I don’t demand or even request that anyone try to prove something to a skeptic - I understand why that might not be palatable.
I’m not running a thought experiment about “what if psychic powers are real” either.
What I am doing, is wondering why non-skeptics don’t seem to care that anyone can hang out a shingle and call themselves a psychic - it’s all very open-minded, allright, but it does provoke the thought experiment “Do people who say they believe in psychic powers really believe, or are they kidding the rest of us?” This may be a rude question, but I see precious little evidence that anyone really believes this stuff. In real professions, the professionals create their own certification processes, and demand that governments only deal with properly certified folks. Why not with psychics? If it’s all a game to keep yourselves entertained, fine - no one has any problem with that, though mystery-mongering can be slightly irritating. In that case, all I ask is that non-skeptics admit it and don’t take the chance of deluding the people who can’t tell that you’re all in on a big joke.
I think Beeblebrox has already given as much of an answer as you’ll ever get, i.e. that most people believe what they WANT to believe. Maybe it’s more to the point that we believe what is convenient for us to believe, and just don’t want those beliefs examined too closely (inconvenient!); this certainly would explain a lot of political and religious beliefs, and by the way (tangent alert) wasn’t that why Socrates was put to death?
I’ll do my best to try to answer your specific questions Andy.
I’m a non-skeptic and you are correct in my case…I don’t care that anyone can “hang out a shingle”…
Why? Couple of reasons.
#1 This country is over-regulated as it is. I’m against excessive government involvement in any area. Besides, there are still lots of businesses and professions that have yet to be regulated…why single out the psychic industry? Can anyone demonstrate an overiding issue of public safety that demands we get control of those dammed psychics? …Not to my satisfaction…and apparently not yet to the satisfaction of our lawmakers. BTW, DavidB and I once had a lengthy discussion here in GD about the need for psychic laws and regulations.
#2 I feel that the market will weed out the less accurate commercial psychics.
As far as the “thought experiment”:
Really believe? Kidding you?
I really believe that these powers might exist. I am not kidding the rest of you…and there are other like me.
Now since I’ve been cooperating nicely with the skeptics here, I’d appreciate some dialogue about this:
“Why don’t skeptics care?”
Meaning that it is my impression from hanging out here with you guys that skeptics really don’t want things like psychic powers or aliens to exist. Oh, they say they do…that they’d be thrilled if it were only true, but I don’t think that most are sincere when they say that.
Most “skeptics” I’ve met seem to have already made their final decision as to the non-existance of these things. Never mind that new reports and new data appear daily. They seem bothered to look into such things…decision already made.
I guess they must think that it is just not worth sifting through the trash to find a gold nugget. Take crop circles for example. Because it has been proven that humans can and have made them, that means that all thereafter are man-made as well. Subject closed for the skeptic.
The Wonderful Wizard of Oz might have been based on a true story, but that doesn’t mean that it was. It might be true that I had Chinese food for breakfast this morning, but that doesn’t mean that it is.
There are always possibilities, but not all possibilities are equally likely to be true. And some possibilities are extremely unlikely to be true.
If so, they are cowards.
Then they could donate the million to charity. The only reason they don’t take up Randi’s challenge is because they know damned well that it’s a fair challenge and that they would lose. Only a coward backs away from a fair fight.
Sorry, I still don’t see a “thought experiment” in the OP. Perhaps it’s a choice of terminology. I see a description of why one should want to test psychics, whether you’re a skeptic or not, but I don’t see a thought experiment.
As for taking out of context, you seemed to be saying that the idea of testing psychics is inherently flawed. I pointed out that testing psychics is not merely a theoretical concept, but is actually being done. If it is inherently flawed, then how is it actually being done?
I don’t think I was pretending to misunderstand or ignoring context. Perhaps my phrasing was less than clear or my style not to your liking.
Eternal said:
Yes, the CIA was investigating using psychic powers for spying. It went under the less obvious name of “remote viewing”, but is essentially a form of clairvoyance. When this came to light, an investigation was performed at the behest of Congress, with evaluations by a skeptic and a believer (the believer having been involved in some of the studies). Needless to say the results were divided, but the remote viewing project was cancelled as being not useable even if some small positive effect was noted.
Tominator2 said:
Of course, but Martin Gardner’s point was that he received mail on every topic saying essentially the same thing that their particular cause de jeur was the one true one.
Krispy Original said:
Who said the government has to be involved? Why not an independent organization of psychics who have their own liscencing system, a voluntary association that have a standard logo (like AAA). In order to join the association, you have to consent to testing by the group to ensure you are a real psychic, and not some out of work actress who can fake a Jamaican accent non-convincingly and do 1-800 line commercials. They could then promote their voluntary organization as authentic psychics with a certificate of verification that they submitted to testing, and have a regular review to ensure they are legitimate. This would weed out the fakes that rip off old people of their retirement money, for example, and could even be used to supplement police investigations of the frauds if they felt like it. As paid contractors, of course. No new laws or regulations, just a voluntary association, name-brand recognition, and aid to enforcing exiting fraud laws. How is that a bad thing?
That would be nice, but experience indicates that is not the case. Fraud psychics do a fine business, never mind people who legitimately think they have powers and are trying to honestly help people.
You’re entitled to your opinion, but that doesn’t mean they are insincere. Perhaps they’ve just been let down one too many times by the paranormal promoters with no evidence.
No, but it does mean that the crop circle proponents must have more proof than yet another swirl in the grass. To be an authentic non-fake, it must have more going for it than has previously been shown to be fakable. The more is shown to be fakable, the higher the standard for the next possible authentic. See the difference?
jab1 said:
Hmmm. Not necessarily. They might just wish that they were “normal”, and not want anyone to know as it would give them undue attention and interrupt their lives. I agree this applies to those who promote their abilities but refuse to test them, but there are bound to be some who are not making a big deal and trying to just live their life. As for backing away from a fair fight, why is fighting a good thing? Your metaphor is flawed because I would rather not fight if I don’t have to, even if it is fair.
Your metaphor is flawed because I would rather not fight if I don’t have to, even if it is fair.