially when the “why” is not known. Science worships materalism because they can usually measure it. Does not mean there isn’t something else besides materialism in this world. If science continues to claim only materialism it (science) will be bypassed for other organizations that are willing to study all possibilities. You really don’t have any idea what science is, do you? Let me boil it down to one fundamental concept for you: the scientific method. If you apply the scientific method to a question, it doesn’t matter whether the question (or your response) is materialistic, spiritual, or anything else. It merely tests whether your response is a valid answer to the question. Is it repeatable? Is it measurable? Are the results internally consistent? Science doesn’t worship materialism. If it could be said to “worship” anything, it would be logic and consistency. If 476 people have 476 different explanations for some phenomenon, then (at least) 475 of them are probably wrong. Even in this thread, ouija board believers can’t agree on why it works. Non-believers haven’t seen any valid evidence that it _does_ work. You need to back up a step. Use your ouija board to determine my bank account number, or Guin’s mother’s middle name, or the contents of 25 sealed and shuffled envelopes (in order). Do this in a controlled environment. Arguing about why it works is meaningless until somebody can show that it does, and that has never been done. > [@lekatt](#): > > He didn’t say what happened only that he got not useful information. I never asked for useful information. It doesn’t matter just a chance to observe something unknown. You said to try it. I told you that I had. Now what? > [@lekatt](#): > > There are nine times more believers in spirits than those who don’t. Do you have any evidence to support this claim? Even the number was only 10%, it would be a very sad statement about humanity. ---
**Author:** ![dinoboy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/65b543/32.png) [@dinoboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dinoboy)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/650 "2009-03-03T02:16:37Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > You are a person that does not believe in spirits. So you ridicule those that do. Shame on you. There are nine times more believers in spirits than those who don’t. Shame on me for asking those who make an unsupported claim to back it up? or shame on me for providing strong evidence that they were likely mistaken? Where in doing a simple test is there ridicule? and would “ **shaming them** ” be considered ridicule? Nine times? Even if you could support that claim, an appeal to consensus ([Argumentum ad Populum](http://www.fallacyfiles.org/bandwagn.html)) is no evidence for veracity. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/651 "2009-03-03T05:43:51Z")
> [@InvisibleWombat](#): > > You really don’t have any idea what science is, do you? Let me boil it down to one fundamental concept for you: the scientific method. > > If you apply the scientific method to a question, it doesn’t matter whether the question (or your response) is materialistic, spiritual, or anything else. It merely tests whether your response is a valid answer to the question. Is it repeatable? Is it measurable? Are the results internally consistent? > > Science doesn’t worship materialism. If it could be said to “worship” anything, it would be logic and consistency. If 476 people have 476 different explanations for some phenomenon, then (at least) 475 of them are probably wrong. Even in this thread, ouija board believers can’t agree on why it works. Non-believers haven’t seen any valid evidence that it _does_ work. > > You need to back up a step. Use your ouija board to determine my bank account number, or Guin’s mother’s middle name, or the contents of 25 sealed and shuffled envelopes (in order). Do this in a controlled environment. > > Arguing about why it works is meaningless until somebody can show that it does, and that has never been done. > > You said to try it. I told you that I had. Now what? > > Do you have any evidence to support this claim? > > Even the number was only 10%, it would be a very sad statement about humanity. Seems everyone wants to teach me about science. How it must be repeatable, etc. In my life experiences very little has been testable and repeatable. Spiritual things are not about materialism, nor will they ever be, nor does that mean they are non-existant. Spiritual people far out-number the materialists. If you look at all the great leaders and teachers of history, they are spiritual people. There is a reason for that. Now if you wish to play the piano well it is necessary to practice, practice, and practice. If you wish to play the ouija, pendulum, or other tools used by spiritual people practice is also needed. A simple five-minute trial will not show you anything. Spiritual growth is emotional growth. It is learning to choose those things that are beneficial to you and others. It is tolerance, patience, compassion, and understanding of all things life has to offer. It is looking beyond good and evil, beyond black and white, seeing the diversity of life and embracing it. ---
**Author:** ![DocCathode](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doccathode/32/18773_2.png) [@DocCathode](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DocCathode)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/652 "2009-03-03T05:50:13Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > A simple five-minute trial will not show you anything. Then why did you propose that he try a simple five-minute trial?😕 ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/653 "2009-03-03T05:57:01Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > Seems everyone wants to teach me about science. How it must be repeatable, etc. Well, if you would not continually post non-scientific stuff while claiming it is science, fewer people would feel this compulsion. > [@lekatt](#): > > In my life experiences very little has been testable and repeatable. And nothing in your life appears have had a scientific basis, either. 😛 > [@lekatt](#): > > A simple five-minute trial will not show you anything. And yet you told another poster to go out and perform just such a five minute trial as if it would show him something. Perhaps you should consider what you really want to express instead of constantly contradicting yourself. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/654 "2009-03-03T06:20:29Z")
It’s a shame that we’re not using [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=463219&) anymore, but okay. I’d re-ask the same question I asked there and never got an answer to. Namely, what epistemological process do we have access to when one spiritual revelation contradicts another? As I stated at the time, I had [a very moving liminal experience](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7928777&postcount=584) years ago, and I documented it years before I brought it up in a debate. But it contradicts those of many other people. How do we determine whose experience was more ‘right’? Along the same lines, I’ve practiced hypnosis before as well as allowed myself to be hypnotized numerous times in order to observe how it worked. The persuader exercise with the pendulum is quite simply explained by sub-conscious movements in one’s musculature. It can very easily be ‘directed’ by the hypnotist saying things like “you will notice the pendulum is beginning to swing in a circle” or “even though you’re not moving your hand, you’ll see that the pendulum is starting to swing from side to side.” As I’ve seen exactly how this can be done (as both subject and hypnotist) what reason do we have to posit any "super"natural explanations, at all? ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/655 "2009-03-03T14:07:58Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > It’s a shame that we’re not using [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=463219&) anymore, but okay. > > I’d re-ask the same question I asked there and never got an answer to. Namely, what epistemological process do we have access to when one spiritual revelation contradicts another? As I stated at the time, I had [a very moving liminal experience](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7928777&postcount=584) years ago, and I documented it years before I brought it up in a debate. But it contradicts those of many other people. How do we determine whose experience was more ‘right’? > > Along the same lines, I’ve practiced hypnosis before as well as allowed myself to be hypnotized numerous times in order to observe how it worked. The persuader exercise with the pendulum is quite simply explained by sub-conscious movements in one’s musculature. It can very easily be ‘directed’ by the hypnotist saying things like “you will notice the pendulum is beginning to swing in a circle” or “even though you’re not moving your hand, you’ll see that the pendulum is starting to swing from side to side.” > > As I’ve seen exactly how this can be done (as both subject and hypnotist) what reason do we have to posit any "super"natural explanations, at all? I miss that personal thread also, at least I wasn’t censored every other post. OK. I read your post and I don’t grok. The reason you never got an answer was you have provided one for yourself as to what it was and how it happened. So most will just leave it be as I will. I will offer a few observations. What you experienced was unique and personal to you, as are all of these “spiritual” experiences. Other people will experience other things, such as “God” being male, or as I did being, just being. The love part is common experience and the total acceptance of you as you are is the most common. This experience can be caused by meditation, or just relaxing, free of materialistic cares. In deeper experiences such as the near death experience one is usually out-of-body observing their own body as dead. This leads to a different interpretation than you have given it. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Robson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gary_robson/32/3448_2.png) [@Gary\_Robson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Robson)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/656 "2009-03-03T14:14:47Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > I miss that personal thread also, at least I wasn’t censored every other post. You don’t know what censorship is, either. I noticed when you replied to my other post you ignored the part where I asked you for any supporting evidence whatsoever for your claim that 90% of people believe in spirits. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/657 "2009-03-03T16:06:44Z")
> [@InvisibleWombat](#): > > You don’t know what censorship is, either. > > I noticed when you replied to my other post you ignored the part where I asked you for any supporting evidence whatsoever for your claim that 90% of people believe in spirits. The knowledge is so common I didn’t think anyone needed a cite. > [@](#): > > The study detailed Americans’ deep and broad religiosity, finding that 92 percent believe in God or a universal spirit – including one in five of those who call themselves atheists. [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/23/ST2008062300818.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/23/ST2008062300818.html) ---
**Author:** ![dinoboy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/65b543/32.png) [@dinoboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dinoboy)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/658 "2009-03-03T18:51:21Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > The knowledge is so common I didn’t think anyone needed a cite. > [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/23/ST2008062300818.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/23/ST2008062300818.html) Ahh… So 92% of people _[polled by The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/06/23/GR2008062301409.html?sid=ST2008062300818&s_pos=list)_ believe in spirits, etc. And they give some very touching _anecdotal_ stories for their reasoning too - which is quite telling. I couldn’t find out exactly how this poll was mediated (no demographics, methodology, nothing - where and how did they present this; Malls, College Campuses, Churches?) but it really doesn’t matter. This is still just an appeal to consensus and as such is bunk-all useful in determining the reality of the issue. Look, if you claim spirits are real (i.e. can interact with our world) then give us something to back it up; how do _ **you** _ know this? ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/659 "2009-03-03T19:50:38Z")
> [@dinoboy](#): > > Ahh… So 92% of people _[polled by The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/06/23/GR2008062301409.html?sid=ST2008062300818&s_pos=list)_ believe in spirits, etc. And they give some very touching _anecdotal_ stories for their reasoning too - which is quite telling. > > I couldn’t find out exactly how this poll was mediated (no demographics, methodology, nothing - where and how did they present this; Malls, College Campuses, Churches?) but it really doesn’t matter. This is still just an appeal to consensus and as such is bunk-all useful in determining the reality of the issue. > > Look, if you claim spirits are real (i.e. can interact with our world) then give us something to back it up; how do _ **you** _ know this? No. Experience. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528/660 "2009-03-03T20:01:29Z")
Then you should really step out of the debate. If you refuse to provide anything other that “I just know,” you can’t be taken seriously. I would submit that the only thing you \*experienced \*was a halucination, of which there is much more proof as a phenomenon than spirits doing, well, anything. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528.md?page=32) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ouija-boards-i-used-to-think-it-was-bull-until/486528.md?page=34)