You CAN equate a research study of psi with a research study of aspirin or antidepressants. Why not? You are making up arbitrary rules of research and applying one set to mainstream studies and another to psi studies. What does this accomplish?
You can equally criticize methodology of antidepressant studies. Yet rarely do you see critiques of their validity.
The point of the article is that what you call slight statistical deviations are the same criteria accepted in other studies.
No one is arguing that the brain isn't complex. They are arguing that it is complex and it is physically affected by the external world.
I agree if the effects of PSI are real then they can be verified and observed on a repeatable basis same as we would expect of any other factor.
I suppose you could accuse me of that... but matter being produced from mind is a concept which, to me, makes about as much sense as "Jack-in-the-box substantiate loop of elephant".
Call it a weakness if you like, but it's an idea I wouldn't even consider even if I were in the middle of some kind of LSD trip. It's something which doesn't make sense to me at a deep fundamental level.
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." - Max Planck
"“Consciousness cannot be accounted for in physical terms. For consciousness is absolutely fundamental. It cannot be accounted for in terms of anything else.”
― Erwin Schrödinger.
Why almost certainly not matter? I presume you have a compelling argument which isn't based on you own incredulity seeing as you've just told me off for that.
"The ontology of materialism rested upon the illusion that the kind of existence, the direct "actuality" of the world around us, can be extrapolated into the atomic range. This extrapolation is impossible, however." Werner Heisenberg
"If one wants to give an accurate description of the elementary particle—and here the emphasis is on the word "accurate"—the only thing which can be written down as description is a probability function. But then one sees that not even the quality of being...belongs to what is described". - Werner Heisenberg
Actually checkout the original post on this Philosophy forum.
You CAN equate a research study of psi with a research study of aspirin or antidepressants. Why not? You are making up arbitrary rules of research and applying one set to mainstream studies and another to psi studies. What does this accomplish?
One of the main reasons is that psi is not a scientific concept. You cannot test, using the scientific method, something which is inherently unscientific because you have no hypotheses to work with. Psi is a vague mystical word which is used to describe a number of different concepts, all of which must be proven to prove the existence of psi. Say you managed to prove that telepathy was possible. That's all well and good, but you have not proven psi.
The existence of telepathy also does not necessitate the existence of clairvoyance and vice versa.
Even then, psi is much more than a descriptive word. I've seen numerous people on the internet use the word to mean some kind of energy field which surrounds us, penetrates us and binds the universe together. Ignoring the fact they are completely abusing the word energy, these people clearly believe that psi is essentially the Force from Star Wars
Look, here they even explain to you in a handy guide how to channel this "energy" and produce a Psi Ball: http://online-telekinesis-school.webs.com/basiclesson1.htm
None of this is scientific and none of this ever can be.
At best, the studies show the existence of some form of ESP (which for some reason is only evident when data is analysed statistically), but they don't support the existence of psi.
Regardless, the methodologies have all be heavily criticised and the results are not considered reliable.
Anyway, not that it's strictly necessary, but has anyone bothered coming up with any testable theories as to how telepathy could exist?
You can equally criticize methodology of antidepressant studies. Yet rarely do you see critiques of their validity.
Unlike the existence of paranormal abilities, the efficacy of anti-depressants does not threaten to topple the oldest of scientific paradigms. If paranormal abilities are proven to exist, all the textbooks must be rewritten and everything we think we know must be called into question. Regardless of whether it's the truth or not, nobody is going to do this on the basis of a few statistical deviations and are naturally going to be more critical.
Who knows? Perhaps the antidepressants really are useless and the data has all be manipulated? I certainly don't know enough about it to comment.
Am I supposed to be impressed by the opinions of the pioneers of quantum mechanics?
Anyway, where does "mind" come into all of this.
Perhaps it all comes down to a lack of intelligence on my part or something, but none of this consciousness and mind stuff makes any sense to me at all.
One of the main reasons is that psi is not a scientific concept. You cannot test, using the scientific method, something which is inherently unscientific because you have no hypotheses to work with. Psi is a vague mystical word which is used to describe a number of different concepts, all of which must be proven to prove the existence of psi. Say you managed to prove that telepathy was possible. That's all well and good, but you have not proven psi.
The existence of telepathy also does not necessitate the existence of clairvoyance and vice versa.
Even then, psi is much more than a descriptive word. I've seen numerous people on the internet use the word to mean some kind of energy field which surrounds us, penetrates us and binds the universe together. Ignoring the fact they are completely abusing the word energy, these people clearly believe that psi is essentially the Force from Star Wars
Look, here they even explain to you in a handy guide how to channel this "energy" and produce a Psi Ball: http://online-telekinesis-school.webs.com/basiclesson1.htm
None of this is scientific and none of this ever can be.
At best, the studies show the existence of some form of ESP (which for some reason is only evident when data is analysed statistically), but they don't support the existence of psi.
Regardless, the methodologies have all be heavily criticised and the results are not considered reliable.
Anyway, not that it's strictly necessary, but has anyone bothered coming up with any testable theories as to how telepathy could exist?
Unlike the existence of paranormal abilities, the efficacy of anti-depressants does not threaten to topple the oldest of scientific paradigms. If paranormal abilities are proven to exist, all the textbooks must be rewritten and everything we think we know must be called into question. Regardless of whether it's the truth or not, nobody is going to do this on the basis of a few statistical deviations and are naturally going to be more critical.
Who knows? Perhaps the antidepressants really are useless and the data has all be manipulated? I certainly don't know enough about it to comment.
This is not going anywhere because each time I address your complaint about psi, you switch arguments.
After years of hearing that if psi exists we can test it, and we are testing it, you raised the argument that we can't test it.
Psi is not a mystical word. It can be broken down into activities and behaviors that can be tested. Telepathy, retro causation, affect of intent in meditators,
This is not going anywhere because each time I address your complaint about psi, you switch arguments.
After years of hearing that if psi exists we can test it, and we are testing it, you raised the argument that we can't test it.
Psi is not a mystical word. It can be broken down into activities and behaviors that can be tested. Telepathy, retro causation, affect of intent in meditators,
So if they are not mystical and if you think they can be scientifically demonstrated do you think they are material, naturalistic phenomena?
Am I supposed to be impressed by the opinions of the pioneers of quantum mechanics?
Anyway, where does "mind" come into all of this.
Perhaps it all comes down to a lack of intelligence on my part or something, but none of this consciousness and mind stuff makes any sense to me at all.
Oh well.
In a materialist or physicalist ontology it wouldn't make any sense to me either. Ditto in a Universe where the Macro level was entirely separated from the micro or quantum level. I have no reason to believe either of those things though and I'd prefer not to lose my mind.
Psi is not a mystical word. It can be broken down into activities and behaviors that can be tested. Telepathy, retro causation, affect of intent in meditators,
I think I'll end this debate. I've been rambling incoherently for a while now. I'm tried and my brain hurts (or is that the sensation of the universe flowing through my head too fast?).
I'll be sure to be back with more arguments later. ;-)
I think I'll end this debate. I've been rambling incoherently for a while now. I'm tried and my brain hurts (or is that the sensation of the universe flowing through my head too fast?).
I'll be sure to be back with more arguments later. ;-)
it there were any evidence at all for telepathy or psychokenesis, then arguments about their existence would have been settled many years ago !
Since there is no such evidence, and a long history of idiocy and fraud, all claims should be treated skeptically unless they can be clearly established.
in any case consciousness and mind remain Great Mysteries, and I dont see how psychic powers - even if demonstrated - would affect this. I also dont see what any of it has to do with God. Its logically possible for there to be eternal souls in a godless universe. Conversely, God might exist but humans be mortal ......
One of the main reasons is that psi is not a scientific concept. You cannot test, using the scientific method, something which is inherently unscientific because you have no hypotheses to work with. Psi is a vague mystical word which is used to describe a number of different concepts, all of which must be proven to prove the existence of psi. Say you managed to prove that telepathy was possible. That's all well and good, but you have not proven psi.
The existence of telepathy also does not necessitate the existence of clairvoyance and vice versa.
Even then, psi is much more than a descriptive word. I've seen numerous people on the internet use the word to mean some kind of energy field which surrounds us, penetrates us and binds the universe together. Ignoring the fact they are completely abusing the word energy, these people clearly believe that psi is essentially the Force from Star Wars
Look, here they even explain to you in a handy guide how to channel this "energy" and produce a Psi Ball: http://online-telekinesis-school.webs.com/basiclesson1.htm
None of this is scientific and none of this ever can be.
At best, the studies show the existence of some form of ESP (which for some reason is only evident when data is analysed statistically), but they don't support the existence of psi.
Regardless, the methodologies have all be heavily criticised and the results are not considered reliable.
Anyway, not that it's strictly necessary, but has anyone bothered coming up with any testable theories as to how telepathy could exist?
Unlike the existence of paranormal abilities, the efficacy of anti-depressants does not threaten to topple the oldest of scientific paradigms. If paranormal abilities are proven to exist, all the textbooks must be rewritten and everything we think we know must be called into question. Regardless of whether it's the truth or not, nobody is going to do this on the basis of a few statistical deviations and are naturally going to be more critical.
Who knows? Perhaps the antidepressants really are useless and the data has all be manipulated? I certainly don't know enough about it to comment.
Am I supposed to be impressed by the opinions of the pioneers of quantum mechanics?
Anyway, where does "mind" come into all of this.
Perhaps it all comes down to a lack of intelligence on my part or something, but none of this consciousness and mind stuff makes any sense to me at all.
Oh well.
Mind only comes into QM with wave function collapse during measurement. The Copenhagen Interpretation, which is increasingly being abandoned .....
I'm not sure what an evangelical is but surely it can't damage the CoE any worse than the heretical vicars who didn't believe in God. I'm thinking here of the Sea of Faith aka the "Godless vicars" and "atheist priests"
I think they were misunderstood. Communicating what you mean is always open to misinterpretation. It's possible I misinterpreted them (attributing to them my own beliefs that God is not some independent being.) and that they really were atheists.
the people behind the alpha course. thats who they are.
the history of psi research is very much British academic psychologists. Thats why for a while it had a sort of bogus respectability.
It was WIlliam McDougal who suggested to Rhine his line of research, resulting in his book The Reach of the Mind, which had a huge influence. Not least on John Campbell, who persuaded sci fi writers to produce lots of stories about telepathy ......
"It never really occurred to me to believe in God - and I had nothing to rebel against, my parents told me nothing whatsoever.
"But I do remember looking at my headmaster delivering a sermon, a classicist, extremely clever... and thinking, he can't really believe all that, can he? How incredible!"
"It never really occurred to me to believe in God - and I had nothing to rebel against, my parents told me nothing whatsoever.
"But I do remember looking at my headmaster delivering a sermon, a classicist, extremely clever... and thinking, he can't really believe all that, can he? How incredible!"
David Attenborough.
Wow, I have something else in common with David Attenborough.
Interestingly, he's an agnostic - the sat firmly on the fence kind - apparently.
I'm an agnostic myself. A gnostic/agnostic. I like wildlife as well.
Meant to say, isn't Dawkins just lacking in the x factor? Sad in a clever bloke and I find it very frustrating as I agree with him on a lot of things. Daren't plonk that in his thread!
"It never really occurred to me to believe in God - and I had nothing to rebel against, my parents told me nothing whatsoever.
"But I do remember looking at my headmaster delivering a sermon, a classicist, extremely clever... and thinking, he can't really believe all that, can he? How incredible!"
David Attenborough.
What a superb quote. ^_^
I wish I had never gone to Catholic primary and secondary schools - I knew it was all bullshit from a very young age and the power of the church was still quite frightening in the 70's and early 80's.
Plus the fact it was like The Lord of the f*****g Flies.
Meant to say, isn't Dawkins just lacking in the x factor? Sad in a clever bloke and I find it very frustrating as I agree with him on a lot of things. Daren't plonk that in his thread!
I always thought Mary Tamm as Romana had the real x factor in Doctor Who but I didn't like to say in his thread. Trouble is we're surrounded by believers. Good job we're anonymous else we'd be on the bonfire....:D
I always thought Mary Tamm as Romana had the real x factor in Doctor Who but I didn't like to say in his thread. Trouble is we're surrounded by believers. Good job we're anonymous else we'd be on the bonfire....:D
I don't know which I preferred, the bonfire or the ducking stool!:cool:
Time for me to go and watch my nightly orbs, so much prettier in the dark.
My pesky imagination/eye sight, oncoming migraine perhaps!!!:D:D:D
Comments
I agree if the effects of PSI are real then they can be verified and observed on a repeatable basis same as we would expect of any other factor.
Previous use of various perjorative terms indicates otherwise.
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." - Max Planck
"“Consciousness cannot be accounted for in physical terms. For consciousness is absolutely fundamental. It cannot be accounted for in terms of anything else.”
― Erwin Schrödinger.
"The ontology of materialism rested upon the illusion that the kind of existence, the direct "actuality" of the world around us, can be extrapolated into the atomic range. This extrapolation is impossible, however." Werner Heisenberg
"If one wants to give an accurate description of the elementary particle—and here the emphasis is on the word "accurate"—the only thing which can be written down as description is a probability function. But then one sees that not even the quality of being...belongs to what is described". - Werner Heisenberg
Actually checkout the original post on this Philosophy forum.
Quantum Experiments Disprove Materialism
http://onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3616
One of the main reasons is that psi is not a scientific concept. You cannot test, using the scientific method, something which is inherently unscientific because you have no hypotheses to work with. Psi is a vague mystical word which is used to describe a number of different concepts, all of which must be proven to prove the existence of psi. Say you managed to prove that telepathy was possible. That's all well and good, but you have not proven psi.
The existence of telepathy also does not necessitate the existence of clairvoyance and vice versa.
Even then, psi is much more than a descriptive word. I've seen numerous people on the internet use the word to mean some kind of energy field which surrounds us, penetrates us and binds the universe together. Ignoring the fact they are completely abusing the word energy, these people clearly believe that psi is essentially the Force from Star Wars
Look, here they even explain to you in a handy guide how to channel this "energy" and produce a Psi Ball: http://online-telekinesis-school.webs.com/basiclesson1.htm
None of this is scientific and none of this ever can be.
At best, the studies show the existence of some form of ESP (which for some reason is only evident when data is analysed statistically), but they don't support the existence of psi.
Regardless, the methodologies have all be heavily criticised and the results are not considered reliable.
Anyway, not that it's strictly necessary, but has anyone bothered coming up with any testable theories as to how telepathy could exist?
Unlike the existence of paranormal abilities, the efficacy of anti-depressants does not threaten to topple the oldest of scientific paradigms. If paranormal abilities are proven to exist, all the textbooks must be rewritten and everything we think we know must be called into question. Regardless of whether it's the truth or not, nobody is going to do this on the basis of a few statistical deviations and are naturally going to be more critical.
Who knows? Perhaps the antidepressants really are useless and the data has all be manipulated? I certainly don't know enough about it to comment.
Am I supposed to be impressed by the opinions of the pioneers of quantum mechanics?
Anyway, where does "mind" come into all of this.
Perhaps it all comes down to a lack of intelligence on my part or something, but none of this consciousness and mind stuff makes any sense to me at all.
Oh well.
This is not going anywhere because each time I address your complaint about psi, you switch arguments.
After years of hearing that if psi exists we can test it, and we are testing it, you raised the argument that we can't test it.
Psi is not a mystical word. It can be broken down into activities and behaviors that can be tested. Telepathy, retro causation, affect of intent in meditators,
So if they are not mystical and if you think they can be scientifically demonstrated do you think they are material, naturalistic phenomena?
In a materialist or physicalist ontology it wouldn't make any sense to me either. Ditto in a Universe where the Macro level was entirely separated from the micro or quantum level. I have no reason to believe either of those things though and I'd prefer not to lose my mind.
I think I'll end this debate. I've been rambling incoherently for a while now. I'm tried and my brain hurts (or is that the sensation of the universe flowing through my head too fast?).
I'll be sure to be back with more arguments later. ;-)
Ok I'll lie in wait.
I don't think the answer to whether there is a mystical "source" of psychic ability is known.
The abilities are consistent and non-mystical enough to be tested, or are as consistent as some other behaviors we now study.
MRIs of mentalists show that a different part of their brain is activated than in a control group, suggesting to me that the effort is not faked.
Since there is no such evidence, and a long history of idiocy and fraud, all claims should be treated skeptically unless they can be clearly established.
in any case consciousness and mind remain Great Mysteries, and I dont see how psychic powers - even if demonstrated - would affect this. I also dont see what any of it has to do with God. Its logically possible for there to be eternal souls in a godless universe. Conversely, God might exist but humans be mortal ......
Mind only comes into QM with wave function collapse during measurement. The Copenhagen Interpretation, which is increasingly being abandoned .....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann%E2%80%93Wigner_interpretation
the people behind the alpha course. thats who they are.
It was WIlliam McDougal who suggested to Rhine his line of research, resulting in his book The Reach of the Mind, which had a huge influence. Not least on John Campbell, who persuaded sci fi writers to produce lots of stories about telepathy ......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Banks_Rhine#Reception
I'd rather join the Quakers....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNqKN9vGzv8
"It never really occurred to me to believe in God - and I had nothing to rebel against, my parents told me nothing whatsoever.
"But I do remember looking at my headmaster delivering a sermon, a classicist, extremely clever... and thinking, he can't really believe all that, can he? How incredible!"
David Attenborough.
Wow, I have something else in common with David Attenborough.
Interestingly, he's an agnostic - the sat firmly on the fence kind - apparently.
I'm an agnostic myself. A gnostic/agnostic. I like wildlife as well.
OOO you!!!!!
I can admire an open mind as well. Cannot claim to have one myself but there you go.
Meant to say, isn't Dawkins just lacking in the x factor? Sad in a clever bloke and I find it very frustrating as I agree with him on a lot of things. Daren't plonk that in his thread!
What a superb quote. ^_^
I wish I had never gone to Catholic primary and secondary schools - I knew it was all bullshit from a very young age and the power of the church was still quite frightening in the 70's and early 80's.
Plus the fact it was like The Lord of the f*****g Flies.
I always thought Mary Tamm as Romana had the real x factor in Doctor Who but I didn't like to say in his thread. Trouble is we're surrounded by believers. Good job we're anonymous else we'd be on the bonfire....:D
I don't know which I preferred, the bonfire or the ducking stool!:cool:
Time for me to go and watch my nightly orbs, so much prettier in the dark.
My pesky imagination/eye sight, oncoming migraine perhaps!!!:D:D:D
You will find out soon enough you if I have my way you heathen scum! >:(>:(>:(