5 ms·

> The Ouija board seems highly inappropriate, since I believe jurors are instructed to not use outside research Outside research? Do you genuinely believe they

> The Ouija board seems highly inappropriate, since I believe jurors are instructed to not use outside research Outside research? Do you genuinely believe they consulted the the spirit world? At most this this would surface their collective belief in the guilt of the accused. An unconventional means to arrive at a consensus, but no more outside research than each of them writing a verdict on a piece of paper.

Sir_Cmpwn 9y ago
It's probably easier to make the "outside research" argument to the kind of person who would consult an Ouija board than it is to convince them Ouija boards are bunk.
BearGoesChirp 9y ago
The validity of the research method should not be taken into account. It doesn't matter if I ask my uncle Bob about the scientific details or if I go read some peer reviewed published paper. I'm not allowed to gain knowledge. That being said, I still find it absurd that independent research from valid sources isn't allowed.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > That being said, I still find it absurd that independent research from valid sources isn't allowed. It's not allowed, among many reasons, because validity is a disputable fact, and outside research by jurors prevents the party that would be adversely affected by taking the source as valid from contesting the validity of the source in open court, defeating the entire purpose of having a public trial, a reviewable trial record, the right to counsel, and, well, the whole of legal process.
  - BearGoesChirp 9y ago
    If the court provided a meaningful alternative I might accept this argument, but given some of the poor track records of expert witnesses, and given that people will bring in their own personal knowledge regardless of what is said. This is especially true since contesting validity of a source costs money and people don't have infinite money in court. The only conclusion is that the current legal system is so broken that the only reasonable judgment is not guilty.
occultist_throw 9y ago
Well, there's 3 avenues to this. 1. Divination is real, and they are consulting whatever they called. Could be the victim. Could be someone/something else. Could be a deity. Long and short, unless you're practiced in this realm, you can't know. And there's no empirical proof. 2. It's a link to their subconscious. Nothing mysterious. But it's a way they can interrogate their own ideas about a situation without personally owning said ideas. Think of this akin to a couch and therapist. 3. Someone is playing with them and controlling a weak-willed person. In other words, they're choosing what's being divined in order to exert influence over someone else. This is not only a bad situation, it's likely illegal. The tough part, is when divination is integral to someones' religion. What's to say that your reading verses with a bible is any less than me relying on the tarot? If you're allowed your religious expression, why not I? And speaking of such, isn't it common still to "swear to tell the truth, the only truth, so help you god"? My first question to that is, "Which God?" 1 would appear protected, 2 isn't, and 3 looks illegal. Hard call.
- sqeaky 9y ago
  > unless you're practiced in this realm, you can't know. I disagree, because... > there's no empirical proof. We have been trying very hard for centuries to contact any kind of afterlife, spirits or gods, and failed. Even if we cannot perfectly rule it out in principal we can rule out anything we have conceived and tested thus far. That and Ouija boards are made by Parker Bros [1]. Unless you believe that a group of people with a reliable channel to the afterlife chose to keep making Scrabble and Monopoly games with their super powers, then we really should just discount it as an obvious money grab, because it is. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Parker_Brothers_games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Parker_Brothers_games
  - occultist_throw 9y ago
    > We have been trying very hard for centuries to contact any kind of afterlife, spirits or gods, and failed. I'd suppose you haven't tried spending time with people who do practice and do this, do you? > Even if we cannot perfectly rule it out in principal we can rule out anything we have conceived and tested thus far. Simply put, you can't. "Absence of proof" does not equal "proof of absence". > That and Ouija boards are made by Parker Bros [1]. Unless you believe that a group of people with a reliable channel to the afterlife chose to keep making Scrabble and Monopoly games with their super powers, then we really should just discount it as an obvious money grab, because it is. Not at all. The Ouigi boards are just a tool. There's usually nothing in them that would be manifest to a specific entity or emotion. Not even that, but they are made by machine, so there would be very likely no emotion in contact with them. Since you seem unlearned in this area, divination can use any sort of tools. Tarot, pendulum, sand, tea, coffee grounds, bones, compass (luao-pen), ruler, entrails, fire, water.. Any of these can be learned and used. Or some are versed in doing divination using no instruments at all - although even in the occult and esoteric areas, this is considered very difficult. And then it comes full circle with religion. These are religious practices. If you're thinking of Miss Cleo, you're further from the truth. Those are advertisement services ; whereas what I talk of are honestly held beliefs. And when understood from the occult mindset, do give valid answers. It's one area where I work in regularly, is divination. Sometimes, it doesn't work. In that case, I say as such. Usually, it does.
takeda 9y ago
Ouija boards can affect outcome, for example one person can influence what others will see and if they believe it suddenly that person's opinion will matter much more than it should. Instead of having a pointless arguments whether Ouija board can talk to dead people (see other comments), much easier is to assume it does and apply existing rules to rule it out. I think there is no doubt that it can affect outcome.

Sir_Cmpwn 9y ago

It's probably easier to make the "outside research" argument to the kind of person who would consult an Ouija board than it is to convince them Ouija boards are bunk.

BearGoesChirp 9y ago

The validity of the research method should not be taken into account. It doesn't matter if I ask my uncle Bob about the scientific details or if I go read some peer reviewed published paper. I'm not allowed to gain knowledge. That being said, I still find it absurd that independent research from valid sources isn't allowed.

dragonwriter 9y ago
> That being said, I still find it absurd that independent research from valid sources isn't allowed. It's not allowed, among many reasons, because validity is a disputable fact, and outside research by jurors prevents the party that would be adversely affected by taking the source as valid from contesting the validity of the source in open court, defeating the entire purpose of having a public trial, a reviewable trial record, the right to counsel, and, well, the whole of legal process.
- BearGoesChirp 9y ago
  If the court provided a meaningful alternative I might accept this argument, but given some of the poor track records of expert witnesses, and given that people will bring in their own personal knowledge regardless of what is said. This is especially true since contesting validity of a source costs money and people don't have infinite money in court. The only conclusion is that the current legal system is so broken that the only reasonable judgment is not guilty.

occultist_throw 9y ago

Well, there's 3 avenues to this. 1. Divination is real, and they are consulting whatever they called. Could be the victim. Could be someone/something else. Could be a deity. Long and short, unless you're practiced in this realm, you can't know. And there's no empirical proof. 2. It's a link to their subconscious. Nothing mysterious. But it's a way they can interrogate their own ideas about a situation without personally owning said ideas. Think of this akin to a couch and therapist. 3. Someone is playing with them and controlling a weak-willed person. In other words, they're choosing what's being divined in order to exert influence over someone else. This is not only a bad situation, it's likely illegal. The tough part, is when divination is integral to someones' religion. What's to say that your reading verses with a bible is any less than me relying on the tarot? If you're allowed your religious expression, why not I? And speaking of such, isn't it common still to "swear to tell the truth, the only truth, so help you god"? My first question to that is, "Which God?" 1 would appear protected, 2 isn't, and 3 looks illegal. Hard call.

sqeaky 9y ago
> unless you're practiced in this realm, you can't know. I disagree, because... > there's no empirical proof. We have been trying very hard for centuries to contact any kind of afterlife, spirits or gods, and failed. Even if we cannot perfectly rule it out in principal we can rule out anything we have conceived and tested thus far. That and Ouija boards are made by Parker Bros [1]. Unless you believe that a group of people with a reliable channel to the afterlife chose to keep making Scrabble and Monopoly games with their super powers, then we really should just discount it as an obvious money grab, because it is. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Parker_Brothers_games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Parker_Brothers_games
- occultist_throw 9y ago
  > We have been trying very hard for centuries to contact any kind of afterlife, spirits or gods, and failed. I'd suppose you haven't tried spending time with people who do practice and do this, do you? > Even if we cannot perfectly rule it out in principal we can rule out anything we have conceived and tested thus far. Simply put, you can't. "Absence of proof" does not equal "proof of absence". > That and Ouija boards are made by Parker Bros [1]. Unless you believe that a group of people with a reliable channel to the afterlife chose to keep making Scrabble and Monopoly games with their super powers, then we really should just discount it as an obvious money grab, because it is. Not at all. The Ouigi boards are just a tool. There's usually nothing in them that would be manifest to a specific entity or emotion. Not even that, but they are made by machine, so there would be very likely no emotion in contact with them. Since you seem unlearned in this area, divination can use any sort of tools. Tarot, pendulum, sand, tea, coffee grounds, bones, compass (luao-pen), ruler, entrails, fire, water.. Any of these can be learned and used. Or some are versed in doing divination using no instruments at all - although even in the occult and esoteric areas, this is considered very difficult. And then it comes full circle with religion. These are religious practices. If you're thinking of Miss Cleo, you're further from the truth. Those are advertisement services ; whereas what I talk of are honestly held beliefs. And when understood from the occult mindset, do give valid answers. It's one area where I work in regularly, is divination. Sometimes, it doesn't work. In that case, I say as such. Usually, it does.

takeda 9y ago

Ouija boards can affect outcome, for example one person can influence what others will see and if they believe it suddenly that person's opinion will matter much more than it should. Instead of having a pointless arguments whether Ouija board can talk to dead people (see other comments), much easier is to assume it does and apply existing rules to rule it out. I think there is no doubt that it can affect outcome.