View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

The Psychology of the Skeptic

Discuss PseudoSkeptics and their Fallacies. Share strategies for debating them.

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby Arouet » 06 Oct 2011, 02:36

If there are problems in the psychological and psychiatric practices (and there are!) there is a whole institutional framework desigend to help improve on it. psychic counsellors have none of it. There is no guraantee of them having any training at all. There are no standards whatsoever.

You haven't addressed the meat of my posts though, so I think you are splitting hairs.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07






Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby ProfWag » 06 Oct 2011, 04:41

Craig Browning wrote:Exsqueeze me?

I get $125.00 an hour for sessions or $45.00 for 20-minutes. I think you'll find that's closer to standard fare these days, with exception to the newbies and desperate. . . then again, the economy is getting so bad I may have to cut my fees (again). Of course, I only charge top dollar when I know it's someone that's just curious or wanting some amusement. Rarely, when there is a real issue happening, do I ever charge anything close to outrageous (typically barter) for people in actual need.

The going rate in Sedona Arizona during Thanksgiving, 2009 was $1.00 per minute (the last time I paid for a reading.). Sylvia makes $700 for a 20 minute reading or something like that. I'm confident everyone's different based on who you are, experience, where you live, etc. Just work with me for once, will ya' Craig'? Surely you can sense that I was generalizing ;-)
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby ProfWag » 06 Oct 2011, 04:50

Craig Browning wrote:As to all those nasty things listed above that psychics are "known for" you can't point to a single industry that the same kinds of things can't be said about, especially when it comes to the world of finance and big $$$ -- same horse, different color.

So that makes it okay to advertise and collect money for something you may not be? I agree that there are asses all over the place, as I've stated before, but that doesn't make it okay in my mind. And, like Arouet said, most of those industries are regulated. Just ask Bernie Madoff, Kenneth Lay, or Martha Stewart.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby craig weiler » 06 Oct 2011, 09:04

Oh look. Arouet and ProfWag have been granted God Rights. They now have the ability to pontificate on subjects that they know nothing about while speaking with absolute certainty.

Congratulations guys! Way to go!
A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are for.
User avatar
craig weiler
 
Posts: 386
Joined: 03 Sep 2011, 12:08
Location: San Francisco Peninsula

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby Arouet » 06 Oct 2011, 10:01

Ugh, this again? Please point out where I spoke with absolute certainty. Even better, point out where I am wrong.

Are psychics regulated? Is there a psychic board that I can complain to when my psychic behaves inappropriately? Is there a set of standards? Are psychics licenced? Is there reliable testing of methodology? Maybe there is and I just haven't heard of it!

I happen to know a bit about regulation of professionals, being one myself. So I'm also not talking about areas that I know nothing about.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby craig weiler » 06 Oct 2011, 10:29

Arouet,
Maybe instead of getting yourself all worked up, you should just hang out at a psychic fair for a day and find out what actually happens instead of all this nonsensical spouting about licensing and regulation.

The reason no one regulates this industry is that so little ever goes wrong. Skeptics go nuts whenever some scam artist bilks someone for a few thousand to remove a curse, but these are too rare for police or legislatures to get worked up about. They live in the real world and deal with real problems. (I think there is one town on the East Coast that is contemplating regulating psychics.) Outright frauds are extremely rare when matched against the entire industry; And when have you ever heard of someone getting bad counseling from a psychic? It isn't even an issue.

This is what I mean by you speaking with absolute certainty about something you know nothing about.
A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are for.
User avatar
craig weiler
 
Posts: 386
Joined: 03 Sep 2011, 12:08
Location: San Francisco Peninsula

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby Arouet » 06 Oct 2011, 12:50

craig weiler wrote:Arouet,
Maybe instead of getting yourself all worked up, you should just hang out at a psychic fair for a day and find out what actually happens instead of all this nonsensical spouting about licensing and regulation.


Please believe me Craig when I say that I'm not worked up about this. Craig W has spoken at length in this forum how a lot of what a psychic does is very similar to counselling. Now, I'll admit that I took him at his word there, which wasn't very skeptical of me, but Craig has been in the business for awhile so I took him at his word.

The reason no one regulates this industry is that so little ever goes wrong. Skeptics go nuts whenever some scam artist bilks someone for a few thousand to remove a curse, but these are too rare for police or legislatures to get worked up about. They live in the real world and deal with real problems. (I think there is one town on the East Coast that is contemplating regulating psychics.) Outright frauds are extremely rare when matched against the entire industry; And when have you ever heard of someone getting bad counseling from a psychic? It isn't even an issue.


You think psychics haven't been regulated because things so rarely go wrong? I'm not sure how you justify that or how you even are able to evaluate the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of psychic counselling except annecdotally. Who is measuring whether things go wrong for many people (such people will simply not go back to the psychic.)

A counsellor is in a position of trust over vulnerable patients: protections should be put in place.


This is what I mean by you speaking with absolute certainty about something you know nothing about.


Again: where are you getting absolute certainty. Here, I'll spell it out for you as a blanket statement: there if very little that I am absolutely certain about. I tend to qualify my statements more than most (for which I get called wishy-washy- especially by Alex over at Skeptiko!). I don not believe that I am anywhere near infalliable in my analysis of situations. So if you are inclined to interpret a statement of mine as evoking abolute certainty, you should assume that's not my intent. If my statement is vague as to my level of certainty, you could always ask me how certain I am of it.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby craig weiler » 06 Oct 2011, 13:11

You think psychics haven't been regulated because things so rarely go wrong? I'm not sure how you justify that or how you even are able to evaluate the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of psychic counselling except annecdotally. Who is measuring whether things go wrong for many people (such people will simply not go back to the psychic.)

A counsellor is in a position of trust over vulnerable patients: protections should be put in place.


When I say that things rarely go wrong, I mean wrong. If I meant ineffective I would say ineffective. Where are the people who have felt violated by psychics?

A counselor might indeed be in a position of trust over a vulnerable patient, but psychics don't have patients, they have clients. And the clients know that. Psychics are not authority figures and don't carry the same gravitas as a psychologist. The clients don't feel obliged to take them at their word. It's a different relationship.

You seem very certain about the need to regulate the counseling, but you understand nothing about what is actually going on. I mean, why don't you guys ever ask us about this stuff? We know a whole lot more about psychics than you do.
A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are for.
User avatar
craig weiler
 
Posts: 386
Joined: 03 Sep 2011, 12:08
Location: San Francisco Peninsula

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby ProfWag » 06 Oct 2011, 18:41

craig weiler wrote:You seem very certain about the need to regulate the counseling, but you understand nothing about what is actually going on. I mean, why don't you guys ever ask us about this stuff? We know a whole lot more about psychics than you do.

Okay, here are some more questions for the two Craigs:
1. How many of your clients are repeat customers?
2. Why do two established psychics (Craig B & W) differ on the subject of "real" psychics--i.e. I believe Craig B says something like less than 5% are actually "psychic" whereas Craig W says he's never known a fraud?
3. What exactly would I expect to receive from a reading from both of you? Specifically, do you give financial advice, relationship advice, tell the future, read the past, etc.? How specific of answers do you give? During my last experieence, the psychic told me to ask very specific questions for a better reading, do you do the same? Do you find you give better readings when the client opens up before hand about their life?
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby Arouet » 06 Oct 2011, 20:11

craig weiler wrote:When I say that things rarely go wrong, I mean wrong. If I meant ineffective I would say ineffective. Where are the people who have felt violated by psychics?


Psychics give people personal advice. People may act on that advice. This can sometimes be to the person's detriment.

A counselor might indeed be in a position of trust over a vulnerable patient, but psychics don't have patients, they have clients. And the clients know that. Psychics are not authority figures and don't carry the same gravitas as a psychologist. The clients don't feel obliged to take them at their word. It's a different relationship.

You seem very certain about the need to regulate the counseling, but you understand nothing about what is actually going on. I mean, why don't you guys ever ask us about this stuff? We know a whole lot more about psychics than you do.


This is proof positive that you don't really read what I write. Did you see where I twice wrote that the other craig had explained in detail that what many psychics do is basically provide counselling to their clients? I also said that I just took Craig at his word at that which implied that I was opening up for you to correct the implication.

So yes, I'm basing it on what a psychic told me. But why don't you enlighten us further: what topics do psychics comment on? Do they give personal advice re: carreer, relationships, etc? How would you differentiate the advice from counselling?
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby really? » 06 Oct 2011, 22:07

I know of a site that's keeping count. This is a start.
http://whatstheharm.net/
really?
 
Posts: 1009
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:58

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby craig weiler » 06 Oct 2011, 22:58

Arouet,
I do read what you write and you make unfounded assumptions. You immediately look for ways that getting psychic readings could be bad for people and do not consider that they could be good. You are taking statements, such as psychics doing counseling and assuming that you understand them in their entirety. I don't think that you understand counseling very well either, based on your statements.

Psychics, unless they are complete idiots, (and some of them are, they're like people that way) do not normally give advice, but rather provide information on the understanding that they are reporting on tendencies that people can change. It is up to the client to decide what to do with that information. They normally cover areas of the most interest to people: health, relationships, career, etc. Most people have one area that they are struggling with, some people have two. A psychic reading is not going to change that either for the better or the worse.

If people come with a problem and want actual counseling, about all a psychic can do is listen and that's what normally happens. Worse case, no change. It's up to the client to decide how they want to spend their time with the psychic and if they want to spill their guts so to speak, there's not much to do except go along with it. The people who seriously need counseling? More often than not, they're seeing a counselor already.

As far as advice goes, it is the rare person who takes anyone else's advice, even if they're paying for it. So that's not much of an issue. People are perfectly capable of blowing off advice that they don't want besides.

Once in a while people come to psychics because they are very psychically sensitive, but don't know anything about it and are completely freaked out. Psychics can help them feel normal.

really?,
That website is ridiculous.
A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are for.
User avatar
craig weiler
 
Posts: 386
Joined: 03 Sep 2011, 12:08
Location: San Francisco Peninsula

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby Arouet » 07 Oct 2011, 00:18

craig weiler wrote:Arouet,
I do read what you write and you make unfounded assumptions. You immediately look for ways that getting psychic readings could be bad for people and do not consider that they could be good. You are taking statements, such as psychics doing counseling and assuming that you understand them in their entirety. I don't think that you understand counseling very well either, based on your statements.


You don't regulate industries that don't do any good. You ban those ones. You are the one making the assumption that assume I understand psychics in their entirety. It's an absurd statement to make and I don't know why anyone would make the claim that they understand anything in their entirety!

Psychics, unless they are complete idiots, (and some of them are, they're like people that way) do not normally give advice, but rather provide information on the understanding that they are reporting on tendencies that people can change. It is up to the client to decide what to do with that information. They normally cover areas of the most interest to people: health, relationships, career, etc. Most people have one area that they are struggling with, some people have two. A psychic reading is not going to change that either for the better or the worse.


I'm not sure what we're arguing about then: Giving information about tendencies that people can change involving health, relationships, career etc. sound pretty close to counselling to me! Close enough that they are in the same family of advice anyway. Not every psychologist will give direct advice either, but the treatment is meant to affect the person's behaviour.

If people come with a problem and want actual counseling, about all a psychic can do is listen and that's what normally happens. Worse case, no change. It's up to the client to decide how they want to spend their time with the psychic and if they want to spill their guts so to speak, there's not much to do except go along with it. The people who seriously need counseling? More often than not, they're seeing a counselor already.


Some are, some aren't. In any event, you already admitted that some psychics are idiots. So that's a good reason to regulate, isn't it?

As far as advice goes, it is the rare person who takes anyone else's advice, even if they're paying for it. So that's not much of an issue. People are perfectly capable of blowing off advice that they don't want besides.


You are glossing over a key fact: unless they are going to a psychic for pure entertainment, they are going in order to make use of the information that they are given. They want to rely on the information given. It is intended that the there is an effect on a person's life.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby NinjaPuppy » 07 Oct 2011, 01:55

Oh fer cryin' out loud, you men are reminding me of old washer women going through menopause. Rather than go back and quote days and days of pissy-moany commentary, allow me to start with this one:

I'm not sure what we're arguing about then: Giving information about tendencies that people can change involving health, relationships, career etc. sound pretty close to counselling to me! Close enough that they are in the same family of advice anyway. Not every psychologist will give direct advice either, but the treatment is meant to affect the person's behaviour.


You're darned right that you're not sure what you're arguing about. You're not women for starters. Women have been giving unwanted and unsolicited advice since the beining of time. From a bible story you have Eve who obviously gave a guy named Adam some pretty damned bad advice. It was all her fault. Did she care? Oh hell no! Did that stop women from having coffee klatches? Again...NO. Has anything since recorded history ever stopped women from gathering and talking? Nope. Women tend to ask for advice no matter the source. Men don't want to hear anything, especially from a woman who doesn't have a clue what they're talking about. It doesn't matter where she heard it, it's ignored unless she's cute and has big boobs. Then sometimes, it might be entertained.
Some are, some aren't. In any event, you already admitted that some psychics are idiots. So that's a good reason to regulate, isn't it?

Many people from all walks of life are idiots too. Want to talk about something that should be regulated? How about marriage and procreation? Marriage councelors? Barbers? Bookies? Your dumbass cousin Ernie? Why single out self proclaimed psychics?
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: The Psychology of the Skeptic

Postby Arouet » 07 Oct 2011, 02:46

???? Ninja, not sure what you had for breakfast this morning, but I think you're off in the wrong direction today!

Obviously we're not going to regulate just people who give advice - friends, family, etc.. We're talking about professionals here! People who are paid for their services.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

PreviousNext

Return to PseudoSkeptic Fallacies

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests