Ah, a great debate. Some people swear by it, some people think it's crap.
I for one, am a believer, but to the steotypical viewpoint of it.
I will not deny that many so-called "Psychics" (which, for the sake of simplicity, I will use to cover all bases of the 'genre', such as mediumship, levitation, mind-reading, foresight, the paranormal, whatever) are in fact, frauds and cold readers and whatnot, set out to prey on people to make a quick buck.
I think everyone has psychic abilities to a small extent, because I'm aware that almost everyone has moments of deja-vu, ESP, and dreams that become real, once in a while. Those who are skeptic and flat out non believers can attribute this to mere coincidence, since it's infrequent enough in most people. I don't find fault in that thinking, since I'd say that too if it didn't happen to me more often than would be normally expected by chance.
Then there is of course ghost sightings and whatnot. I personally once slept in a house that was haunted by benevolent spirits (friend was house sitting for someone and didn't want to be alone). It was strange, but not in a bad way. I don't think I imagined what I experienced by wishful thinking, as I went in there with a firm hope that I wouldn't encounter anything if the claims of the house being haunted were indeed true (I'll relate a little of the take in SD if anyone is curious).
Of course, people, such as (to cite one example) James Randi and his "Million Dollar Challenge" want to see PROOF of this. Well, my argument is, just because it can't be proven under a scientifically controlled experiment, doesn't mean it can't be or isn't true. Science has yet to explain under controlled conditions, for instance, the Placebo Effect and how the power od the mind can override "medicine". Does that mean that isn't real? In another example, I've had tests and procedures done on me as a child for several years (some of which were the SAME one repeated just in case the original gave false or misleading results) to attempt explain why my growth was stunted for 3 years. They never figured it out. Even though the cause was not understood, it still happened.
Not every sceientific experiement produces viable results to prove or dispove a theory. Plus, I believe psychic abilities are somewhat 'random', meaning you really CAN'T place it in a controlled experiment in order to get viable and conclusive results. Every case is going to be different.
One can claim that psychic abilities and ghost sightings are all based on interpretations and believing what one choses to, and the stories are full of crap. People put their faith in what they most believe, INCLUDING the realm of the Scientific. We believe scientific reports without being a part of the experiement and seeing and experiencing the results for ourselves, do we not? Skeptics, where is YOUR proof that some scientific results you believe aren't a hoax or the result of a conspiracy on a mass scale? If one can believe a scientific study without being a part of it or even understanding how the experiment was conducted or the results drawn, then believers of paranormal have the same right to believe a tale of such a display. Just because something is IMPLAUSIBLE, does not necessarily mean it's IMPOSSIBLE.
"But then why can't a psychic just 'forsee' the willing lottery numbers and win millions?" Ever occur that it might not work that way, or they have a personal ethic against it? A 'psychic' can't see everything in the future they want to see. They can't just go, "okay, I want the willing lottery numbers for Powerball on xx/xx/xx" and get results like an internet search engine. And even if one person could, why would they tell anyone? Money from fame means crap if you can keep winning the lottery over and over; plus public knowledge of such a power would probably mean they'd be locked up for either insanity or for experiment, either out of fear or an attempt to understand. And if they did tell people the numbers before they were drawn to "prove" it, it would suck because everyone would win, so they'd be no point anymore!
Like any job out there, each and every person has differing levels of different abilities. No two psychics share the same abilities. If you found a psychic who could see anything you wanted to at any time, why the HELL would you share them?
Just because psychic powers don't work the way people THINK and WANT them to work, doesn't mean they can't be real.
I guess this turned more into a rant, but meh, this is just my general viewpoint on it to get this started. For the record, my family is one brought up with math/science, and religion and/or the paranormal was a NON-factor. I wasn't raised to believe these things; I made my own conclusions based on my experiences.
Anyway, what do you think? Are Psychic abilities and the paranormal a possibility, or just a hoax?
I agree that many people/everyone has 'psychic' abilities, having experienced them myself. I don't think that the psychics who make money out of seeing other people's futures/lives are real though. Still, that doesn't stop the strange fascination I get walking down the dark, cobbled alleyway near where I live, and going past the psychic's shop. Keep wanting to go in there, just for fun. Shame I'd have to pay...
As you said, such things are random - nobody can go 'I want to see the future' and have it happen. Similarly, I don't think you can see other people's lives, only your own.
We believe scientific reports without being a part of the experiement and seeing and experiencing the results for ourselves, do we not? Skeptics, where is YOUR proof that some scientific results you believe aren't a hoax or the result of a conspiracy on a mass scale? If one can believe a scientific study without being a part of it or even understanding how the experiment was conducted or the results drawn, then believers of paranormal have the same right to believe a tale of such a display.
Asking for proof for anything outside math is extremely hard.
Actually, scientist often test each other's theory over and over again. If a series of experiments shows that an accepted theory does not allign with the results, then that scientist(s) will be rewarded with fame (and/or money) depending on how well the theory is. That is one way of how the insitution of science works. I am not sure if you taken science classes before.
In my college, every time we learn a theory, usually in a week or two, we go to the labs and test out that theory.
Remember, having mountains of evidence for something does not mean you proven something.
However, the paranormal is different. So far, there is no instrument that can produce repeatable,
testiable experiments. By no means that this is a proof that paranormal don't exist or exist. However, if I were to
say that the Invisible Pink Unicorn is stalking you right now, but I can't show evidence for it, would you believe me?
I have not seen anything considered psychics to happen to me before. The self-proclaimed
psychics are just actually very good at processing information though vague questions and reading your reactions.
Science may not explain everything in life, but it is the most logical explanation (actually, most
logical insitution) that humanity has for things that can happen in life. No other method/insitution gives a way to explain life
while being able to question/correct itself. Science is not out to prove anything either. It constructs theories to explain different
events that can happen in life. Also, "everything" is the same as infinite. Nothing can explain an infinite
amount of things. Infinity can't be reach nor does it exist
I think that any belief that people have psychic ability is the attempt of a powerless person to find some way of claiming power over their surroundings.
Regarding your claims over scientific vs. psychic evidence - scientific evidence has to be repeated and verified by the entire scientific community before it is accepted as a possible theory. Psychic evidence is purely anecdotal, and does not stand up to any scientific testing.
I think the work of Derren Brown is fascinating in this field - he performs the work of so-called "psychics" whilst having utter disbelief in the hocus-pocus of it. Even a subconscious understanding of psychology can fool people into thinking they have extraordinary gifts that they do not have.
There are other examples on that site, Derren Brown can do a lot with magic, mentalism and cold reading, but not under controlled conditions. Joe has been tested for decades and has results that even sceptics admit are very strong. For example Richard Wiseman has publicly stated "I agree that by the standards of any other area of science that remote viewing is proven" or Michael Shermer has stated “The case for psychic functioning seems better than it ever has been. The contemporary findings along with the output of the SRI/SAIC program do seem to indicate that something beyond odd statistical hiccups is taking place. I also have to admit that I do not have a ready explanation for these observed effects.”
Outside of remote viewing there are many psychics who have worked with Dean Radin, Rupert Sheldrake, Edwin May and many others.
The Ganzfeld telepathy trials have produced odds against chance of 29 quintillion to 1, so again show that psi or psychic abilities are real. I would also like to see Derren Brown reproduce the results of the precognition trails under controlled conditions. The problem with the sceptical angle as it is portrayed by sensationalists like James Randi is that it focuses on the easy targets, you won't find more than a passing mention of Joe McMoneagle on Randi's site, but loads about Geller (I've looked)...interesting that.
It's a shame that the real science in the area gets overshadowed by Randi's challenge; like anyone with any sense would go up to be tested by a hostile magician who has made a career out of saying there is no such thing as psychic abilities. It would be like a black man submitting to be given a trial by the KKK.
Have not been here for a while so hadn't seen the last comment... The facts are the facts, and unfortunately for the sceptics that's not a made up number, it is the result of a meta-analysis of all the Ganzfeld telepathy trials. If you read Dean Radin's book you will see how this was arrived at. I would really advise people to look into the evidence, not to simply dismiss things as bull****, that just shows the low level of engagement that is prevalent amongst many sceptics.
I misread the title of this thread... I thought it said physics, not psychics. When WarmEye said some people think it's a load of rubbish I was quite confused
Have not been here for a while so hadn't seen the last comment... The facts are the facts, and unfortunately for the sceptics that's not a made up number, it is the result of a meta-analysis of all the Ganzfeld telepathy trials. If you read Dean Radin's book you will see how this was arrived at. I would really advise people to look into the evidence, not to simply dismiss things as bull****, that just shows the low level of engagement that is prevalent amongst many sceptics.
Given the reported problems with many of the first Ganzfeld trials, a meta-analysis of all Ganzfeld trials is extremely inappropriate.
Discuss theological issues, which are issues inherent to a religion, not their political manifestations.
Psychics
