7 ms·

Repeat after me: there's no such thing as a psychic. All psychics are simple con men, who prey on vulnerable individuals in order to receive easy cash. That is

Repeat after me: there's no such thing as a psychic. All psychics are simple con men, who prey on vulnerable individuals in order to receive easy cash. That is all.

tombert 8y ago
While I agree that it's all baloney, I'd argue that many of them aren't "con men", since they honestly believe they have psychic powers. They're just wrong, and are confused by confirmation bias.
- teddyh 8y ago
  Sure, but those people don’t usually become famous.
- crankylinuxuser 8y ago
  Now.. I have no qualms in calling out fraud where I see it. But care in throwing it all out. We, earlier this week, read about someone who attended a meditation retreat left in handcuffs because meditation did crazy things to the mind. I mean, he was just eating and sitting and sleeping silently. We have holes in understanding of consciousness, and can't even tell if something is sentient or thinking. And then, we have people feeling emotions in areas. These emotions can be shared. many people can feel being stared at. The hole seems to be the intersection of: consciousness, mind, and emotion. Can we point at emotion? Can we throw it against a wall? Can we describe anger without emotions? How do we measure it? Why can some people feel the anger in an area? Same for mind and consciousness - show me an example. Quantify it. What's confusing is that your declaration of "They're just wrong, and are confused by confirmation bias." is that the very statement is confirmation bias of sciencism. Either there is proof (positive or negative), or there is not. Do not confuse lack of proof as proof of lack.
  - EpicEng 8y ago
    The fact that we can't yet show a mechanism for <whatever> does not make it reasonable to assume some sort of supernatural explanation. Your logic opens the door for believing any wacky idea a person has should be taken seriously. They shouldn't. Show a mechanism or proof of the effect. Otherwise it's nonsense.
    - crankylinuxuser 8y ago
      What part of my logic is in error? Lack of proof does not mean proof of nonexistence. And if we look at things like the aether, was made a distinct proof that it didn't exist as conjectured (although its rearing its head as a quantum Foam). But I await for proof, be it positive or negative, of emotion and consciousness. Because all you did was throw insults. > Show a mechanism or proof of the effect. Otherwise it's nonsense. One can highlight open questions with no apparent answers. And it absolutely doesn't make those questions "nonsense". But this view is called Scientism, and is not science. "Proof or its fake" is absolutely not science. "Proof or its unproven" is science.
      - EpicEng 8y ago
        While you await proof of psychic powers I am eagerly awaiting proof of unicorns and leprechauns.
      - tombert 8y ago
        > Lack of proof does not mean proof of nonexistence. It is certainly evidence of nonexistence. Do you believe every single claim you've ever heard because you can't conclusively disprove it 100% of the time always? Of course not, you use your reason and assume that more positive claims are false until proven otherwise.
        crankylinuxuser 8y ago
        Charles H. Duell was the Commissioner of US patent office in 1899. Mr. Deull's most famous attributed utterance is that "everything that can be invented has been invented." We laugh at it today, because some patent commissioner couldn't see past his own limited view, and made that claim. Yet, when I postulate questions about things we have very little science with, I'm dismissed. I ask for science to be used with emotions; yet Im the dumb one. I want scientific method to determine consciousness; yet I'm the non-scientific one. Again, you're the standard fare when it comes to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism
  - tombert 8y ago
    > Do not confuse lack of proof as proof of lack If taken to the extreme, this logic can be used to prove literally anything. "Haven't seen any proof of invisible back-massage fairies? Well, don't confuse lack of proof as proof of lack!". When your framework can be used to prove something false, it means that the framework is unreliable. I don't really know what "sciencism" is, but we know that the scientific method has been demonstrated to work in producing results that are useful to us. I am typing this message on an electronic keyboard, plugged into a computer, plugged into a giant-ass interconnected network hitting satellites and fiber-cables and whatnot, all of which were developed by scientists or engineers following a scientific method. To use your wording, however, while I can't conclusively say "lack of proof is proof of lack", I can easily say "lack of proof is strong evidence of lack". Occam's razor tells us to discard unnecessary assumptions.
- raverbashing 8y ago
  If I had psychic powers I would just get the numbers for the next lotto draw, play it and keep a very tight secret on how I did it. (Or just any investment that is improbably without insider info, that works as well)
  - LanceH 8y ago
    I would win one. Then write a book on how I did it. Win the next one. Then do a major reprint on the book.
    - lozaning 8y ago
      The Rich Dad Poor Dad method to becoming rich.
- scott_s 8y ago
  In this instance, when the specific people are looking up people's Facebook accounts to mine information on them, we can say that they know what information they gathered through natural means.
ams6110 8y ago
A fool and his money are soon parted. We can't really fix that, unfortunately.
- stronglikedan 8y ago
  > We can't really fix that, I can, and I'll show you how, too, for a mere $100. (cash only)
evolvedcleaning 8y ago
Technically, this isn’t true since there’s no way to prove or disprove such a phenomenon, currently. It’s beyond the limits of science. Further, it’s certain that some subset of professional psychics and their clients do believe in their powers. this says nothing as to whether there’s shared delusion occurring. This isn’t to discount the reality that many psychics are knowingly conning their customers.
- russdill 8y ago
  That's like saying there isn't anyway to prove or disprove a phenomenon of robbing a bank in broad daylight. It's beyond the limits of science. There was a quantum mechanical interaction that made it appear as if I was there, but I wasn't actually there. We don't know anything with absolute certainty, we know many things with overwhelmingly great certainty.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - bduerst 8y ago
    Except you can observe a bank robbery, so that analogy is just a self-serving hypothetical. I think psychics are a bunch of baloney too, but by definition the supernatural is not natural and not provable/disprovable. Let's not pretend that the act of disproving has some magic reach because then psychics or creationists or whoever will latch onto that overreach as a defense.
    - scott_s 8y ago
      As I said above, you're right in that we can't prove a negative. But it's not a claim outside of science. They make claims which can be tested. When tested, their claims fail. When you repeat that enough times, you have amassed an incredible amount of negative evidence. When the body of negative evidence becomes overwhelming, it's reasonable to conclude that thing likely does not exist.
    - greiskul 8y ago
RcouF1uZ4gsC 8y ago
If there really was a psychic, it would be much smarter for them to keep quiet about it and become a billionaire stock trader. Thus, even allowing for the possibility of psychics, the ones that are advertising their services to consumers for money are either stupid or fake.
amelius 8y ago
Perhaps this talk puts things in perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnA8GUtXpXY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnA8GUtXpXY
- yarg 8y ago
  This guy seems not to know about the speed of light.
bitwize 8y ago
"These people are either lying or mentally ill." --Tim Minchin
- acqq 8y ago
  Tim Minchin's Storm the Animated Movie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhGuXCuDb1U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhGuXCuDb1U
seeker61 8y ago
"Repeat after me" ... how sadly ironic. I trust it isn't lost on you ... is it?
yters 8y ago
While many are probably con men (and perhaps many scientists, too), there has been pretty interesting research on psychic phenomena. I haven't been able to reproduce their results, though. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=1454382 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=1454382 https://www.amazon.com/Spiritual-Brain-Neuroscientists-Case-Existence-ebook/dp/B000UZPH2Q https://www.amazon.com/Spiritual-Brain-Neuroscientists-Case-... https://www.amazon.com/Conscious-Universe-Scientific-Psychic-Phenomena-ebook/dp/B003TO584M https://www.amazon.com/Conscious-Universe-Scientific-Psychic...

Repeat after me: there's no such thing as a psychic. All psychics are simple con men, who prey on vulnerable individuals in order to receive easy cash. That is all.

tombert 8y ago

While I agree that it's all baloney, I'd argue that many of them aren't "con men", since they honestly believe they have psychic powers. They're just wrong, and are confused by confirmation bias.

teddyh 8y ago
Sure, but those people don’t usually become famous.
crankylinuxuser 8y ago
Now.. I have no qualms in calling out fraud where I see it. But care in throwing it all out. We, earlier this week, read about someone who attended a meditation retreat left in handcuffs because meditation did crazy things to the mind. I mean, he was just eating and sitting and sleeping silently. We have holes in understanding of consciousness, and can't even tell if something is sentient or thinking. And then, we have people feeling emotions in areas. These emotions can be shared. many people can feel being stared at. The hole seems to be the intersection of: consciousness, mind, and emotion. Can we point at emotion? Can we throw it against a wall? Can we describe anger without emotions? How do we measure it? Why can some people feel the anger in an area? Same for mind and consciousness - show me an example. Quantify it. What's confusing is that your declaration of "They're just wrong, and are confused by confirmation bias." is that the very statement is confirmation bias of sciencism. Either there is proof (positive or negative), or there is not. Do not confuse lack of proof as proof of lack.
- EpicEng 8y ago
  The fact that we can't yet show a mechanism for <whatever> does not make it reasonable to assume some sort of supernatural explanation. Your logic opens the door for believing any wacky idea a person has should be taken seriously. They shouldn't. Show a mechanism or proof of the effect. Otherwise it's nonsense.
  - crankylinuxuser 8y ago
    What part of my logic is in error? Lack of proof does not mean proof of nonexistence. And if we look at things like the aether, was made a distinct proof that it didn't exist as conjectured (although its rearing its head as a quantum Foam). But I await for proof, be it positive or negative, of emotion and consciousness. Because all you did was throw insults. > Show a mechanism or proof of the effect. Otherwise it's nonsense. One can highlight open questions with no apparent answers. And it absolutely doesn't make those questions "nonsense". But this view is called Scientism, and is not science. "Proof or its fake" is absolutely not science. "Proof or its unproven" is science.
    - EpicEng 8y ago
      While you await proof of psychic powers I am eagerly awaiting proof of unicorns and leprechauns.
    - tombert 8y ago
      > Lack of proof does not mean proof of nonexistence. It is certainly evidence of nonexistence. Do you believe every single claim you've ever heard because you can't conclusively disprove it 100% of the time always? Of course not, you use your reason and assume that more positive claims are false until proven otherwise.
      - crankylinuxuser 8y ago
        Charles H. Duell was the Commissioner of US patent office in 1899. Mr. Deull's most famous attributed utterance is that "everything that can be invented has been invented." We laugh at it today, because some patent commissioner couldn't see past his own limited view, and made that claim. Yet, when I postulate questions about things we have very little science with, I'm dismissed. I ask for science to be used with emotions; yet Im the dumb one. I want scientific method to determine consciousness; yet I'm the non-scientific one. Again, you're the standard fare when it comes to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism
- tombert 8y ago
  > Do not confuse lack of proof as proof of lack If taken to the extreme, this logic can be used to prove literally anything. "Haven't seen any proof of invisible back-massage fairies? Well, don't confuse lack of proof as proof of lack!". When your framework can be used to prove something false, it means that the framework is unreliable. I don't really know what "sciencism" is, but we know that the scientific method has been demonstrated to work in producing results that are useful to us. I am typing this message on an electronic keyboard, plugged into a computer, plugged into a giant-ass interconnected network hitting satellites and fiber-cables and whatnot, all of which were developed by scientists or engineers following a scientific method. To use your wording, however, while I can't conclusively say "lack of proof is proof of lack", I can easily say "lack of proof is strong evidence of lack". Occam's razor tells us to discard unnecessary assumptions.
raverbashing 8y ago
If I had psychic powers I would just get the numbers for the next lotto draw, play it and keep a very tight secret on how I did it. (Or just any investment that is improbably without insider info, that works as well)
- LanceH 8y ago
  I would win one. Then write a book on how I did it. Win the next one. Then do a major reprint on the book.
  - lozaning 8y ago
    The Rich Dad Poor Dad method to becoming rich.
scott_s 8y ago
In this instance, when the specific people are looking up people's Facebook accounts to mine information on them, we can say that they know what information they gathered through natural means.

ams6110 8y ago

A fool and his money are soon parted. We can't really fix that, unfortunately.

stronglikedan 8y ago
> We can't really fix that, I can, and I'll show you how, too, for a mere $100. (cash only)

evolvedcleaning 8y ago

Technically, this isn’t true since there’s no way to prove or disprove such a phenomenon, currently. It’s beyond the limits of science. Further, it’s certain that some subset of professional psychics and their clients do believe in their powers. this says nothing as to whether there’s shared delusion occurring. This isn’t to discount the reality that many psychics are knowingly conning their customers.

russdill 8y ago
That's like saying there isn't anyway to prove or disprove a phenomenon of robbing a bank in broad daylight. It's beyond the limits of science. There was a quantum mechanical interaction that made it appear as if I was there, but I wasn't actually there. We don't know anything with absolute certainty, we know many things with overwhelmingly great certainty.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- bduerst 8y ago
  Except you can observe a bank robbery, so that analogy is just a self-serving hypothetical. I think psychics are a bunch of baloney too, but by definition the supernatural is not natural and not provable/disprovable. Let's not pretend that the act of disproving has some magic reach because then psychics or creationists or whoever will latch onto that overreach as a defense.
  - scott_s 8y ago
    As I said above, you're right in that we can't prove a negative. But it's not a claim outside of science. They make claims which can be tested. When tested, their claims fail. When you repeat that enough times, you have amassed an incredible amount of negative evidence. When the body of negative evidence becomes overwhelming, it's reasonable to conclude that thing likely does not exist.
  - greiskul 8y ago

RcouF1uZ4gsC 8y ago

If there really was a psychic, it would be much smarter for them to keep quiet about it and become a billionaire stock trader. Thus, even allowing for the possibility of psychics, the ones that are advertising their services to consumers for money are either stupid or fake.

amelius 8y ago

Perhaps this talk puts things in perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnA8GUtXpXY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnA8GUtXpXY

yarg 8y ago
This guy seems not to know about the speed of light.

bitwize 8y ago

"These people are either lying or mentally ill." --Tim Minchin

acqq 8y ago
Tim Minchin's Storm the Animated Movie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhGuXCuDb1U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhGuXCuDb1U

seeker61 8y ago

"Repeat after me" ... how sadly ironic. I trust it isn't lost on you ... is it?

yters 8y ago

While many are probably con men (and perhaps many scientists, too), there has been pretty interesting research on psychic phenomena. I haven't been able to reproduce their results, though. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=1454382 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=1454382 https://www.amazon.com/Spiritual-Brain-Neuroscientists-Case-Existence-ebook/dp/B000UZPH2Q https://www.amazon.com/Spiritual-Brain-Neuroscientists-Case-... https://www.amazon.com/Conscious-Universe-Scientific-Psychic-Phenomena-ebook/dp/B003TO584M https://www.amazon.com/Conscious-Universe-Scientific-Psychic...