Tolerance: Can there be too much?

[Willie Lumplump]

One of my recent posts has raised the question of tolerance. What sorts of ideas should we tolerate, and what ideas should we not tolerate? Is it possible to have too much tolerance? What are the possible or probable consequences of too much tolerance?

I offer the following example of reasonable limits to tolerance: Anybody who exploits another person's emotional vulnerability by selling superstitious nonsense should expect to receive accusations. We as a society have retreated far into superstition from the time the Enlightenment, and today we routinely tolerate all manner of dangerous foolishness. I say "dangerous" because we need all our rational faculties to solve problems that threaten civilization and life on this planet. Who will stand up for reason and denounce superstition? We should, and I think that waccobb is a good place to do it.

[mykil]

There really can never been enough tolerance in our world Willie, argument is how wars are stared my friend. You may warn people of others abnormal behavior but even then you are crossing a few boundaries in my opinion, what ever happened to turn the other cheek? In this day and age we have to learn not to tolerate curtain aspects of our government behavior, but all in all it begin form someone somewhere not tolerating something somewhere and everything getting out of hand.

[Willie Lumplump]

In the past I've argued that to save the planet and each other we need to exercise our full powers of reason. We are not exercising our full powers of reason when we assert that "a" and "not a" are both true. That's a fundamental principle of logic. Here's "a": "There can really never been [sic] enough tolerance in our world." And here's "not a": "We have to learn not to tolerate certain aspects of our government [sic] behavior." If you are willing to believe that a proposition and its exact opposite are both true, then I contend that you are not in a good position to save the planet and human civilization, both of which are in grave danger. Furthermore, I'm absolutely convinced that our quasi-fascist goverment actively promotes this kind of irrationality. Here's "a": We seek peace and are willing to work with other countries to achieve it." "Here's "not a": "If we believe you to be a threat, we are justified in bombing you back into the stone age." The government wishes us to believe that both propositions are true. And, I dare say, most Americans do indeed have that belief. Every time you accept both "a" and "not a," you ease your slide toward irrationality, and it's irrationality, not intolerance, that is the basis of war.

[ThePhiant]

Wilie
please define

superstitious nonsense
please define


dangerous foolishness.
please define


Who will stand up for reason and denounce superstition?
please define reason


We should, and I think that waccobb is a good place to do it.
I think that is going to be a hard one

[Willie Lumplump]

Wilie
please define...


I'm using all these terms in their generally accepted sense--no idiosyncrasies, no neologisms. Any dictionary will suffice.

[ThePhiant]

well, Mykil is a dangerous fool who spouts a lot of superstitious nonsense at times, but I don't think he even knows how to use a dictionary.
can you be a little bit more vague????

I'm using all these terms in their generally accepted sense--no idiosyncrasies, no neologisms. Any dictionary will suffice.

[mykil]

Willie; LULU wrote word for word my first script that I was going to reply with. I think that someone just rubbed you the wrong way a little and you got upset a littlie and decided to vent! If this is so no worries we all [well not me] get in a mood now and again! Peace, and I hope you feel better!!!!! Oh and LULU BITE ME!!!! LMAO!!!


well, Mykil is a dangerous fool who spouts a lot of superstitious nonsense at times, but I don't think he even knows how to use a dictionary.
can you be a little bit more vague????

[Willie Lumplump]

Willie; LULU wrote word for word my first script that I was going to reply with. I think that someone just rubbed you the wrong way a little and you got upset a littlie and decided to vent! If this is so no worries we all [well not me] get in a mood now and again! Peace, and I hope you feel better!!!!! Oh and LULU BITE ME!!!! LMAO!!![/quote]

I'm criticizing certain ways of thinking, not you personally. And I'm not immune from the kinds of thinking that I'm criticizing. Sometimes I just can't seem to get over an irrational idea, and I just have to make up my mind to recognize its irrationality and live with it. In fact, a superstitious idea that has troubled me off-and-on for 25 years has just popped up again recently. I imagine that I'll take this nonsense with me to my grave, but to my last breath I'll recognize it as nonsense.

[Willie Lumplump]

well, Mykil is a dangerous fool who spouts a lot of superstitious nonsense at times, but I don't think he even knows how to use a dictionary. can you be a little bit more vague????

Perhaps you could be a little less vague about what I'm being vague about?

[Braggi]

Perhaps you could be a little less vague about what I'm being vague about?

Willie, it's your topic in general. Not everyone gets it. In addition, you said use a dictionary when definitions from your personal view would make more sense. Sometimes a dictionary doesn't say what somebody means, if you get my drift.

In response to your question, I think it's less an issue of tolerance than one of trust. I've had problems with this issue all my life. When someone said something I was pretty sure was wrong, I felt the need to inject my superior knowledge into the mix. Sometimes it was welcome, but more often it was not. I (Sometimes I was embarrassingly wrong, but that's an aside.) It's a real yoga for me to keep a handle on that one, be conscious of when it comes up for me (before I open my big mouth, that is) and then decide whether it is proper to correct the person or statement. Diplomacy is key as is the ability to just let it go if that's the best response.

What I really have trouble with is the same thing you have trouble with: the True Believers. It's fairly easy to cure someone of their ignorance, assuming even a basic level of communication and trust. However, it's very difficult to cure someone who "believes," whether that belief is right or wrong. It won't matter how many studies or experts you trot out, a belief is a belief.

It takes a lot of trust for someone to allow you to challenge their beliefs. Most people don't trust us that much nor will they ever. That's just how it is. They probably shouldn't.

-Jeff

PS. It is kinda weird, however, that these folks are often the same ones complaining that the schools don't teach critical thinking. Eh?

[ThePhiant]

you said use a dictionary when definitions from your personal view would make more sense. Sometimes a dictionary doesn't say what somebody means, if you get my drift.
couldn't have said it better myself:thumbsup:




What I really have trouble with is the same thing you have trouble with: the True Believers. It's fairly easy to cure someone of their ignorance, assuming even a basic level of communication and trust. However, it's very difficult to cure someone who "believes," whether that belief is right or wrong. It won't matter how many studies or experts you trot out, a belief is a belief.

I once asked a christian methodist, who believes that the earth exist for only 5000 years, how he could explain dinosaur bones, he said God likes to test our faith in him!
I doesn't get any better than that!!!

[ThePhiant]

Perhaps you could be a little less vague about what I'm being vague about?
OK that is fair enough, well let me repeat myself
Wilie
please define
<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --><!-- using waccobburl -->
Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">superstitious nonsense </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->
please define

<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --><!-- using waccobburl -->
Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">dangerous foolishness. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->
please define

<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --><!-- using waccobburl -->
Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Who will stand up for reason and denounce superstition </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->?
please define reason

[Willie Lumplump]

OK that is fair enough, well let me repeat myself
Wilie
please define
<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --><!-- using waccobburl -->
Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td class="alt2" style="border: 1px inset ;">superstitious nonsense </td></tr></tbody></table>
<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->...

If you ask me to define a word, I'm not about to compete with Webster's International Dictionary--or any other dictionary, for that matter. Our ability to communicate depends upon a shared understanding of what individual words mean, and those meanings are set down in dictionaries. To the extent that we invest words with meanings known only to ourselves, we reduce our power to communicate. Is it possible that you're really meaning to ask a different question? Is it that your asking for examples rather than definitions?

[Willie Lumplump]

Willie, it's your topic in general. Not everyone gets it. In addition, you said use a dictionary when definitions from your personal view would make more sense. Sometimes a dictionary doesn't say what somebody means, if you get my drift....

I'm not sure I've found the thread that ties together all your thoughts. Anyway, about "definitions from your personal view," I addressed this point in a post to ThePhiant. Generally I'd expect a word to lose its usefulness to the extent that a personalized definition departs from a dictionary definition. Although, I suppose one might explicitly provide a new meaning. I remember Humpty Dumpty's reply to Alice when she challenged his definition of a word. He said something to the effect that "it means whatever I say it means, neither more nor less. It's simply a question of who is to be the master." I'll have to look up the exact quote.

[Braggi]

Anyway, about "definitions from your personal view," I addressed this point in a post to ThePhiant.

OK, Willie. You're using phrases and ThePhiant asked what you meant. You've refused to define what you mean so give some specific examples.

Please give some examples of "dangerous foolishness." Please denounce some "superstition(s)" for us. Maybe then we'll know what the Hel you're talking about.

One person's most cherished belief is another person's dangerous superstition. Change people and the situation reverses. Only examples can describe where an individual is coming from even if both people agree completely on the definitions of the words.

-Jeff

[Willie Lumplump]

OK, Willie. You're using phrases and ThePhiant asked what you meant. You've refused to define what you mean so give some specific examples.

Please give some examples of "dangerous foolishness." Please denounce some "superstition(s)" for us. Maybe then we'll know what the Hel you're talking about.

One person's most cherished belief is another person's dangerous superstition. Change people and the situation reverses. Only examples can describe where an individual is coming from even if both people agree completely on the definitions of the words.

-Jeff

First, here are the definitions of superstition that I copied from dictionary.com. Of course, the same definitions are available to anyone, and that's why I haven't provided them before.

<TABLE class=luna-Ent minmax_bound="true"><TBODY minmax_bound="true"><TR minmax_bound="true"><TD class=dn vAlign=top minmax_bound="true">1.</TD><TD vAlign=top minmax_bound="true">a belief or notion, not based on reason or knowledge, in or of the ominous significance of a particular thing, circumstance, occurrence, proceeding, or the like. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=luna-Ent minmax_bound="true"><TBODY minmax_bound="true"><TR minmax_bound="true"><TD class=dn vAlign=top minmax_bound="true">2.</TD><TD vAlign=top minmax_bound="true">a system or collection of such beliefs. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=luna-Ent minmax_bound="true"><TBODY minmax_bound="true"><TR minmax_bound="true"><TD class=dn vAlign=top minmax_bound="true">3.</TD><TD vAlign=top minmax_bound="true">a custom or act based on such a belief. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=luna-Ent minmax_bound="true"><TBODY minmax_bound="true"><TR minmax_bound="true"><TD class=dn vAlign=top minmax_bound="true">4.</TD><TD vAlign=top minmax_bound="true">irrational fear of what is unknown or mysterious, esp. in connection with religion. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=luna-Ent minmax_bound="true"><TBODY minmax_bound="true"><TR minmax_bound="true"><TD class=dn vAlign=top minmax_bound="true">5.</TD><TD vAlign=top minmax_bound="true">any blindly accepted belief or notion.</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Before listing some superstitions, I'd like to address the notion that "one person's most cherished belief is another person's dangerous superstition." This in itself is a dangerous notion because it implies that logic is relative.
And if logic is seen as relative, we have nothing to anchor us to reality. Let me give an example: "All zebras have stripes. Here is an animal with stripes. Therefore this animal is a zebra." That argument is fallaceous. It is illogical. Its illogic doesn't depend on your point of view. Even if my point of view is as culturally determined as yours, even if you are as smart as I am, even if your intentions are as good as mine, that argument is still illogical. Even if we both agree that the argument is valid, or even if everyone on earth agrees that it is valid, it is still illogical.

The zebra case is an example of one kind of illogic. Other kinds of illogic have to do with rules of evidence. It is illogical to believe in a proposition for which there is no evidence. There is no evidence to support to the validity of tarot, therefore it is illogical to believe in it. Furthermore, tarot is invested with an ominous significance. Therefore, tarot meets the definition of a superstition. The fact that you might believe that it's valid doesn't change a thing. It is still a superstition.

Examples of other superstitions are belief in spirit guides, astral projection, and astrology. Scientology is partly a hoax which does not, by itself, make it a superstition. However, since its claim to validity is based partly on a preposterous and illogical belief in powerful beings who came to this planet during the Jurassic Period, I would include it as a superstition.

Superstitions in general tend to be dangerous because they tend to undermine our ability to reason by creating a mental arena within which rules of logic don't apply. And I would say that that the boundaries of this arena probably are not fixed. If the boundaries shift and contaminate areas of reason that we depend on for our survival, we are in real trouble. On a smaller scale, if an individual is having emotional problems, and if that individual seeks help through the practice of a superstition such as tarot (as one wacco member did recently), there is a significant possibility of long-term harm. Not only would the person in need forego valid treatment, his (or her, in this case) ability to reason logically would also be compromised, and in the long run the loss of the ability to reason is bound to be deleterious.

[Neshamah]

In the past I've argued that to save the planet and each other we need to exercise our full powers of reason. We are not exercising our full powers of reason when we assert that "a" and "not a" are both true. That's a fundamental principle of logic.

Yes, but we are not always in a position to say whether 'a' or '~a' is correct. I'd rather allow both positions, and then at least some people will be right.

I prefer to err on the side of being too tolerant and too permissive, rather than try to enforce anyone's necessarily imperfect conception of the truth. When it comes to beliefs, I tolerate all kinds of things I am certain are wrong. I do so because repressing any beliefs opens the door to repressing correct beliefs. Repressing strongly held beliefs is likely to do far more harm than permitting those beliefs to be held. Obviously tolerance cannot be unlimited. I for example tolerate the killing of the unborn because unborn children are still linked to the mother. However, I am much less tolerant when it comes to the killing of adults.


~ Neshamah


P.S. Logic requires assumptions. Those who make use of astrology adopt assumptions that most of us would reject, but that does not mean there are not some who apply astrology logically within their framework. Assumptions are generally kept by at least some people for as long as they work. Lots of people lead perfectly happy lives following assumptions that are likely false, but just because something is not true does not mean it will not work. If they are happy and are not hurting anyone, then I think their assumptions are just fine.

P.P.S. The issue is less clear when those assumptions are likely to cause harm. Even there, as long as the harm is limited to that person or to children within that person's care, the overall happiness of everyone is greater when people can follow their own assumptions and make their own mistakes.

P.P.P.S. Iraq would likely be a better place if everyone adopted democracy and placed less emphasis on whether a person is a Sunni or a Shiite. However, we create much greater harm by trying to impose this 'better' worldview, then by letting people and cultures face the consequences of their own decisions.

[mykil]

OK; now you really have my attention! Is there anyway in hell you can elaborate on this superstition, irritation form the past? Please, I am for real and want to know what could be bothering you for all these years? I am curious for my own personal gain and would be most grateful if you may go into a few details! Peace!<o:p></o:p>



I'm criticizing certain ways of thinking, not you personally. And I'm not immune from the kinds of thinking that I'm criticizing. Sometimes I just can't seem to get over an irrational idea, and I just have to make up my mind to recognize its irrationality and live with it. In fact, a superstitious idea that has troubled me off-and-on for 25 years has just popped up again recently. I imagine that I'll take this nonsense with me to my grave, but to my last breath I'll recognize it as nonsense.

[Willie Lumplump]

Yes, but we are not always in a position to say whether 'a' or '~a' is correct. I'd rather allow both positions, and then at least some people will be right.

Global warming is happening. Global warming is not happening. Let's believe both so that at least some people will be right. Blacks are an inferior race. Blacks are not an inferior race. Let's believe both so at least some people will be right. AIDS is caused by the HIV virus. AIDS is not caused by the HIV virus. Let's believe both so that at least some people will be right.


I prefer to err on the side of being too tolerant and too permissive, rather than try to enforce anyone's necessarily imperfect conception of the truth. When it comes to beliefs, I tolerate all kinds of things I am certain are wrong.

Well, when they come for you to drag you away to Guantanamo to be tortured and held without right of habeus corpus, don't complain. It's wrong of course, but you tolerated it when the same thing happened to others.


Logic requires assumptions. Those who make use of astrology adopt assumptions that most of us would reject, but that does not mean there are not some who apply astrology logically within their framework.

National Socialism requires assumptions. Most people reject those assumptions, but that doesn't mean that there aren't some who apply National Socialism logically within their framework. If the assumptions of a belief system are false, it's irrelevant whether or not the assumptions are applied logically.


Iraq would likely be a better place if everyone adopted democracy and placed less emphasis on whether a person is a Sunni or a Shiite. However, we create much greater harm by trying to impose this 'better' worldview, then by letting people and cultures face the consequences of their own decisions.

You are under the impression that the United States wishes to impose democracy in Iraq? Then why has the U.S. overthrown so many democratically elected governments around the world and installed brutal dictators?

[Willie Lumplump]

OK; now you really have my attention! Is there anyway in hell you can elaborate on this superstition, irritation form the past? Please, I am for real and want to know what could be bothering you for all these years? I am curious for my own personal gain and would be most grateful if you may go into a few details! Peace!<o:p></o:p>

OK. Fair enough. My first wife and I divorced 25 years ago. We divorced not because we didn't love each other but because we were torn apart by forces that seemed beyond our control and by small-minded friends and family who pushed their own agendas at our expense. I am a naturalist, that is, I don't believe in anything supernatural, like God for instance. Nevertheless, for many years I had the sense that my wife and I had committed a great sin, an unforgivable sin for which there must be terrible punishment. Sometimes I still sense echoes of that belief. Yet, I don't believe in God and therefore can't believe in sin. So my sense of sin is illogical--even superstitious.

[mykil]

It all comes back to god now doesn’t it? I myself am a Recovering Christian and am proud of it! I just assume our elders in our past wrote allot of those in that particular period in time as sort of a guide to live by. You have to admit, not killing or stealing or fucking thy friend’s wife was a good trait to live by and still is. Yet I think as we evolve in our time we have to let go of certain aspects of the big book and really sit back and laugh. In this we can see the good and the bad and really get a sense of where we were, where we are and where on earth or beyond we are headed. Putting up with another’s belief system is as old as the hills, to me this is kind of like putting up with republicans! I don’t adhere to there wayz in life, nor do I wish too! Yet they are people too! When you were younger, you were younger. Let the past go and you will be free, try living in the now and let go of the pain in your heart is the only way of life for me Willie. Give into the now and you too will be FREE WILLIE! Living in the past and letting certain aspects of you pain resurface is not an evolution, more of stepping backwards and not living up to your full potential. There are a number of wayz to rid your soul and body of reoccurring bad trauma. Massage for one works miracles! Looking up your lovely ex wife and having a meaningful conversation may promote closure as well, or spark way more hellish memories eh? Peace!


OK. Fair enough. My first wife and I divorced 25 years ago. We divorced not because we didn't love each other but because we were torn apart by forces that seemed beyond our control and by small-minded friends and family who pushed their own agendas at our expense. I am a naturalist, that is, I don't believe in anything supernatural, like God for instance. Nevertheless, for many years I had the sense that my wife and I had committed a great sin, an unforgivable sin for which there must be terrible punishment. Sometimes I still sense echoes of that belief. Yet, I don't believe in God and therefore can't believe in sin. So my sense of sin is illogical--even superstitious.

[Neshamah]

Willie Lumplump,

Here's what I said:

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Neshamah wrote: https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/orangebuttons/viewpost.gif (https://www.waccobb.net/forums/showthread.php?p=40554#post40554)
Yes, but we are not always in a position to say whether 'a' or '~a' is correct. I'd rather allow both positions, and then at least some people will be right.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

In the examples you cite, we are in a position to say which is correct. I stated that I choose to err on the side of being too permissive. That does not mean I think everything should be permitted. I agree with you that there can be too much tolerance, but in general, I think lack of tolerance is the greater problem. When excessive intolerance becomes acceptable, it is just as easy to repress the correct views as the incorrect ones, and the U.S. government thrives on marginalizing or repressing views it does not tolerate.



You are under the impression that the United States wishes to impose democracy in Iraq? Then why has the U.S. overthrown so many democratically elected governments around the world and installed brutal dictators?

The U.S. does as it pleases because it is no longer accountable to the voters, partly because so many do not vote, and partly because our government and media have become intolerant of views outside of a narrow spectrum represented by Guiliani on one end and Clinton on the other.

I usually agree with you; this is a new experience.


~ Neshamah

[Braggi]

Before listing some superstitions, I'd like to address the notion that "one person's most cherished belief is another person's dangerous superstition." This in itself is a dangerous notion because it implies that logic is relative.
And if logic is seen as relative, we have nothing to anchor us to reality. Let me give an example: "All zebras have stripes. Here is an animal with stripes. Therefore this animal is a zebra." That argument is fallaceous.

And your writing appears to me to be pointless. Get to the point. I'm trying to direct you there and you keep sliding into ... uselessness.

I'm not sure what you're up to with this thread, Willie. You've given us nothing to work with. What are you complaining about? I've taken my best guess and you claim to not know what thread I was responding to. I feel insulted by that response.

Allow me to expand on my point and see if it fits with you: on one hand we have a fundy Christian and on the other a fundy Muslim. Both have beliefs and both believe their beliefs are the only safe belief and the other's belief is a dangerous superstition. We are not talking about zebras here. I'm trying to draw you into a serious discussion. If it doesn't work, I'll give up on this thread.

So, should these two folks be tolerant of each others' beliefs or should they just attempt to kill each other knowing they can never save the other through conversion? They both KNOW for certain the other is wrong.

I don't think either is being too tolerant to just let sleeping dogs lie. Better that they discuss the weather and move on into their separate lives. I think this is both possible and reasonable. Reason dictates they behave and tolerate each other. That isn't dangerous. To do otherwise is unreasonable and could be dangerous. Yet both are living a superstition in my opinion. It's only dangerous if it gets dangerous.

What do you think, Willie?

I'll take on spirit guides and tarot in another post or two.

-Jeff

[ThePhiant]

YOU LOVED EACH OTHER???????????????????????????
what kind of irrational poppycock is that!!!!!!
Love doesn't exist! because you can't prove it's existence
therefore your statement is irrational and illogical
if you can prove to me that love exist, clancy will give you another $1000 and Mykil will give you a kiss.
PROVE IT!!! Dr. HumpHump



OK. Fair enough. My first wife and I divorced 25 years ago. We divorced not because we didn't love each other but because we were torn apart by forces that seemed beyond our control and by small-minded friends and family who pushed their own agendas at our expense. I am a naturalist, that is, I don't believe in anything supernatural, like God for instance. Nevertheless, for many years I had the sense that my wife and I had committed a great sin, an unforgivable sin for which there must be terrible punishment. Sometimes I still sense echoes of that belief. Yet, I don't believe in God and therefore can't believe in sin. So my sense of sin is illogical--even superstitious.

[Braggi]

OK, Willie, allow me to inform you of the completely reasonable and rational way I use Spirit Guides in my own life in a way that is safe and does not preclude my making rational decisions. I'll simplify for the sake of brevity.

I have ancestors, both direct and indirect that have died. These ancestors all had knowledge that could be considered "wisdom" if that knowledge is applied to problem solving. One of those ancestors is my father. Another is my grandfather. Another is my son. When confronted with a problem, I often search my mind looking for an answer. Sometimes, it makes sense for me to imagine that my father, or some other ancestor, would want me to apply wisdom and experience from their lives to help me solve my problem. By attempting to view my problem through the eyes of my ancestor, I am using the power of a Spirit Guide to help me solve my problem. Sometimes I even take it so far back I imagine what lessons a cave man would want me to know to help me make the most of a situation or survive a crisis.

I think this process is completely rational and the farthest thing from dangerous. I'm calling upon the wisdom of my ancestors and I'm astonished how often absolutely perfect answers arise from my Spiritual questioning.

I leave it to you to determine whether I'm just taking an extra moment to ponder my situation and coming up with a better answer due to my attentiveness or whether I'm tapping into a Cosmic, Supernatural, Spiritual consciousness that I'm channeling. I don't question the source. I'm sure it's just my own best and most reasonable self coming up with the answer I know is best. But sometimes it sure does feel like I'm communing with the Spirits.

Dangerous? Not for me. What do you think?

-Jeff

[Zeno Swijtink]

One of my recent posts has raised the question of tolerance. What sorts of ideas should we tolerate, and what ideas should we not tolerate? Is it possible to have too much tolerance? What are the possible or probable consequences of too much tolerance?

<snip>



So you are asking a question about tolerating ideas, not about tolerating people (who have intolerable ideas).

And from what you write elsewhere I take it you mean by "not tolerating" an idea:" not letting it pass without critique, as in your post about tarot and a person who offers tarot readings (a message that somehow disappeared in the digital void :): ).

There is also the meaning of "not tolerating an idea" as silencing the person who utters or promotes the idea.

Unfortunately the two meanings are sometimes conflated by people who consider even politice criticism as an effort to silence a person. Critical Thinking is then seen as negative, aggressive thinking.

I don't think one should always critique an opinion one think is incorrect. It's a matter of prioritizing and of context. But in principle for any idea we should create contexts where people can critique it without retribution.

And in principle we should never silence a person for their ideas.

That's why Barry created "Censored & Un-Censored," as a space for the Strong where you enter at your own risk. I think the only rule there is that you cannot attack people personally, which is what you kind of did in your original tarot posting.

But we are here talking about tolerating ideas.

Which leaves me with the question whether there are certain ideas that only can be discussed under the "Censored & Un-Censored" rubric. Jokes about gender, race, religion, etc. apparently.

And what about tarot? Should any advocacy of tarot be restricted to the dangerous ideas of the "Censored & Un-Censored" rubric since it goes so much against reason that those who care for reason need to be warned?

[ChristineL]

...

Superstitions in general tend to be dangerous because they tend to undermine our ability to reason by creating a mental arena within which rules of logic don't apply. ...


You're assuming that if someone has a belief system, (which you have decided is a superstition), they have taken leave of their logic, are incapable of critical thinking and are dangerous. Are you aware that many of the people who have the most respect for this planet of ours and have advocated keeping it balanced for generatins do so out of their spiritual beliefs, i.e.; many Native American Tribes (those very tribes who went to the Capitol prior to the dropping of the Abombs on Japan to beg the President not to do this), those who follow the Celtic traditions, the Buddhists and others.

When the Native Americans went to Washington they basically stated that the balance of things would require that if we dropped the "gourd of ashes" on another country, it would eventually be dropped on us. Not only spiritual, but damn logical...don't you think?

Then there's the Kabalists, whose theories on the origins of our solar system and all matter being in constant motion were proven out scientifically in the last century. The "big bang theory" and all matter is made up of atoms which are in constant motion.

Since my earliest childhood I saw and knew things I had no way of seeing and knowing. I was almost always right...I was born with six senses as opposed to five. I have studied Tarot, Palmistry and Numerology. I would never suggest readings can take the place of therapy and have often suggested therapy to clients I considered beyond my scope. Readings are a form of guidance system and I have convinced many a skeptic and non-believer of their validity through a simple short reading. The modern "science" of Palmistry was founded by a gentleman named Behnam who was a medical doctor in the late 1800's, early 1900's. He noticed patients suffering the same diseases had the same marks in their hands; on the lines, the finger joints, nails, etc. The only problem with his book is the cultural biases of his time. He literally photographed and made prints of thousands of hands. It works...it's amazing how much can be seen about a total stranger through a close look at their hands. Come on Willie, broaden your mind a little...the book is called the "The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading" by William G. Benham. Out of print but findable.

I agree that any extremism in belief, and the need to prove to be the only ones that are right, are at the root of many wars and other horrors. This usually happens when beliefs become organizations and the few want to control the many. I too am a "recovering Catholic". Those of the Celtic traditions, Kabalists like myself, Shamans of the Native American tribes (as well as African ones, etc.), and Buddhists don't put a lot of energy into fighting wars to prove themselves right, take over the world, destroy the planet in the name of a God-given right to dominate it or into converting others.

I will also concede there are many quacks in my profession. However, there are many quack psychiatrists, psychologists, therapists, medical doctors...etc., etc. Even those professions are the products of "belief systems". For example, no other western country seems to have such a strong belief in wide-spread ADD and the necessity for widespread use of psychotropic drugs to treat children who don't conform.

Just for the record, I've had enough therapy (with with carefully chosen genuine Western therapists with degrees) to have confirmed that I am relatively (I don't believe anyone is 100%) mentally/emotionally healthy. (At least within our Cultural belief system of what that is.)

I would consider your total atheism to be illogical, along with your insistence that any kind of spiritual belief system is superstition and potentially "dangerous".

Oh, and I do (as I'm sure many of our members do) know all striped animals are not zebras just as I know if I hear hoof beats...it could be a zebra...but chances are it's not.

Remember, there was a time in Western History when people like me, and you for that matter, were so little tolerated we were burned at the stake, pressed to death, drowned and hanged. This usually happened after being tortured. Of course, all this came out of a set of superstitions by your way of thinking, extremism and need from the few to control the many by mine. As much discrimination and "judgement" as I may encounter, I am grateful I don't have to worry about that.

[ChristineL]

...

And what about tarot? Should any advocacy of tarot be restricted to the dangerous ideas of the "Censored & Un-Censored" rubric since it goes so much against reason that those who care for reason need to be warned?

Those who care so much for "reason" need no warning and can just decide not to read the posts, no matter where they appear. It's a little like turning off the TV when you object to the program...Maybe we should have a special section for Scholars...

[mykil]

uh-oh here we go again, will you two get a room!

[Willie Lumplump]

Looking up your lovely ex wife and having a meaningful conversation may promote closure as well, or spark way more hellish memories eh? Peace!

I just yesterday talked to my ex wife for the first time in 25 years, and we did find closure, but it worked out a little too well, and now I have another big problem. Oh, well. What did I expect? Peace?

[Willie Lumplump]

Willie Lumplump,

Here's what I said:

Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td class="alt2" style="border: 1px inset ;">Neshamah wrote: https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/orangebuttons/viewpost.gif (https://www.waccobb.net/forums/showthread.php?p=40554#post40554)
Yes, but we are not always in a position to say whether 'a' or '~a' is correct. I'd rather allow both positions, and then at least some people will be right.

</td></tr></tbody></table>

In the examples you cite, we are in a position to say which is correct. I stated that I choose to err on the side of being too permissive. That does not mean I think everything should be permitted. I agree with you that there can be too much tolerance, but in general, I think lack of tolerance is the greater problem. When excessive intolerance becomes acceptable, it is just as easy to repress the correct views as the incorrect ones, and the U.S. government thrives on marginalizing or repressing views it does not tolerate.



The U.S. does as it pleases because it is no longer accountable to the voters, partly because so many do not vote, and partly because our government and media have become intolerant of views outside of a narrow spectrum represented by Guiliani on one end and Clinton on the other.

I usually agree with you; this is a new experience.


~ Neshamah

But we must take responsibility for our own lives and the life of the country. We've become a rogue nation that causes destruction around the world because the American people tolerate this abuse of power. On the domestic scene, unions are pounded into submission, we don't get the universal health care that a large majority of Americans want, pensions are at risk, the country's infrastructure is falling apart, the right of habeus corpus has been taken from us, and our tax system robs from the poor and gives to the rich. Why does all this happen in a democracy? BECAUSE WE TOLERATE IT! We've set our expectations so low that we're willing to tolerate even the worst abuses. This is tolerance run wild. When will we rise up in righteous anger, quit tolerating a failed government, and take our country back?

[Willie Lumplump]

YOU LOVED EACH OTHER???????????????????????????
what kind of irrational poppycock is that!!!!!!
Love doesn't exist! because you can't prove it's existence
therefore your statement is irrational and illogical
if you can prove to me that love exist, clancy will give you another $1000 and Mykil will give you a kiss.
PROVE IT!!! Dr. HumpHump

I've never said that we should live by logic alone, but tarot, astrology, and many other wacky notions make sweeping claims that are testable. To believe such claims without evidence is irrational, and irrationality undermines rationality. We can't afford to have our irrationality undermined.

[Willie Lumplump]

YOU LOVED EACH OTHER???????????????????????????
what kind of irrational poppycock is that!!!!!!
Love doesn't exist! because you can't prove it's existence
therefore your statement is irrational and illogical
if you can prove to me that love exist, clancy will give you another $1000 and Mykil will give you a kiss.
PROVE IT!!! Dr. HumpHump

In my previous post, what I meant, of course, is that we can't afford to have our rationality undermined.

[Willie Lumplump]

What are you complaining about?

I'm complaining that (1) most people (not necessarily wacco people) are too willing to abandon logic and believe all manner of improbable or impossible things without the least bit of evidence, and (2) most people, including wacco people, seem quite unaware of the deleterious effects of this kind of irrationality and seem willing to tolerate it without criticism.


I'm trying to draw you into a serious discussion.

So, should these two folks [Christian and Muslim fundies] be tolerant of each others' [sic] beliefs or should they just attempt to kill each other knowing they can never save the other through conversion?

You're trying to draw me into a serious discussion by posing rhetorical questions?


I don't think either is being too tolerant to just let sleeping dogs lie. Better that they discuss the weather and move on into their separate lives. I think this is both possible and reasonable. Reason dictates they behave and tolerate each other. That isn't dangerous. To do otherwise is unreasonable and could be dangerous. Yet both are living a superstition in my opinion. It's only dangerous if it gets dangerous.

What do you think, Willie?

I agree.

[Willie Lumplump]

OK, Willie, allow me to inform you of the completely reasonable and rational way I use Spirit Guides in my own life in a way that is safe and does not preclude my making rational decisions. I'll simplify for the sake of brevity.

I have ancestors, both direct and indirect that have died. These ancestors all had knowledge that could be considered "wisdom" if that knowledge is applied to problem solving. One of those ancestors is my father. Another is my grandfather. Another is my son. When confronted with a problem, I often search my mind looking for an answer. Sometimes, it makes sense for me to imagine that my father, or some other ancestor, would want me to apply wisdom and experience from their lives to help me solve my problem. By attempting to view my problem through the eyes of my ancestor, I am using the power of a Spirit Guide to help me solve my problem. Sometimes I even take it so far back I imagine what lessons a cave man would want me to know to help me make the most of a situation or survive a crisis.

I think this process is completely rational and the farthest thing from dangerous. I'm calling upon the wisdom of my ancestors and I'm astonished how often absolutely perfect answers arise from my Spiritual questioning.

I leave it to you to determine whether I'm just taking an extra moment to ponder my situation and coming up with a better answer due to my attentiveness or whether I'm tapping into a Cosmic, Supernatural, Spiritual consciousness that I'm channeling. I don't question the source. I'm sure it's just my own best and most reasonable self coming up with the answer I know is best. But sometimes it sure does feel like I'm communing with the Spirits.

Dangerous? Not for me. What do you think?

-Jeff

I think it sounds wonderful. I think I should try it.

[Willie Lumplump]

So you are asking a question about tolerating ideas, not about tolerating people (who have intolerable ideas).

I think the only rule there is that you cannot attack people personally, which is what you kind of did in your original tarot posting.

If two tarot-believers want to get together on Saturdays for a friendly reading, I'll feel free to criticize the idea of tarot. But if a person attempts to sell his services as a tarot reader to an emotionally vulnerable person who is in need of real help, I'll criticize not only the idea of tarot but also the huckster who is exploiting another person's vulnerability.


And what about tarot? Should any advocacy of tarot be restricted to the dangerous ideas of the "Censored & Un-Censored" rubric since it goes so much against reason that those who care for reason need to be warned?

I say let the tarot-hawkers subject their practices and themselves to criticism. If they don't hold back, I won't either. Why should people who take advantage of others' vulnerability be protected from harsh criticism?

[Willie Lumplump]

You're assuming that if someone has a belief system, (which you have decided is a superstition), they have taken leave of their logic, are incapable of critical thinking and are dangerous. Are you aware that many of the people who have the most respect for this planet of ours and have advocated keeping it balanced for generatins do so out of their spiritual beliefs, i.e.; many Native American Tribes (those very tribes who went to the Capitol prior to the dropping of the Abombs on Japan to beg the President not to do this), those who follow the Celtic traditions, the Buddhists and others.

I've said nothing about religion. I've focused on supposedly paranormal phenomena and pseudosciences such as astrology.

Your story about many Native American tribes going to the Capitol to beg the President not to drop the A-bomb is historically false. The atomic bomb remained a closely guarded secret until it exploded above Hiroshima. Since the second bomb was dropped only three days after the first, I doubt that any tribes had time to organize a trip to Washington.


Then there's the Kabalists, whose theories on the origins of our solar system and all matter being in constant motion were proven out scientifically in the last century. The "big bang theory" and all matter is made up of atoms which are in constant motion.

I don't know what you think I'm saying, that only atheists have ever made an important discovery?


I have convinced many a skeptic and non-believer of their validity through a simple short reading.

This kind of anecdotal evidence is notoriously unreliable. The fact that you have convinced people of the truth of a proposition says nothing about the truth of that proposition. The leader of the Heaven's Gate cult convinced his followers that an alien spaceship was coming in the tail of a comet to take them all home. Was that true?


The modern "science" of Palmistry

I thoroughly approve of your quotation marks.


He noticed patients suffering the same diseases had the same marks in their hands

Sorry. "He noticed" doesn't cut it. What was the experimental design? What did the statistical analysis show? What journal published the results of the study? Who were the referees?


I will also concede there are many quacks in my profession. However, there are many quack psychiatrists, psychologists, therapists, medical doctors...etc., etc. Even those professions are the products of "belief systems".

Are you suggesting the following line of reasoning?: A. There are quacks in the palmistry business which is a belief system. B. There are quacks in the recognized health professions which are belief systems. C. Therefore, palmistry is as valid as the other belief systems.


I would consider your total atheism to be illogical, along with your insistence that any kind of spiritual belief system is superstition and potentially "dangerous".

I don't remember saying this. Could you quote me to refresh my memory?


Remember, there was a time in Western History when people like me, and you for that matter, were so little tolerated we were burned at the stake.

That's a scary thought. Who was like you and me?

[Willie Lumplump]

uh-oh here we go again, will you two get a room!

That gave me my biggest laugh of the day.

[ThePhiant]

We can't afford to have our irrationality undermined.
I think we are beginning to understand each other

[ThePhiant]

we can't afford to have our rationality undermined.
of course not, that's why only fools fall in love.
can you imagine any sane and rational person succumbing to their feelings???

[ThePhiant]

. We can't afford to have our irrationality undermined.
Willie I fool heartedly agree!!!
I couldn't have said it any clearer myself!

[Braggi]

Hello again Willie. Thanks for reading and understanding my approach to "Spirit Guides." Sometimes a person can find rationality in the seemingly irrational. Your more recent posts sound more like the Willie I remember.

Now, about tarot:


... if a person attempts to sell his services as a tarot reader to an emotionally vulnerable person who is in need of real help, I'll criticize not only the idea of tarot but also the huckster who is exploiting another person's vulnerability.

Why should people who take advantage of others' vulnerability be protected from harsh criticism?


I tend to agree with you about tarot "readers" who prey on the vulnerable. I always feel a prickle on the back of my neck when I hear someone tell me they've consulted a psychic and now they feel validated about something or now they know what the "right" decision is.

I once got pretty pissed at my wife who came home with an expensive tarot deck and let me know she wanted to learn how to use it. She's a highly trained psychotherapist and I thought she should know better than to waste time and money on that crap.

Then one day I was hanging out at a book store in Laguna Beach and I noticed a tarot reader who was sitting at her table playing with her cards since she had no customers at the moment. She invited me to have a free reading. She was using the Voyager tarot deck. Each card is covered with a photo collage of fascinating and beautiful images, some of them quite moving. She did a simple reading for me which I believe consisted of five cards, each of them placed in a "traditional" tarot pattern and each reflecting some facet of my life. Instead of putting a card down and telling me "... this card means so and so ..." she asked me what images on the card caught my eye. By connecting the dots of my responses, including the main colors of the images I was pointing out, she was able to pinpoint some of the things that were going on in my life and help me see some things I needed work on. Mostly she was just validating what I already knew, just like any good therapist does. I wound up signing up for a class with her and learned quite a bit more about the Voyager deck and how it can be used. She was a good teacher and my views about tarot have softened considerably following this experience. BTW, I also talked my wife into joining me in the class.

By including the person being "read" as well as reading the cards, a skilled tarot reader actually can help people understand themselves more fully and perhaps can facilitate decisions that will improve a person's life. I think most of the readers out there are not so skilled, but I now allow for the possibility that a psychic reader actually can be helpful to a person.

I don't think anyone should depend on a tarot reading to make a decision about a divorce or anything else of such significance, but as a tool to put the wheels of life in motion ... well, let's just say few would argue with the notion of talking an issue out with an attentive friend or a non involved third party. Sometimes a tarot reader can fill that need.

-Jeff

[ThePhiant]

Jeff,
I get that same prickle when i hear somebody talk about their session with an "official counselor"
as your story points out correctly, you never know the level or quality of a person until you try them out
it is important to have a recommended , not just an experienced person help you, just the same as for any other service.
some people are good at what they are doing and others are not
Oh and BTW where are those tarot readers lurking about, the ones that PREY on the vulnerable???





I tend to agree with you about tarot "readers" who prey on the vulnerable. I always feel a prickle on the back of my neck when I hear someone tell me they've consulted a psychic and now they feel validated about something or now they know what the "right" decision is....

[ChristineL]

Hello again Willie. Thanks for reading and understanding my approach to "Spirit Guides." Sometimes a person can find rationality in the seemingly irrational. Your more recent posts sound more like the Willie I remember.

Now, about tarot:




I tend to agree with you about tarot "readers" who prey on the vulnerable. I always feel a prickle on the back of my neck when I hear someone tell me they've consulted a psychic and now they feel validated about something or now they know what the "right" decision is.

I once got pretty pissed at my wife who came home with an expensive tarot deck and let me know she wanted to learn how to use it. She's a highly trained psychotherapist and I thought she should know better than to waste time and money on that crap.

Then one day I was hanging out at a book store in Laguna Beach and I noticed a tarot reader who was sitting at her table playing with her cards since she had no customers at the moment. She invited me to have a free reading. She was using the Voyager tarot deck. Each card is covered with a photo collage of fascinating and beautiful images, some of them quite moving. She did a simple reading for me which I believe consisted of five cards, each of them placed in a "traditional" tarot pattern and each reflecting some facet of my life. Instead of putting a card down and telling me "... this card means so and so ..." she asked me what images on the card caught my eye. By connecting the dots of my responses, including the main colors of the images I was pointing out, she was able to pinpoint some of the things that were going on in my life and help me see some things I needed work on. Mostly she was just validating what I already knew, just like any good therapist does. I wound up signing up for a class with her and learned quite a bit more about the Voyager deck and how it can be used. She was a good teacher and my views about tarot have softened considerably following this experience. BTW, I also talked my wife into joining me in the class.

By including the person being "read" as well as reading the cards, a skilled tarot reader actually can help people understand themselves more fully and perhaps can facilitate decisions that will improve a person's life. I think most of the readers out there are not so skilled, but I now allow for the possibility that a psychic reader actually can be helpful to a person.

I don't think anyone should depend on a tarot reading to make a decision about a divorce or anything else of such significance, but as a tool to put the wheels of life in motion ... well, let's just say few would argue with the notion of talking an issue out with an attentive friend or a non involved third party. Sometimes a tarot reader can fill that need.

-Jeff

Thank you Jeff. This is exactly what a good "psychic" does. I, too, don't believe anyone should depend on a reading to make a very important life changing decision. It is a tool or a guidance system which sometimes gives validation, sometimes presents a new aspect of a situation for further thought, and yes...often helps people understand themselves and their own motivations better. As a reader myself, I refuse to give readings to people who expect me to give them the magical solutions to their problems and issues. The idea is to give insights that enpower people to make better decisions and be better prepared for upcoming changes. All my repeat clients will quote me: "I can do the reading, you still have to do the work."

Christine

[ChristineL]

Jeff,
I get that same prickle when i hear somebody talk about their session with an "official counselor"
as your story points out correctly, you never know the level or quality of a person until you try them out
it is important to have a recommended , not just an experienced person help you, just the same as for any other service.
some people are good at what they are doing and others are not
Oh and BTW where are those tarot readers lurking about, the ones that PREY on the vulnerable???

Again, I would agree...I think a "psychic reader" should be chosen with the same care you would choose an "official counselor", but then...many don't choose those carefully. Whether it be an "official counselor" or a "reader", if nothing they're saying "resonates" with you, move on.

And...Lulu...unfortunately...I have come across tarot readers that prey on the vulnerable and the desperate...The first thing that comes to mind is the "...I see you have a curse on you, or a dark cloud over you, (and other variations on this theme), and for so much I will...remove it. Granted, no one should fall for that, but who knows what someone is ready to grasp onto when in desperate straits.

Strangely enough, I agree with Willie on one thing; immediately jumping onto someone's post offering to sell them a "reading" as a way to deal with what they're going through is wrong. I would still feel it was wrong if someone was offering their services as a psychologist or counselor. WACCO has sections for promoting businesess...that's where the advertising of services belongs. When I posted a thank you to those who had tried to help me find my cat and stated I had found out he had been killed by a car, a member sent me a private email promoting her services in getting me through the grieving process...that felt a touch predatory to me. The "sorry for your loss" and "I know how rough this is" type of emails I received did a lot more towards comforting me.

Yes Willie, I know that was not an exact quote, I don't have the time to go through all your posts to get to it.

Barry, if you're reading this, can something be done to limit the promoting of businesses and services to their appropriate sections? It seems that almost every time I read the "digest" or go through various threads, someone is promoting some service or other they can provide in the middle of discussions.

Christine

[ThePhiant]

chistine, the way I took Jeff's comment was as if they are hanging out on streetcorners selling their predictions. you still have to seek them out.
and your example may be true, but it is the same with car sales people, you got to be able to distinguish the truth from the crap.
and unfortunately some people will only want to hear what they want to hear and aren't ready to see what is right in front of them.
a friend of mine who is dying of cancer with only a few weeks left, has finally allowed the thought of a possible death in .
anybody who told her that before, was considered rude, hostile or just plain unrealistic!!!!!
she would not have been able to hear anything but good news from anybody's reading because it didn't "resonate" with her otherwise.
how healthy is that?





And...Lulu...unfortunately...I have come across tarot readers that prey on the vulnerable and the desperate...The first thing that comes to mind is the "...I see you have a curse on you, or a dark cloud over you, (and other variations on this theme), and for so much I will...remove it. Granted, no one should fall for that, but who knows what someone is ready to grasp onto when in desperate straits.
Christine

[ChristineL]

chistine, the way I took Jeff's comment was as if they are hanging out on streetcorners selling their predictions. you still have to seek them out.
and your example may be true, but it is the same with car sales people, you got to be able to distinguish the truth from the crap.
and unfortunately some people will only want to hear what they want to hear and aren't ready to see what is right in front of them.
a friend of mine who is dying of cancer with only a few weeks left, has finally allowed the thought of a possible death in .
anybody who told her that before, was considered rude, hostile or just plain unrealistic!!!!!
she would not have been able to hear anything but good news from anybody's reading because it didn't "resonate" with her otherwise.
how healthy is that?


Lulu, I love that image...psychics hanging out on street corners selling predictions...and no they don't, but they sometimes sit in wait behind large hand shaped neon signs, LOL. I agree, you have to be able to distinguish truth from crap. That's true any time you're buying any "service", from car repairs to therapy.

As far as some people wanting to hear only what they want to hear...true. I've lost quite a few potential clients by telling them up front that I can't promise to tell them only what they want to hear...there's no growth and insight to be gained from that if it's not the truth.

I understand what you're saying regarding truth not necessarily resonating. What I meant...if someone tells you a bunch of things about yourself, or your past, and none of them are right...move on. I didn't use quite the right terminology.

Unfortunately, someone like your friend would be beyond mine, or most any other psychic's, abilities to be of assistance.

Christine

[Neshamah]

But we must take responsibility for our own lives and the life of the country. We've become a rogue nation that causes destruction around the world because the American people tolerate this abuse of power. On the domestic scene, unions are pounded into submission, we don't get the universal health care that a large majority of Americans want, pensions are at risk, the country's infrastructure is falling apart, the right of habeus corpus has been taken from us, and our tax system robs from the poor and gives to the rich. Why does all this happen in a democracy? BECAUSE WE TOLERATE IT! We've set our expectations so low that we're willing to tolerate even the worst abuses. This is tolerance run wild. When will we rise up in righteous anger, quit tolerating a failed government, and take our country back?

I've already advocated voting and greater tolerance from the media and the government. If everyone who did not vote in the 2004 election had voted for Barry, Barry would be President. The problem I see is not so much that everyone tolerates the present system, but that they will not tolerate any alternatives. There are alternatives, but they all get marginalized.

I do not want to get caught up on words. It sounds like we are not that far apart on substance. The government needs to be changed. That means we should relentlessly criticize the status quo and entertain alternatives.


~ Neshamah

[Willie Lumplump]

Thank you Jeff. This is exactly what a good "psychic" does. I, too, don't believe anyone should depend on a reading to make a very important life changing decision. It is a tool or a guidance system which sometimes gives validation, sometimes presents a new aspect of a situation for further thought, and yes...often helps people understand themselves and their own motivations better. As a reader myself, I refuse to give readings to people who expect me to give them the magical solutions to their problems and issues. The idea is to give insights that enpower people to make better decisions and be better prepared for upcoming changes. All my repeat clients will quote me: "I can do the reading, you still have to do the work."Christine

I must admit, I'm rather mystified. When you put the word "psychic" in quotes, are you meaning that you don't believe in psychics? I can't think of any other reason you'd use quotes in this way. And when you call yourself "a reader," what are you reading, exactly, and where do you think your insights are coming from?

[Willie Lumplump]

Again, I would agree...I think a "psychic reader" should be chosen with the same care you would choose an "official counselor", but then...many don't choose those carefully. Whether it be an "official counselor" or a "reader", if nothing they're saying "resonates" with you, move on.

I this this post may answer my previous question about the significance of quotation marks around the word "psychic." If there's a pattern in your use of quotation marks, I certainly don't see it, so I have no idea what the quotation marks are supposed to signify.


Yes Willie, I know that was not an exact quote, I don't have the time to go through all your posts to get to it.

A paraphrase I don't mind, but when you attribute to me a statement that I never made, of course I have to object.


Barry, if you're reading this, can something be done to limit the promoting of businesses and services to their appropriate sections? It seems that almost every time I read the "digest" or go through various threads, someone is promoting some service or other they can provide in the middle of discussions.

I have to vote with Christine on this one.

[Willie Lumplump]

Lulu, I love that image...psychics hanging out on street corners selling predictions...and no they don't, but they sometimes sit in wait behind large hand shaped neon signs, LOL. I agree, you have to be able to distinguish truth from crap. That's true any time you're buying any "service", from car repairs to therapy.

As far as some people wanting to hear only what they want to hear...true. I've lost quite a few potential clients by telling them up front that I can't promise to tell them only what they want to hear...there's no growth and insight to be gained from that if it's not the truth.

I understand what you're saying regarding truth not necessarily resonating. What I meant...if someone tells you a bunch of things about yourself, or your past, and none of them are right...move on. I didn't use quite the right terminology.

Unfortunately, someone like your friend would be beyond mine, or most any other psychic's, abilities to be of assistance.

Christine

Are you aware that James Randi, the professional magician and debunker, has offered a million-dollar reward to anyone who can prove the existence of any psychic phenomenon? Not only has no "psychic" ever collected the reward, as far as I know, none has ever attempted to claim the reward.

[ChristineL]

I must admit, I'm rather mystified. When you put the word "psychic" in quotes, are you meaning that you don't believe in psychics? I can't think of any other reason you'd use quotes in this way. And when you call yourself "a reader," what are you reading, exactly, and where do you think your insights are coming from?

No, it means I'm using a term that other people use to describe people like me. I don't feel it's a totally accurate description, but I have not come up with a better one.

As for what I'm reading and where my insights are coming from. I don't have an experiment protocal, and all those records and studies you require. I just know hundreds of people have stated they've benefited from the insights I've given them through my readings. That, of course, would be anecdotal to you. I don't know the experiment protocol Thomas Edison used...when I turn a switch a light goes on and that's good enough for me and a lot of other people.

I'm certainly not going to discuss where I believe my insights are coming from with you. As you have already made up your mind that psychic phenomena absolutely does not exist, and that Tarot and Palmistry have no validity in giving people insights into themselves and their lives, it can't be a discussion.

Do you know many police departments have realized that psychics can be of assistance in the investigations of murders, and even in the finding of the victims' bodies and do employ them? That's not anecdotal, cases have been documented.

[ChristineL]

I this this post may answer my previous question about the significance of quotation marks around the word "psychic." If there's a pattern in your use of quotation marks, I certainly don't see it, so I have no idea what the quotation marks are supposed to signify.

A paraphrase I don't mind, but when you attribute to me a statement that I never made, of course I have to object.

I have to vote with Christine on this one.

I'm amazed you'd spend any time trying to figure out the significance of quotation marks. I usually focus on the overall content.

Of course you'd vote with me on that one, after all, I was agreeing with you.

[ThePhiant]

and what be the rules for proving the existence of psychic phenomena???

Willie, are you aware that the police of all people use psychics to solve cases???
Imagine that Willie, the old gumshoes, who can only utter, "Just the facts",
are actually in cahoots with paranormal investigators to solve cases!!!
that must itch the crap out of you Willie. or willie not?


Are you aware that James Randi, the professional magician and debunker, has offered a million-dollar reward to anyone who can prove the existence of any psychic phenomenon? Not only has no "psychic" ever collected the reward, as far as I know, none has ever attempted to claim the reward.

[ThePhiant]

but now on a more scientific note.
where did Einstein get his insights from?
can you explain that strange phenomena that makes scientist invent things "accidently"??????


Are you aware that James Randi, the professional magician and debunker, has offered a million-dollar reward to anyone who can prove the existence of any psychic phenomenon? Not only has no "psychic" ever collected the reward, as far as I know, none has ever attempted to claim the reward.

[mykil]

Sorry Willie; maybe you should have tried the massage therapy first eh?


I just yesterday talked to my ex wife for the first time in 25 years, and we did find closure, but it worked out a little too well, and now I have another big problem. Oh, well. What did I expect? Peace?

[mykil]

Willie; I think it all boils down to the fact that there are other people on this planet and we share it! People are allowed their different beliefs; this is what makes us all unique. For you to sit here and argue that there are no psycic abilities in the world is like me telling you how to grow tomatoes! You say you are Mr. Natural so I am assuming you grow tomatoes and are good at it! But beyond that I feel that it is even deeper than that. Your beliefs are not the only ones! Just because you do not believe does not mean that it is not true. Your way is not the only way. And you have proved over and over that this is the way you think. If you read all your posts over the last few weeks you will see that I AM RIGHT AND MY WAY IS THE ONLY WAY!!! I believe there are psychic powers in our world so this is the only way I see things. That appears to be your attitude, and it is an old one! For you to try and convince me there is no psychic abilities in our world is you option, getting mad that I am a believer is just plain, I don’t know how to put it, meaningless comes to mind! Why on earth would you want to take on someone else’s twinge to begin with? Why are you so sure there are no intuitive abilities? Do bat’s really have a built in radar? IF they do what is so hard to believe about someone catching some rayz?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Now I am sure there are a whole bunch of debunked misinformation in the world, and just as many people that are willing to learn from others to take advantage on the situation and really try to mess with others minds for personal growth or even to accumulate more financial gain, this goes without saying! Have you read up on any of the new material concerning bio-networking? Or even quantum physics? Do you have an opinion on the scientific approach to this subject, or will you just turn the other cheek and just suppose it6 is all not tolerable? You know we discovered electricity only about 100 years ago, can you imaging a society that came across this phenomena 1000 years, 1000000 years, or even a billon years ago? How far advanced might they be if they haven’t destroyed themselves? Do you think they might be able to visit us at free will in a matter of seconds? Do you think they would even talk to one another any more? Or just more on the lines of not even having to think anymore cause they just know?

[Willie Lumplump]

I don't feel it's [psychic] a totally accurate description, but I have not come up with a better one.

If the English language, with its vocabulary of 800,000 or so words, doesn't contain a word that describes you, I have to ask myself if the English language is incomplete or whether you simple don't have a clear concept of yourself and the claims that you make.


I'm certainly not going to discuss where I believe my insights are coming from with you. As you have already made up your mind that psychic phenomena absolutely does [sic] not exist, and that Tarot and Palmistry have no validity in giving people insights into themselves and their lives, it can't be a discussion.

Self-described "psychics" make claims about the real world that are subject to empirical verification. If anyone ever succeeds in verifying the existence of psychic phenomena in controlled conditions, I will believe in psychic phenomena. Therefore, it isn't correct to say that my disbelief in psychic phenomena is absolute.

The fact that some people are helped by consulting with you isn't a bit surprising. Carl Rogers, who pioneered the use of "talk therapy," believed that simply listening to a person talk about a problem was therapeutic, and the continued influence of his ideas among mental health professionals attests to their validity. But my question is, "What leads you to believe that psychic phenomena have anything to do with it?" Oh, and another question: Is it your habit to hold discussions only with people who agree with you?


Do you know many police departments have realized that psychics can be of assistance in the investigations of murders, and even in the finding of the victims' bodies and do employ them? That's not anecdotal, cases have been documented."Anecdotal" doesn't mean "undocumented." It means that an observation or observations are uncontrolled, that is, there is no parallel group of observations against which the first set of observations can be compared. The police cases are indeed anecdotal.

[Willie Lumplump]

I'm amazed you'd spend any time trying to figure out the significance of quotation marks. I usually focus on the overall content.

Of course you'd vote with me on that one, after all, I was agreeing with you.

You believe that quotation marks are so unimportant that they can be scattered about a paragraph like corn meal in a chicken yard? Writers often use quotation marks to distance themselves from an expression, that is, to show that they don't necessarily agree with an expression. If you describe yourself as a psychic, you mean that you believe that you are a psychic. If you describe yourself as a "psychic," you mean that you know you're not a psychic (but you aren't saying just what you think you are). Does that difference seem unimportant?

[Willie Lumplump]

and what be the rules for proving the existence of psychic phenomena???

The same rules that are used for proving or disproving any other claim. It seems a bit much to describe scientific protocols in this thread, although I suppose I could do it.


Willie, are you aware that the police of all people use psychics to solve cases?

Oh, well, if the police believe something, it must be true.

[Willie Lumplump]

Sorry Willie; maybe you should have tried the massage therapy first eh?

Well, that's where I went wrong. "Aye, there's the rub!"

[Willie Lumplump]

Your beliefs are not the only ones! Just because you do not believe does not mean that it is not true. Your way is not the only way. And you have proved over and over that this is the way you think. If you read all your posts over the last few weeks you will see that I AM RIGHT AND MY WAY IS THE ONLY WAY!!!

I think you're missing the point. The burden of proof always lies with the person making the claim, and extravagant claims require extravagant proofs. Of course, a person is always free to believe in things for which there is no evidence, or insufficient evidence, but such beliefs are, by definition, irrational. If you want to be irrational, I'm in no position to stop you, although I can hope to give you information that you can use to realize that your belief is irrational.


Why on earth would you want to take on someone else’s twinge to begin with?

I'm out of the loop. I don't know what a twinge is.


Why are you so sure there are no intuitive abilities?

No sane person would deny that there is such a thing as intuition. Einstein defined it as the result of previous intellectual experience (I'm paraphrasing).


Do bat’s really have a built in radar? IF they do what is so hard to believe about someone catching some rayz?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
What does a bat's echo location system have to do with paranormal phenomena?

[Willie Lumplump]

Response to Mykill:

By "bio-networking" are you referring to the network of connections between metabolites? If not, I don't know what you mean. Quantum physics is a hobby of mine, although of course at the level of a layman, of course. But what does all this have to do with the subject at hand?


can you imaging a society that came across this phenomena 1000 years, 1000000 years, or even a billon years ago? How far advanced might they be if they haven’t destroyed themselves? Do you think they might be able to visit us at free will in a matter of seconds?

No. Definitely no. They would not be able to visit us at free will. The reason is that the speed of light is the upper limit at which information can travel. This is not a mere technological barrier; it is a universal constant. Other universes may have a different constant for their speed of light, but in ours the speed is fixed at 300,000 kilometers per second. 4.2 years to the nearest star. 25,000 years to the center of the Milky Way galaxy. 2 million years to the nearest large galaxy. 13.7 billion years to the farthest galaxies observable.


Do you think they would even talk to one another any more? Or just more on the lines of not even having to think anymore cause they just know?

Beats me.

[ChristineL]

If the English language, with its vocabulary of 800,000 or so words, doesn't contain a word that describes you, I have to ask myself if the English language is incomplete or whether you simple don't have a clear concept of yourself and the claims that you make.



Self-described "psychics" make claims about the real world that are subject to empirical verification. If anyone ever succeeds in verifying the existence of psychic phenomena in controlled conditions, I will believe in psychic phenomena. Therefore, it isn't correct to say that my disbelief in psychic phenomena is absolute.

The fact that some people are helped by consulting with you isn't a bit surprising. Carl Rogers, who pioneered the use of "talk therapy," believed that simply listening to a person talk about a problem was therapeutic, and the continued influence of his ideas among mental health professionals attests to their validity. But my question is, "What leads you to believe that psychic phenomena have anything to do with it?" Oh, and another question: Is it your habit to hold discussions only with people who agree with you?

"Anecdotal" doesn't mean "undocumented." It means that an observation or observations are uncontrolled, that is, there is no parallel group of observations against which the first set of observations can be compared. The police cases are indeed anecdotal.

I have clear concept of who I am, and my claims, I just don't feel one word describes it. It is the one word that comes the closest.

Most things one observes in life don't happen under controlled conditions.

I don't say what I do is about "psychic phenomena". I'm able to tell people things about themselves I have no way of knowing and give them insights into themselves and their present situations they didn't have before. Just for the record, I'm not the one listening...I'm the one talking. No, I don't only like to have discussions with people who agree with me, I like to have them with people who have a bit of an open mind and don't dwell on semantics. I also feel hostility in your posts on this subject. I almost want to ask if you were bitten, or dropped on your head, by a spsychic as a young child.

If I get you right, if twenty police officers testify to the fact that a psychic's insights and visions resulted in the solving of a crime...it's still "anecdotal", and therefore lends no validity to the idea that some people have psychic abilities. Documentation is still anecdotal; as are observations, no matter how many people observe the same things; and a lifetime of study done by one man can't be valid. Dr. Benham's research and observations ("The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading"), when applied, do work. You'll accept nothing excepting your experiment protocal under controlled conditions.

As I have mentioned before, I have nothing vested in converting anybody...it would appear a lot less than you do. We can agree to disagree and I'm finished debating with you on this subject.

[ThePhiant]

.



Oh, well, if the police believe something, it must be true.
I never said that the police believes something.
I said they solved cases using psychics.
is that hocus-pocus too????

[ChristineL]

You believe that quotation marks are so unimportant that they can be scattered about a paragraph like corn meal in a chicken yard? Writers often use quotation marks to distance themselves from an expression, that is, to show that they don't necessarily agree with an expression. If you describe yourself as a psychic, you mean that you believe that you are a psychic. If you describe yourself as a "psychic," you mean that you know you're not a psychic (but you aren't saying just what you think you are). Does that difference seem unimportant?

Gee, thank you for the writing lesson. After all English is my second language and I'm sure I occasionally make mistakes.

[mykil]

The speed of light is what? And you believe this information to be true? So no matter what comes up, if someone discoverers a faster speed than light, like lets say a light acceleration model, their is no way in hell you would even conceder the abilities to increase that speed beyond just t plain old light. Light has been done to death dude, it’s time for something allot faster than that old mode of transportation! That is just plain shallow and I find this intolerable to even conceder learning something from you. My tolerance level has to stop somewhere, and to even think that you can’t accept something so trivial is just shallow and intolerable Willie!!! LMAO!!! I will respond more to you responses in the morning, I am a little put back by the way you think and am tiring to find a way to get through to your old wayz! Shouldn’t take me long to put something together in my mind, the simplest minds are the easiest to read!!!! Bio-Networking is the new term for communicating with your mind dude! :idea:





Response to Mykill:

[color=black][font=Times New Roman][size=3]By "bio-networking" are you referring to the network of connections between metabolites? If not, I don't know what you mean. Quantum physics is a hobby of mine, although of course at the level of a layman, of course. But what does all this have to do with the subject at hand?



No. Definitely no. They would not be able to visit us at free will. The reason is that the speed of light is the upper limit at which information can travel. This is not a mere technological barrier; it is a universal constant. Other universes may have a different constant for their speed of light, but in ours the speed is fixed at 300,000 kilometers per second. 4.2 years to the nearest star. 25,000 years to the center of the Milky Way galaxy. 2 million years to the nearest large galaxy. 13.7 billion years to the farthest galaxies observable.



Beats me.

[Willie Lumplump]

but now on a more scientific note.
where did Einstein get his insights from?
can you explain that strange phenomena that makes scientist invent things "accidently"??????

Einstein got his insights by applying his intellect and intuition to physical problems. And what is intuition? Einstein said that "intuition is nothing but the outcome of earlier intellectual experience" (a direct quote).

I can't think of any examples of something being invented accidentally. There are numerous examples of something being discovered accidentally, and sometimes serendipitous discoveries are quite surprising, but if you say that some "strange phenomena" are behind the process of discovery you must define precisely what you mean by "strange" and then accept the usual burden of proof.

[ThePhiant]

Ok, let me simplify for you even more.
where do your thoughts come from?
this intellect you are talking about how does it work?
and what the hell is an "intellectual experience" ??????


Einstein got his insights by applying his intellect and intuition to physical problems. And what is intuition? Einstein said that "intuition is nothing but the outcome of earlier intellectual experience" (a direct quote).

I can't think of any examples of something being invented accidentally. There are numerous examples of something being discovered accidentally, and sometimes serendipitous discoveries are quite surprising, but if you say that some "strange phenomena" are behind the process of discovery you must define precisely what you mean by "strange" and then accept the usual burden of proof.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Einstein got his insights by applying his intellect and intuition to physical problems. And what is intuition? Einstein said that "intuition is nothing but the outcome of earlier intellectual experience" (a direct quote).

I can't think of any examples of something being invented accidentally. There are numerous examples of something being discovered accidentally, and sometimes serendipitous discoveries are quite surprising, but if you say that some "strange phenomena" are behind the process of discovery you must define precisely what you mean by "strange" and then accept the usual burden of proof.

I can add that Einstein did not work from scratch but stands in a late 19th c. tradition that includes the Frenchman Jules Poincaré and the Dutchman Hendrik Antoon Lorentz.

https://www.iep.utm.edu/p/poincare.htm

[Willie Lumplump]

Most things one observes in life don't happen under controlled conditions.

And in such cases there is nothing wrong in talking about your own experience. Where you run into trouble is when you make sweeping claims that are, in principle, empirically testable but for which you have only weak evidence (or no evidence at all).


I don't say what I do is about "psychic phenomena". I'm able to tell people things about themselves I have no way of knowing and give them insights into themselves and their present situations they didn't have before.

So you know things that you have no way of knowing, but you're not a psychic. In that case, how are you different from a psychic?


I like to have [discussions] with people who have a bit of an open mind.

As I always say, I like to have an open mind, but not so open that my brains fall out.


I like to have [discussions] with people who . . . don't dwell on semantics.

In that case you surely wouldn't have enjoyed discussions with the noted philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein. Wittgenstein maintained there there were no true philosophical problems and that all apparent problems could be boiled down to confusing uses of words. Words are used not only to convey meaning but also to pull the wool over people's eyes and make people believe what we want them to believe even in the face of opposing evidence.


I also feel hostility in your posts on this subject. I almost want to ask if you were bitten, or dropped on your head, by a spsychic [sic] as a young child.

I see you and people who make similar claims as yours as a part of the general "assault on reason" (Al Gore's term). A hundred years ago the light of reason that was our founding fathers' bequest to us burned bright in this country. The values of the Enlightenment prevailed. Now we have retreated far back into the dark ages from which we had begun to emerge in the 15th century. Ghosts, demons, occult powers, and so-called "paranormal phenomena" are perceived everywhere. Ronnie Reagan consulted his astrologer before making important decisions. This man, who had his finger on the button that could destroy the world, was consulting with a refugee from the dark ages. And now we have a president who consults with politicians disguised as evangelical Christians preaching a gospel of hate and destruction. And . . . what do you know? . . . I feel angry about all that.


If I get you right, if twenty police officers testify to the fact that a psychic's insights and visions resulted in the solving of a crime...it's still "anecdotal", and therefore lends no validity to the idea that some people have psychic abilities.[/end quote]

Quite so.

[quote]Documentation is still anecdotal; as are observations, no matter how many people observe the same things

No, I said that the act of documenting something does not, by itself, confer truth or validity. "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is a document, but it is full of lies. Lies can be written down in documents just as well as truth.


and a lifetime of study done by one man can't be valid. Dr. Benham's research and observations ("The Laws of Scientific Hand Reading"), when applied, do work.

Over the past five hundred years or so the Western world has developed certain conventions to protect against bias, wishful thinking, and outright fraud, and to allow truth to come to the surface. Collectively these conventions are sometimes called "the scientific method" (something of a misnomer, but that's another story). If you make a modest claim such as, "I found a penny on the sidewalk today," your word is enough to support your claim. But when you make a sweeping generalization such as, "I can look at a person's hand and tell you the condition of his colon (or some such thing), you can adequately support that claim only by applying the conventions developed over half a millennium.


As I have mentioned before, I have nothing vested in converting anybody...

Maybe I forgot to ask. Do you accept money for what you do?

[Willie Lumplump]

I never said that the police believes something.
I said they solved cases using psychics. is that hocus-pocus too????

If police hire a psychic and then solve a case, does that necessarily mean that the psychic solved it for them? Do you think that any of the police who appear in the psychic TV shows are paid for their services? Do you think that the television producers and their staffs who produce psychic TV shows have anything to gain by distorting the truth? Do you think that some people might confuse the entertainment value of such productions with factual content?

[Willie Lumplump]

Gee, thank you for the writing lesson. After all English is my second language and I'm sure I occasionally make mistakes.

Now, now.

[Zeno Swijtink]

If police hire a psychic and then solve a case, does that necessarily mean that the psychic solved it for them? Do you think that any of the police who appear in the psychic TV shows are paid for their services? Do you think that the television producers and their staffs who produce psychic TV shows have anything to gain by distorting the truth? Do you think that some people might confuse the entertainment value of such productions with factual content?

Has anyone read "Extraordinary knowing : science, skepticism, and the inexplicable powers of the human mind", by Elizabeth Lloyd Mayer ; [forewords by Freeman Dyson and Carol Gilligan]. New York, NY : Bantam Books, 2007??

A friend in our monthly Science and Spirit Salon recommended it, and although I got it from the library I haven't read it (yet??).

The publisher's summary states:


"In 1991, when her daughter’s rare, hand-carved harp was stolen, Lisby Mayer’s familiar world of science and rational thinking turned upside down. After the police failed to turn up any leads, a friend suggested she call a dowser–a man who specialized in finding lost objects. With nothing to lose–and almost as a joke–Dr. Mayer agreed. Within two days, and without leaving his Arkansas home, the dowser located the exact California street coordinates where the harp was found.Deeply shaken, yet driven to understand what had happened, Mayer began the fourteen-year journey of discovery that she recounts in this mind-opening, brilliantly readable book. Her first surprise: the dozens of colleagues who’d been keeping similar experiences secret for years, fearful of being labeled credulous or crazy.Extraordinary Knowing is an attempt to break through the silence imposed by fear and to explore what science has to say about these and countless other “inexplicable” phenomena. From the Society for Psychical Research at the turn of the last century to a CIA study of remote viewing–much of it still classified; from the diaries of Sigmund Freud to the speculations of leading theoretical physicists, Dr. Mayer reveals a wealth of credible and fascinating research into the realm where mind seems to trump the laws of nature. She does not ask us to believe. Rather she brings us a book of profound intrigue and optimism, with far-reaching implications not just for scientific inquiry but also for the ways we go about living in the world."

https://books.google.com/books?id=9KFVAAAACAAJ&dq=Extraordinary+knowing&num=100&as_brr=0

The maverick Princeton physicist Freeman Dyson wrote a preface.

In a 2004 review in the New York Review of Books of "Debunked! ESP, Telekinesis, Other Pseudoscience" by Georges Charpak and Henri Broch, Dyson wrote:


"The hypothesis that paranormal phenomena are real but lie outside the limits of science is supported by a great mass of evidence.

The evidence has been collected by the Society for Psychical Research in Britain and by similar organizations in other countries. The journal of the London society is full of stories of remarkable events in which ordinary people appear to possess paranormal abilities.

The evidence is entirely anecdotal. It has nothing to do with science, since it cannot be reproduced under controlled conditions. But the evidence is there. The members of the society took great trouble to interview first-hand witnesses as soon as possible after the events, and to document the stories carefully.

One fact that emerges clearly from the stories is that paranormal events occur, if they occur at all, only when people are under stress and experiencing strong emotion. This fact would immediately explain why paranormal phenomena are not observable under the conditions of a well-controlled scientific experiment.

Strong emotion and stress are inherently incompatible with controlled scientific procedures. In a typical card-guessing experiment, the participants may begin the session in a high state of excitement and record a few high scores, but as the hours pass, and boredom replaces excitement, the scores decline to the 20 percent expected from random chance."

I don't necessarily agree with this. I am trying to keep an open mind.

[Clancy]

Has anyone read "Extraordinary knowing : science, skepticism, and the inexplicable powers of the human mind"...I don't necessarily agree with this. I am trying to keep an open mind.

I'm trying to keep an open mind too, but you'd think that with all this paranormal stuff supposedly happening with such regularity that some paranormal event somewhere would offer simple, conclusive proof. Not to mention the thousands of people who charge money for their paranormal skills yet not a single one has ever attempted to collect the widely known million dollar reward for showing a simple proof.

It brings to mind the thousands and thousands of UFO sightings over the years, and still there's not a single piece of UFO hardware let alone an alien to examine.

[ThePhiant]

when did I say I saw this on TV?? ( I don't have one, Willie!)
do you have any proof that the truth was distorted?
do scientist get paid for their "studies"?
can we trust them then?


If police hire a psychic and then solve a case, does that necessarily mean that the psychic solved it for them? Do you think that any of the police who appear in the psychic TV shows are paid for their services? Do you think that the television producers and their staffs who produce psychic TV shows have anything to gain by distorting the truth? Do you think that some people might confuse the entertainment value of such productions with factual content?

[ThePhiant]

It brings to mind the thousands and thousands of UFO sightings over the years, and still there's not a single piece of UFO hardware let alone an alien to examine.

hahaaahhahahahahahahahahahahahaahahaha
I think the sun doesn't exist, caus I have never seen any material evidence proving that it exist
hahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahhhaaa

[ThePhiant]

zeno

we all probable know of at least one miracle,something that cannot be explained by logical, rational or scientific thinking.
the opposite is also true.
why do some people die of cancer and others don't?
why does medicine not have a 100% success rate or even 100% same outcome? are doctors just experimenting?
one pill can kill or cure.
where is the science in that?


Has anyone read "Extraordinary knowing : science, skepticism, and the inexplicable powers of the human mind", by Elizabeth Lloyd Mayer ; [forewords by Freeman Dyson and Carol Gilligan]. New York, NY : Bantam Books, 2007??

A friend in our monthly Science and Spirit Salon recommended it, and although I got it from the library I haven't read it (yet??)....

[Lorrie]

Willie this is true right?

Intellect joins with intuition to produce inspiration and insight.

~Lorrie

[Zeno Swijtink]

I'm trying to keep an open mind too, but you'd think that with all this paranormal stuff supposedly happening with such regularity that some paranormal event somewhere would offer simple, conclusive proof. Not to mention the thousands of people who charge money for their paranormal skills yet not a single one has ever attempted to collect the widely known million dollar reward for showing a simple proof.

It brings to mind the thousands and thousands of UFO sightings over the years, and still there's not a single piece of UFO hardware let alone an alien to examine.

The objection that "if paranormal phenomena are so common why are there not clear convincing cases of it" appears a strong one until one realizes that many things we now take for granted and know how to shape and intensify were unknown or not understood for thousands of years. I am thinking of for instance magnetism and electricity.

That does not mean that all paranormal phenomena are on a par or that there isn't rampant fraud and self deception in this arena.

Personally I am hesitant to introduce new forces in the scheme of explanation and think that many of the miraculous phenomena can eventually be explained by brain research. There has been some interesting work on out-of-body experiences and brain research.

The reward you are talking about: is that Rupert Sheldrake's challenge to design an experiment to test his theory of morphic resonance, that phenomena — particularly biological ones — become more probable the more often they occur?

[Zeno Swijtink]

Willie this is true right?

Intellect joins with intuition to produce inspiration and insight.

~Lorrie

Many people seem to have a picture of intuition as a kind of mental seeing, a direct connection with the object of knowledge.

For me "intuition" generates hypotheses that need to be further probed, tested, discussed.

Even visual perception should be seen as just generating hypotheses: it's not just a simple direct "reading" of your environment. The mind is very active in shaping what you seem to see.

For instance, we don't see a blind spot in our visual image (which we should see is seeing was that "objective" since the eye lacks receptors at the place where the nerves that connect the eye with the brain leave the eye ball).

The brain fills in, guesses what is in that blind spot. It's a hypothesis.

[Zeno Swijtink]

<snip>
The reward you are talking about: is that Rupert Sheldrake's challenge to design an experiment to test his theory of morphic resonance, that phenomena — particularly biological ones — become more probable the more often they occur?

I just wanted to add a little bit more about Sheldrake: One of Rupert Sheldrake's "Seven Experiments That Could Change the World" concerns "Phantom Touch," such as phantom leg.

I saw an amazing video lecture by neuroscientist Vilayanur Ramachandran that discusses this from a body point of view. It's a TED lecture and available free online at

https://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/184

[Clancy]

I'm in full agreement with your thoughtful response, which is why I'm trying to keep an open mind. And here's the million dollar reward I was talking about, perhaps a wacco-ite might like to try to collect it...
https://www.randi.org/research/




The objection that "if paranormal phenomena are so common why are there not clear convincing cases of it" appears a strong one until one realizes that many things we now take for granted and know how to shape and intensify were unknown or not understood for thousands of years. I am thinking of for instance magnetism and electricity.

That does not mean that all paranormal phenomena are on a par or that there isn't rampant fraud and self deception in this arena.

Personally I am hesitant to introduce new forces in the scheme of explanation and think that many of the miraculous phenomena can eventually be explained by brain research. There has been some interesting work on out-of-body experiences and brain research.

The reward you are talking about: is that Rupert Sheldrake's challenge to design an experiment to test his theory of morphic resonance, that phenomena — particularly biological ones — become more probable the more often they occur?

[ThePhiant]

Zeno, do we know how the brain guesses? where does it get its information from?
oh and does it work on its own or is somebody in charge?
I know you can answer these simple questions




The brain fills in, guesses what is in that blind spot. It's a hypothesis.

[ThePhiant]

Zeno, we still don't know how magnetism and electricity work!!!!!!!
we know how to use and reproduce them, but we don't know how they work.



until one realizes that many things we now take for granted and know how to shape and intensify were unknown or not understood for thousands of years. I am thinking of for instance magnetism and electricity.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Zeno, we still don't know how magnetism and electricity work!!!!!!!
we know how to use and reproduce them, but we don't know how they work.

Magnetism works by love, electricity is a form of co-medy.

We know how to use and reproduce them, but we don't know how they work.

[mykil]

ROTFLMFAO!!!! "think" "you might have meet your match there LULU"!!!! LMAO!!!!!



Magnetism works by love, electricity is a form of co-medy.

We know how to use and reproduce them, but we don't know how they work.

[ThePhiant]

Magnetism works by love, electricity is a form of co-medy.


next time you upstage me, can you do it in private?

[Willie Lumplump]

if someone discoverers a faster speed than light,

It's not like there are different rates of travel in the universe and the fastest we've discovered so far is light. That's not the situation at all. Nothing can travel faster than light for a number of reasons, one of which is that such travel would violate laws of causality. Also, as any particle with a non-zero rest mass approaches the speed of light, it becomes more massive. At the speed of light, any such particle would have infinite mass, which is an impossibility. Also, at light speed the particle would be two-dimensional, that is, its length in the direction of travel would be infinitely small, another impossibility.

[Willie Lumplump]

Ok, let me simplify for you even more.
where do your thoughts come from? this intellect you are talking about how does it work?

What you're asking about is the origin of consciousness. I'm not sure what that has to do with the current discussion. But whatever the exact origin may be, it's certainly a function of electrical and chemical activity in the brain.


and what the hell is an "intellectual experience" ??????

Ask Einstein, he's the one whom I quoted.

[Willie Lumplump]

Has anyone read "Extraordinary knowing : science, skepticism, and the inexplicable powers of the human mind", by Elizabeth Lloyd Mayer ; [forewords by Freeman Dyson and Carol Gilligan]. New York, NY : Bantam Books, 2007??

A friend in our monthly Science and Spirit Salon recommended it, and although I got it from the library I haven't read it (yet??).

The publisher's summary states:

"In 1991, when her daughter’s rare, hand-carved harp was stolen,"[etc., etc., etc.]

Publishers write liner notes to sell books. They aren't in the habit of conducting independent, expert investigations.


In a 2004 review in the New York Review of Books of "Debunked! ESP, Telekinesis, Other Pseudoscience" by Georges Charpak and Henri Broch, Dyson wrote:

"The hypothesis that paranormal phenomena are real but lie outside the limits of science is supported by a great mass of evidence."

And Michael Behe, a biochemist, believes in intelligent design. And James Watson, a co-discoverer of DNA, believes that blacks are inferior in intelligence. People believe in all sorts of strange things--even scientists sometimes.

[mykil]

In the earliest part of the 20<SUP>th</SUP> century it was thought to be imposable to drive a car past thirty miles per hour, the clear assumption was that you would not be able to breath if you traveled past that speed! Their was scientific proof top back this up! <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
quote=Willie Lumplump;41122]It's not like there are different rates of travel in the universe and the fastest we've discovered so far is light. That's not the situation at all. Nothing can travel faster than light for a number of reasons, one of which is that such travel would violate laws of causality. Also, as any particle with a non-zero rest mass approaches the speed of light, it becomes more massive. At the speed of light, any such particle would have infinite mass, which is an impossibility. Also, at light speed the particle would be two-dimensional, that is, its length in the direction of travel would be infinitely small, another impossibility.[/quote]

[ThePhiant]

[quote=Willie Lumplump;41123]What you're asking about is the origin of consciousness.
that is correct.
what is it and where does it come from?

I'm not sure what that has to do with the current discussion.
if you can't scientifically identify your source for your rational thinking, your whole thesis is based on, well, paranormal phenomena..................

But whatever the exact origin may be, it's certainly a function of electrical and chemical activity in the brain.OK if that is the case, we most certainly would be able to reproduce thoughts in a laboratory dish???




Ask Einstein, he's the one whom I quotedthis is a cheap getaway, if you quote him, you stand behind what he says.
unless of course you are just a yeah-sayer, who needs to hide behind big names

[Braggi]

... and what the hell is an "intellectual experience" ??????



Fear not! You are unlikely to have one. :wink:

-Jeff

[Willie Lumplump]

In a 2004 review in the New York Review of Books of "Debunked! ESP, Telekinesis, Other Pseudoscience" by Georges Charpak and Henri Broch, Dyson wrote:
"Strong emotion and stress are inherently incompatible with controlled scientific procedures. In a typical card-guessing experiment, the participants may begin the session in a high state of excitement and record a few high scores, but as the hours pass, and boredom replaces excitement, the scores decline to the 20 percent expected from random chance."

Charpak and Broch, and for that matter, Dyson too, should proceed directly to James Randi's office and collect the $1 million that he owes them.

[Willie Lumplump]

when did I say I saw this on TV?? ( I don't have one, Willie!)

Good point. That was an assumption on my part, apparently unjustified.


do you have any proof that the truth was distorted?

No, but the burden of proof always rests with the person making a claim. In any case, I was merely pointing out that the police and TV producers have a clear financial incentive for creating an exciting story about psychics who solve crimes.


do scientist get paid for their "studies"? can we trust them then?

Scientists are indeed paid for their studies, and the threat of bias is ever-present and universally recognized. That's why certain conventions have evolved over the past 500 years that help protect against wishful thinking and bias (though, of course, deliberate fraud is a more difficult problem).

[Willie Lumplump]

hahaaahhahahahahahahahahahahahaahahaha
I think the sun doesn't exist, caus I have never seen any material evidence proving that it exist
hahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahhhaaa

When five billion people start waking up every morning and seeing UFO's, I'm sure that belief in UFO's will be universal.

[Willie Lumplump]

zeno

we all probable know of at least one miracle,something that cannot be explained by logical, rational or scientific thinking.
the opposite is also true.[quote]

The opposite would be "Nobody knows of at least one miracle, etc."

[quote]why do some people die of cancer and others don't?
why does medicine not have a 100% success rate or even 100% same outcome? are doctors just experimenting?
one pill can kill or cure. where is the science in that?

Let's see if I understand you correctly. If something happens 100% of the time, then science is involved. If less than 100%, science is not involved. Is that what you're saying?

[Willie Lumplump]

Willie this is true right?

Intellect joins with intuition to produce inspiration and insight.

~Lorrie

I don't know that I'd say that. Einstein said that intuition is one manifestation of intellect, which I certainly agree with. Inspiration is a much fuzzier matter, and insights may be intellectual or otherwise.

[Braggi]

When five billion people start waking up every morning and seeing UFO's, I'm sure that belief in UFO's will be universal.



Isn't it curious, now that almost everyone carries a digital camera capable of video recording, that you never hear of UFOs anymore?


-Jeff