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

Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

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

Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby quantumparanormal » 20 Sep 2009, 05:08

Even some of the most notorious and fervent skeptics can at times experience cognitive dissonance in the light of overwhelming positive psi evidence:

But there is one thing we should have no doubt about: These highly significant results, coming from several laboratories, have made some skeptics very uncomfortable. Admitting the difficulty she experiences maintaining her well-publicized skeptical beliefs in the face of mounting experimental evidence, psychologist Susan Blackmore writes: (Carter, 2007, p. 48)
Human beings are not built to have open minds. If they try to have open minds they experience cognitive dissonance. Leon Festinger first used this term. He argued that people strive to make their beliefs and actions consistent and when there is inconsistency they experience this unpleasant state of "cognitive dissonance," and they then use lots of ploys to reduce it. I have to admit I have become rather familiar with some of them.

First, there is premature closure. You can just pick one theory and stick to it against all odds... Or the disbeliever can refuse to look at the positive results. You may think I wouldn't refuse, but I have to admit that when the Journal of Parapsychology arrives with reports of Helmut Schmidt's positive findings I begin to feel uncomfortable and am quite apt to put it away "to read tomorrow." (Blackmore, 1987, p. 251)



I added the following on 9/20/09:

Furthermore, I feel I need to explain my point, since it seems difficult for people like ciscop to understand. Keep in mind that cognitive dissonance means 1) "holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously," 2) this causes discomfort in the person holding those ideas, and 3) they will change their behavior and/or attitude in order to accommodate such a discomfort. Typically, die-hard skeptics such as Blackmore have no problem outright dismissing psi-positive evidence. When provided psi-positive evidence to evaluate, such skeptics typically outright dismiss the evidence, as they have already made up their minds the evidence is invalid in advance. This typically creates no discomfort for them, since they don't hold both the idea that 1) psi-positive evidence does exists and 2) psi-positive evidence does not exist. Therefore, no cognitive dissonance occurs as a result. However, if it is uncomfortable for them, this implies that they consider the psi-positive evidence to be, in the very least, possibly valid.

Let me give you an example. How would you feel if a person came to you with evidence that fairies exist? Would you feel uncomfortable? I would think not. You would probably laugh and think that person is "crazy." Since you already "know" fairies don't exist, there's no discomfort in having to evaluate such evidence, as you have already made up your mind that fairies do not exist. You do not simultaneously hold the ideas that 1) fairies do not exist AND 2) fairies do exist. Therefore, there is no cognitive dissonance occurring. However, if another person given such evidence felt discomfort, what would that mean? That would imply that that person simultaneously holds the ideas that 1) fairies do not exist AND 2) fairies do exist. Put another way, it suggests that person might consider such evidence as being possibly valid. Why else would holding these two contradictory ideas create discomfort?

Similarly, Susan Blackmore should feel no cognitive dissonance if she actually believes all psi evidence is invalid, easily dismissible. Additionally, if one fervently believes that psi "does not exist" and is easily dismissible, one should not experience cognitive dissonance when confronted with psi-positive evidence.
Last edited by quantumparanormal on 21 Sep 2009, 08:28, edited 6 times in total.
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA






Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby ciscop » 20 Sep 2009, 06:52

quantumparanormal wrote:Even some of the most notorious and fervent skeptics can at times experience cognitive dissonance in the light of overwhelming positive psi evidence:

But there is one thing we should have no doubt about: These highly significant results, coming from several laboratories, have made some skeptics very uncomfortable. Admitting the difficulty she experiences maintaining her well-publicized skeptical beliefs in the face of mounting experimental evidence, psychologist Susan Blackmore writes: (Carter, 2007, p. 48)
Human beings are not built to have open minds. If they try to have open minds they experience cognitive dissonance. Leon Festinger first used this term. He argued that people strive to make their beliefs and actions consistent and when there is inconsistency they experience this unpleasant state of "cognitive dissonance," and they then use lots of ploys to reduce it. I have to admit I have become rather familiar with some of them.

First, there is premature closure. You can just pick one theory and stick to it against all odds... Or the disbeliever can refuse to look at the positive results. You may think I wouldn't refuse, but I have to admit that when the Journal of Parapsychology arrives with reports of Helmut Schmidt's positive findings I begin to feel uncomfortable and am quite apt to put it away "to read tomorrow." (Blackmore, 1987, p. 251)



¨even¨...?
but... i thought skeptics were gods... (sarcasm)
IS HUMAN NATURE you ignorant!
of course they experience cog. dissonance, we all do

instead of building a case for psi
you have to attack the skeptics with the studies contrary to your beliefs like susan blackmore (talking about cog. dissonance eh?)

:lol: :lol: :lol:
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby quantumparanormal » 20 Sep 2009, 06:56

Perhaps it's his lack of English? Nah, he's just really that dumb. Here it is again: http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=378#p4801
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby ciscop » 20 Sep 2009, 07:05

quantumparanormal wrote:Perhaps it's his lack of English? Nah, he's just really that dumb. Here it is again: http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=378#p4801


when faced by facts you attack my language skills? those are your resources?? all right! :lol: :lol:
i wonder how many languages do you speak?
stupidity doesnt count as a language by the way.

Image

:lol:
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby quantumparanormal » 21 Sep 2009, 00:07

ciscop wrote:
quantumparanormal wrote:Even some of the most notorious and fervent skeptics can at times experience cognitive dissonance in the light of overwhelming positive psi evidence:

Human beings are not built to have open minds. If they try to have open minds they experience cognitive dissonance. Leon Festinger first used this term. He argued that people strive to make their beliefs and actions consistent and when there is inconsistency they experience this unpleasant state of "cognitive dissonance," and they then use lots of ploys to reduce it. I have to admit I have become rather familiar with some of them.

First, there is premature closure. You can just pick one theory and stick to it against all odds... Or the disbeliever can refuse to look at the positive results. You may think I wouldn't refuse, but I have to admit that when the Journal of Parapsychology arrives with reports of Helmut Schmidt's positive findings I begin to feel uncomfortable and am quite apt to put it away "to read tomorrow." (Blackmore, 1987, p. 251)


¨even¨...?
but... i thought skeptics were gods... (sarcasm)
IS HUMAN NATURE you ignorant!
of course they experience cog. dissonance, we all do

instead of building a case for psi
you have to attack the skeptics with the studies contrary to your beliefs like susan blackmore (talking about cog. dissonance eh?)

:lol: :lol: :lol:


ciscop,

Please explain how you were logically able to obviate/invalidate/dismiss my argument that in the light of overwhelming positive psi evidence, even some of the most notorious and fervent skeptics can at times experience cognitive dissonance; given I provided the example case involving Blackmore in which she states "you may think I wouldn't refuse, but I have to admit that when the Journal of Parapsychology arrives with reports of Helmut Schmidt's positive findings I begin to feel uncomfortable and am quite apt to put it away "to read tomorrow."; via your argument that we all, as humans, experience cognitive dissonance. Thanks.

Furthermore, I feel I need to explain my point, since it seems difficult for you to understand. Keep in mind that cognitive dissonance means 1) "holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously," 2) this causes discomfort in the person holding those ideas, and 3) they will change their behavior and/or attitude in order to accommodate such a discomfort. Typically, die-hard skeptics such as Blackmore have no problem outright dismissing psi-positive evidence. When provided psi-positive evidence to evaluate, such skeptics typically outright dismiss the evidence, as they have already made up their minds the evidence is invalid in advance. This typically creates no discomfort for them, since they don't hold both the idea that 1) psi-positive evidence does exists and 2) psi-positive evidence does not exist. Therefore, no cognitive dissonance occurs as a result. However, if it is uncomfortable for them, this implies that they consider the psi-positive evidence to be, in the very least, possibly valid.

Let me give you an example. How would you feel if a person came to you with evidence that fairies exist? Would you feel uncomfortable? I would think not. You would probably laugh and think that person is "crazy." Since you already "know" fairies don't exist, there's no discomfort in having to evaluate such evidence, as you have already made up your mind that fairies do not exist. You do not simultaneously hold the ideas that 1) fairies do not exist AND 2) fairies do exist. Therefore, there is no cognitive dissonance occurring. However, if another person given such evidence felt discomfort, what would that mean? That would imply that that person simultaneously holds the ideas that 1) fairies do not exist AND 2) fairies do exist. Put another way, it suggests that person might consider such evidence as being possibly valid. Why else would holding these two contradictory ideas create discomfort?

Similarly, Susan Blackmore should feel no cognitive dissonance if she actually believes all psi evidence is invalid, easily dismissible. Additionally, if one fervently believes that psi "does not exist" and is easily dismissible, one should not experience cognitive dissonance when confronted with psi-positive evidence.

Got it?
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby ciscop » 23 Sep 2009, 05:18

You know
even thought it is your native language and this is my 3rd language
it seems you fail to understand what cog. dissonance means and how people react to it

So.. im going to try to explain to you
You got that right.. Cog. Dissonance is when you hold 2 contradicting ideas and they cause discomfort
what you FAIL to understand
is HOW that discomfort will present..

When talking about how skeptics react to woo evidence, Some skeptics will laugh (not all) and some skeptics will put the article of a quack, i mean helmut schmidt down just like Susan Blackmore did.
If you brought me an article of why fairies exist, i will put it down too
why would i laugh? there´s many ways to react and express my cog. dissonance! it doesnt MEAN i have the idea of FAIRIES existing.. it means i feel discomfort in losing time in reading about something i know it doesnt exist, THAT´S COG. DISSONANCE

just like you will throw away a panflet of scientology or put it down
it doesnt mean you also THINK WE COME FROM XENU (perhaps you do, that wouldnt surprised me, you believe anything)

GOT IT?

i can tell you one thing.. The guys i know screaming cog. dissonance! at others are always the guys most aggraviated by it...
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby quantumparanormal » 23 Sep 2009, 05:50

Boy, it takes some rather long explaining to get through to you.............

ciscop wrote:You know
even thought it is your native language and this is my 3rd language
it seems you fail to understand what cog. dissonance means and how people react to it


I'm guessing you haven't really looked into the definition of "cognitive dissonance." Otherwise, you'd agree with what I'm saying. There are 3 elements to it:

The person who experiences cognitive dissonance 1) "holds two contradictory ideas simultaneously," 2) this causes that person discomfort, and 3) that person will change his/her behavior and/or attitude in order to accommodate such a discomfort. "Hold" in this case means "Keep in mind or convey as a conviction or view," and contradictory means "Two propositions [ideas] are contradictories if both cannot be true."

Let's analyze Blackmore's statement:

1) You may think I wouldn't refuse, but I have to admit that when the Journal of Parapsychology arrives with reports of Helmut Schmidt's positive findings,
2) I begin to feel uncomfortable
3) and am quite apt to put it away "to read tomorrow."

1) The "positive findings" are contradictory to what her core belief/idea about psi is, which is that it doesn't exist.

2) Why should she feel uncomfortable about "positive findings?" If she really believes psi is false, don't you agree there should be no discomfort in evaluating "psi-positive" evidence? Don't you agree she would feel that the "positive findings" are most likely not positive and easily dismissible? Performing the duty of evaluating parapsychological claims should not per se create any discomfort, as that's what Blackmore does all the time. After all, she is a parapsychologist; it's her "job," so there should be no discomfort in the act of evaluating such evidence. What we are left pondering is why she feels this discomfort. If she actually believes deep down inside that psi is false, there should be no discomfort in evaluating psi evidence, just like there should be no discomfort in evaluating evidence that fairies exist. However, if there is data that results in a threat to her conviction that psi is false, then that would most likely create discomfort. Therefore, we can assume that her discomfort is due to her thinking the psi evidence presented might indeed be possibly valid. The discomfort is a result of a challenge, or threat, the evidence presents. If she really believed psi evidence was not threatening, we could infer she would feel no dissonance having to evaluate such evidence.

3) Her reaction, her behavior, to this discomfort is to put the evidence away "to read tomorrow."

It's really that simple, not difficult to comprehend.

ciscop wrote:it means i feel discomfort in losing time in reading about something i know it doesnt exist, THAT´S COG. DISSONANCE


Boy are you wrong here. You are creating a false analogy. Blackmore does this all the time--evaluate psi evidence. Why would she feel she's "losing time" doing it considering she's a parapsychologist? If she feels it doesn't exist, there should be no discomfort. If she simply doesn't want to read it because she feels it's a waist of time to do so, she can put it down and forget about it. Either way, there should be no discomfort at all. Whether she puts it down and never reads it or reads it later, or even reads it now, it should not cause her any cognitive dissonance evaluating something she indeed believes is false.

Just look at her long list of publications; it's filled with parapsychological papers: http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/publicat.htm

It's NOT cognitive dissonance in this case because you cannot demonstrate Blackmore would feel it's a "waist of time." She does it all the time. Just read her published works. She loves doing this stuff!

Therefore, your argument that Blackmore experiences cognitive dissonance because it would be a "waist of time for her to evaluate something she doesn't believe in (i.e, psi))" is unequivocally false.

ciscop wrote:just like you will throw away a panflet of scientology or put it down
it doesnt mean you also THINK WE COME FROM XENU


You are creating another false analogy. Your analogy above is analogous with my 2nd example below.

Before I provide the examples, let's dissect your "analogy:"

1) I'm given a "a panflet of scientology" to evaluate.
2) I begin to feel uncomfortable.
3) I am quite apt to put it away "to read tomorrow."

Why would #2 occur? If I absolutely believe Scientology is false and have no problem putting in the time to read the literature anyway, why should there be any discomfort? Where are the two contradictory ideas I "hold?" Whether I put it away for later, throw it in the trash, or read it now, it would NOT cause me any discomfort because I firmly do NOT believe in Scientology. Even if I thought it was a waist of time to read the evidence, there'd still be no discomfort, as I simply don't have to read it. Therefore, no cognitive dissonance occurs.

1st example: Let's say, for example, I believe Scientology is false and that there is no way I believe it could ever be proven true. Let's also say it's my job, or my hobby, to evaluate evidence supporting Scientology. I should feel no cognitive dissonance unless I hold the contradictory idea that Scientology might be real. Forget about the act of evaluating it (i.e, the work involved), as that's work that's par for the course, not an idea that threatens my belief(s); therefore, the act of evaluating the evidence per se is not part of the dissonant equation. If I really hold the conviction that all evidence supporting Scientology is false, I should feel no discomfort, as I will not hold both the ideas that 1) Scientology is real and 2) Scientology is not real. However, if I do feel discomfort, then it indicates I hold these two contradictory ideas in my mind. Why else would it be uncomfortable otherwise?

2nd example: In contrast, let's say, for example, I don't care to evaluate Scientology evidence or that no matter what evidence was provided to me it wouldn't matter, as I'd still believe Scientology is false. Even if I did put down the evidence to read at a later time, the act of putting it down or reading it later would not cause me discomfort because I've already made up my mind. I do not hold the simultaneous ideas that 1) Scientology is real and 2) Scientology is not real, nor do I hold the idea that "WE COME FROM XENU." I only believe Scientology is false, and no amount of Scientology-positive evidence will ever cause me any discomfort, as I do not, and will not, hold the idea that Scientology is real. Therefore, there is no cognitive dissonance. Consequently, I will put away the evidence or read it; either way, I've made up my mind--no dissonance. So, your analogy above is analogous to this 2nd example.

Blackmore fits example #1 perfectly!

Using the definition above for cognitive dissonance (which is correct), we can infer from Blackmore's statement that she 1) simultaneously keeps in her mind or conveys as a conviction or view the two ideas that [a] psi might exist and [b] psi might not exist, which both cannot be true, 2) this causes her discomfort, and 3) she puts away the evidence to "to read tomorrow."

On a separate note, I actually asked a few coworkers how they'd react if a person came to them with evidence that fairies exist. I asked them if they'd feel uncomfortable reviewing the "positive evidence." Every single coworker said, "No, I wouldn't feel uncomfortable." I then asked, "Why is that?" They each said (in essence), "Because I know fairies don't exist; that's silly!" They wouldn't experience cognitive dissonance unless they actually held the contradictory idea the evidence could possibly be valid. I then asked, "What if the evidence was very convincing and contained lots of empirically obtained data?" They reacted in an uncomfortable manner, and of course they did--it threatens their convictions fairies don't exist!

Now, if I forced my coworkers to evaluate the fairy evidence, they'd most likely experience cognitive dissonance, but in Blackmore's case, no one is forcing her to evaluate the evidence. She does it at her own free will. It's what she does all the time!

Try this experiment yourself.

In other words, people who experience cognitive dissonance when faced with psi-positive evidence most likely believe it's possible such evidence might be valid, which threatens their convictions that psi is false, and this creates discomfort and the resultant behavior. This also applies to believers as well: people who experience cognitive dissonance when faced with psi-negative evidence most likely believe it's possible such evidence might be valid, which threatens their convictions that psi is real, and this creates discomfort and the resultant behavior.

Got it?

The only thing you base your argument on is the presumption that Blackmore feels it's a waist of time to evaluate psi-positive evidence, which you have no evidence to support, and, rather, evidence to the contrary exists: http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/publicat.htm

Furthermore, let me clue you in as to why she feels this way. There are clues. These are her own words:

Susan Blackmore wrote:The other major challenge to the skeptic's position is, of course, the fact that opposing positive evidence exists in the parapsychological literature. I couldn't dismiss it all. This raises an interesting question: just how much weight can you or should you give the results of your own experiments over those of other people? On the one hand, your own should carry more weight, since you know exactly how they were done... On the other hand, science is necessarily a collective enterprise... So I couldn't use my own failures as justifiable evidence that psi does not exist. I had to consider everyone else's success.

I asked myself a thousand times, as I ask the reader now: is there a right conclusion?

The only answer I can give, after ten years of intensive research in parapsychology, is that I don't know.
(Blackmore, 1989a, p.74)


Don't you see how conflicted she is? It's no wonder she experiences cognitive dissonance!
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby quantumparanormal » 23 Sep 2009, 11:26

Oh, I forgot to add one more thing regarding the following analogy:

ciscop wrote:just like you will throw away a panflet of scientology or put it down
it doesnt mean you also THINK WE COME FROM XENU


Remember, with cognitive dissonance, you hold two contradictory ideas. Put another way, you keep the ideas for a certain period of time. You can't just take a pamphlet, realize you won't like it because it's about Scientology, throw it away or put it down, then say you've experienced cognitive dissonance. You've avoided the dissonance by immediately throwing away or putting down the pamphlet. You avoided holding the two contradictory ideas by dealing with it immediately. Because you didn't already hold the idea that Scientology might be possible (unlike with Blackmore) before taking the pamphlet, there was no dissonance before, during, nor after this event. In Blackmore's case, she either 1) already knew psi had positive support or 2) anticipated the evidence to be reviewed would be possibly valid, which is why she felt it would make her feel uncomfortable to have to review it. Hence, she puts it down for later, but the dissonance is already there. She hasn't gotten rid of it. She has yet to read the evidence, later.

Even if you did read the pamphlet, if you don't actually believe "WE COME FROM XENU," and the pamphlet in no way convinced you that we might, reading about it should not cause discomfort, should it? Reading it will not cause you to believe we do, right? No. Ahh, unless, of course, you begin to believe it might be possible! That's where the dissonance occurs.

So, in other words, Blackmore's case is NOT analogous to yours.
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby ciscop » 23 Sep 2009, 13:36

is getting really tiring this
the only thing we are doing is going in circles
i dont think you understand what cog. dissonance is and how people react to it
you think SHE HAS TO BELIEVE IN PSI which is not the case
she built a career in debunking parapsychologist experiments
and yes! she layed down the article to avoid cog. dissonance!
she has done tons of studies and found no evidence for psi
besides you are forgeting the article was from Helmid Schmidt who is a quack here is a link from diccionario para el esceptico
http://spanish.skepdic.com/adhoc.html.... ups i forgot you dont speak a 2nd language like me

and stop saying evidence for psi is overwhelming, you just sound like a radin puppet
go on and show that overwhelming psi evidence you keep mentioning that the CONSPIRACY OF EVIL SKEPTICS keep from the media and from getting mainstream in science... yep even radin states theres no many scientists studying those topics, could it be for the same reason we arent hunting fairies ?

GO ON ! and show us the overwhelming evidence for psi
are those the same that include uri geller or those that include the project alpha?

nah.. is better to diss about skeptics
like you try with wiseman and with blackmore

by the way, in case you havent noticed
is kind of funny the cog. dissonance happening between you and me
the irony.... :lol: :lol:
you are gonna keep saying she shouldnt experience cog. dissonance and i am going to keep saying that yes she should
and that doesnt mean she believes psi is for real.
go on and dissect this comment ill be waiting for your overwhelming psi evidence :lol:
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby quantumparanormal » 23 Sep 2009, 21:55

ciscop wrote:is getting really tiring this
the only thing we are doing is going in circles
i dont think you understand what cog. dissonance is and how people react to it
you think SHE HAS TO BELIEVE IN PSI which is not the case


You are going in circles because you refuse to accept the reality of what Blackmore feels when faced with psi-positive evidence.

Tell me this: Why else would she feel discomfort evaluating psi evidence? And don't say it's because it's a "waist of time." I've proven that argument is flawed.

Incorrect: it is you who do not understand what cognitive dissonance is in Blackmore's case, and that's obvious. You react with Uri Geller references and LOLs, a reaction to cognitive dissonance yourself.

Sorry, ciscop, but you are dead-wrong here, again.

Here's yet another clue she believes psi might be possible, which is WHY she experiences cognitive dissonance.

SB wrote:At last I've done it. I've thrown in the towel...

Come to think of it, I feel slightly sad. I was just over thirty years ago that I had the dramatic out-of-body experience that convinced me of the reality of psychic phenomena... Just a few years of careful experiments changed all of that. I found no psychic phenomena... I became a skeptic.

So why didn't I give up then? There are lots of bad reasons. Admitting you are wrong is always hard, even though it's a skill every scientist needs to learn. And starting again as a baby in a new field is a daunting prospect. So is losing all of the status and power of being an expert. I have to confess I enjoyed my hard-won knowledge.

... None of it ever gets anywhere. That's a good enough reason for leaving.

But perhaps the real reason is that I am just too tired--and tired above all of working to main an open mind. I couldn't dismiss all those extraordinary claims out of hand. After all, they just might be true, and if they were then swathes of science would have to be written. (Blackmore, 2000)


Now if only you would admit you're wrong, I wouldn't have to write such long posts. Unfortunately, your cognitive dissonance results in references to Uri Geller and LOLs.
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby quantumparanormal » 23 Sep 2009, 23:42

I'm going to write a separate topic that explains why ciscop is wrong in his assessment Blackmore's cognitive dissonance. It will be labeled 'Exposing a pseudo-skeptic's fallacies'.
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby ciscop » 24 Sep 2009, 00:11

quantumparanormal wrote:I'm going to write a separate topic that explains why ciscop is wrong in his assessment Blackmore's cognitive dissonance. It will be labeled 'Exposing a pseudo-skeptic's fallacies'.


go on :-D you are only showing yet AGAIN
and as i predicted (i must be PSYCHIC!)
that you cant show the overwhelming psi evidence
and your resource is to attack skeptics
im glad to join the ranks of wiseman and blackmore in your book :oops:
im glad you are dedicating all those 3 pages posts nobody cares to read :lol:

and the cog. dissonance is so huge in your part is gotta be some sort of dissorder
i call it ¨Radintitis¨.. it means people with the head so much into radin´s ass they cant see anything else

it doesnt matter how many times i repeat it
susan blackmore doesnt believe psi evidence is positive
you are forgeting where does the evidence came from... Schmidt is a guy that inspired Radin in his studies,
is the Father Quack if you wish.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

lil mickey.. Is awesome you have that much time available
do you work in telemarketing? haha (been there)
have a good time dissecting my comments
im sure that will help your cause
because if a skeptic is wrong, then woo is posible right? i love it hahahaha
Go On and Have Fun

oh by the way... in my book... you joined the ranks of Highflyer a mental patient, david mabus a christian nut and dave koenig a mediocre magician.. Well done!... hahahahahaha
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby quantumparanormal » 24 Sep 2009, 00:34

Thank you. You just gave me more ammunition to prove my point. Well done!
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby quantumparanormal » 24 Sep 2009, 00:35

ciscop wrote:go on :-D you are only showing yet AGAIN
and as i predicted (i must be PSYCHIC!)
that you cant show the overwhelming psi evidence
and your resource is to attack skeptics
im glad to join the ranks of wiseman and blackmore in your book :oops:
im glad you are dedicating all those 3 pages posts nobody cares to read :lol:

and the cog. dissonance is so huge in your part is gotta be some sort of dissorder
i call it ¨Radintitis¨.. it means people with the head so much into radin´s ass they cant see anything else

it doesnt matter how many times i repeat it
susan blackmore doesnt believe psi evidence is positive
you are forgeting where does the evidence came from... Schmidt is a guy that inspired Radin in his studies,
is the Father Quack if you wish.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

lil mickey.. Is awesome you have that much time available
do you work in telemarketing? haha (been there)
have a good time dissecting my comments
im sure that will help your cause
because if a skeptic is wrong, then woo is posible right? i love it hahahaha
Go On and Have Fun

oh by the way... in my book... you joined the ranks of Highflyer a mental patient, david mabus a christian nut and dave koenig a mediocre magician.. Well done!... hahahahahaha


Thank you. You just gave me more ammunition to prove my point. Well done!
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: Even the most notorious skeptics experience cog. dissonance

Postby ciscop » 24 Sep 2009, 00:57

no problem there
my slow learning disability friend
have fun!

:lol:
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Next

Return to PseudoSkeptic Fallacies

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest