4 ms·

I think that we, as a society, are really attached to language and convention. And telepathy is incompatible with that. So any evidence or argument for telepath

I think that we, as a society, are really attached to language and convention. And telepathy is incompatible with that. So any evidence or argument for telepathy is voided. There is a mountain of anecdote, however.

lxgr 2y ago
All of which can be adequately be explained for with unexpected physical nonverbal communication channels, confirmation bias and various other cognitive biases, and none of which reproducible in a methodologically correct setting, despite decades of trying.
- swayvil 2y ago
  "Adequate explanation" is a tool of relatively small scope, dependent upon the judgment of individuals, which is of relatively great scope. If many individuals judge it "telepathy" then that carries weight. Let's not put the cart before the horse.
  - lxgr 2y ago
    > If many individuals judge it "telepathy" then that carries weight. No, science is not a trial by popular vote. What carries weight are models, theories, experiments, and falsification. This can include subjective reports, but the human mind, as brilliant as it can be, is also a never-ending source of biases and (conscious or unconscious) deception, which all need to be corrected for via proper experimental setup.
    - wumbo 2y ago
      friends! let us have it both ways! Humans have telepathy and cognitive biases!
      - RobotToaster 2y ago
        What if collective cognitive biases are the result of telepathy?
        ErigmolCt 2y ago
        But telepathy, as traditionally understood, isn't scientifically proven...
- mistermann 2y ago
  It sure can, but whether your explanation is correct is the tricky part. Luckily, most people can't realize this so the problem "doesn't exist", and "is" solved.
  - lxgr 2y ago
    Not sure how I'd "realize correctness" of my explanation, but until I hear a more plausible one (in particular, that means one not introducing extraordinary other assumptions without extraordinary evidence for their existence), I'll stick with mine.
    - mistermann 2y ago
      [flagged]

lxgr 2y ago

All of which can be adequately be explained for with unexpected physical nonverbal communication channels, confirmation bias and various other cognitive biases, and none of which reproducible in a methodologically correct setting, despite decades of trying.

swayvil 2y ago
"Adequate explanation" is a tool of relatively small scope, dependent upon the judgment of individuals, which is of relatively great scope. If many individuals judge it "telepathy" then that carries weight. Let's not put the cart before the horse.
- lxgr 2y ago
  > If many individuals judge it "telepathy" then that carries weight. No, science is not a trial by popular vote. What carries weight are models, theories, experiments, and falsification. This can include subjective reports, but the human mind, as brilliant as it can be, is also a never-ending source of biases and (conscious or unconscious) deception, which all need to be corrected for via proper experimental setup.
  - wumbo 2y ago
    friends! let us have it both ways! Humans have telepathy and cognitive biases!
    - RobotToaster 2y ago
      What if collective cognitive biases are the result of telepathy?
      - ErigmolCt 2y ago
        But telepathy, as traditionally understood, isn't scientifically proven...
mistermann 2y ago
It sure can, but whether your explanation is correct is the tricky part. Luckily, most people can't realize this so the problem "doesn't exist", and "is" solved.
- lxgr 2y ago
  Not sure how I'd "realize correctness" of my explanation, but until I hear a more plausible one (in particular, that means one not introducing extraordinary other assumptions without extraordinary evidence for their existence), I'll stick with mine.
  - mistermann 2y ago
    [flagged]