Discussions about Psychics and Psychic Phenomena, Extra Sensory Perception, Telepathy, Psi, Clairvoyancy, 6th Sense, Psychokinesis, etc.
I do think that the questions are slightly different, and this one seems to have arise from a prompt in any case. At any rate, thank you for bringing that up. I don't claim to be error free and if you find a clear factual error in my blog will correct it. I also try to remember to couch my statements with terms that aren't absolutist, but I don't always succeed. No one proofreads my blog posts for me and I don't always phrase things in exactly the right way.
I'm sure you noticed as well, that my blog is not written for skeptics . . . at all. My audience is psychic people and apparently a few people from the scientific parapsychology community as well. I make no attempt whatsoever to take skepticism into account.
A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are for.
Craig, I think I've posted this before, but I do try in general to avoid getting into personal convesations like what you are inviting here. they inevtiably accomplish little and result in hurt feelings. So yes, I haven't asked you why you think you're psychic. If you want to do an objective trial of some sort to demonstrate your abilities, I'd be up for that though.
Okay, it's all good.
And yes, when you have a special section for skeptics as to how they should behave as compared to others, then the way I interpret that is that you really aren't open to honest discussion on psi and only care about one side of the story. Which, if that's the way you want to be then more power to you, but it also lends me to believe that you aren't open to the possibility that there are other factors causing some of the psi results you have found with yourself and others. (Although, joining this forum may make my observation incorrect, but...)
I'm in total agreement with you that skeptics shouldn't call people "idiots" or other terms that you have forbidden us skeptics to say on your blog, but then again, shouldn't those rules apply to believers as well?
In general, psychic people and psi proponents don't need to be told. If they do engage in sniping, it's usually because they've been provoked. At least that's been my experience.
On my blog though, I want the psychic people to freely share whatever comes to mind and they won't do that if they think skeptics will comment on it. That's why most of my blog posts are off limits to skeptics altogether. On the parapsychology stuff, I just want to keep away the skeptic crusaders, otherwise I'm open and I've had a couple errors pointed out by skeptics.
Certainly as a psychic person I'm not going to be open to the possibility that psi doesn't exist or that I am somehow deluded or bad with probabilities or any of the strictly materialist psychological explanations. They don't feel right to me and my experience tells me otherwise. So I think that there is a lot of truth to your impressions.
I am definitely open to physics explanations of psi. I think the electromagnetic spectrum has a lot to do with it. My take on it is that psi has natural causes that are explainable with current physics if you accept the evidence for consciousness in physics.
One of the major hurdles in my opinion is that the people who are good at psi are so wildly different in their personalities and their thinking in general that many scientists have a hard time relating to them and understanding why they act so strange. Scientists are more comfortable with logical, rational thought and it works for them and the way they run their lives. Rationality is comfortable for them. Feeling based people though, including psychics, do not rely on rationality, they rely on feelings to make the important decisions in their lives. And they're good at it. It works for them because how you feel about something can be very important information. Part of this though is that they do not rely on rational thought and are often illogical and irrational. Yet these people often function as well as or even better in their lives than scientists.
A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are for.
How dogmatic of you. . . not to mention "unfair".
You are admitting in that line I underlined that you WONT consider alternative views but yet you expect others to have empathy and considerations for your own. In reading that whole paragraph I found a person that "has to" believe; not so much due to their own experiences and all the cash they've put out over the years studying things, but a psychological dependence that reads in this case, as desperate.
This single paragraph contradicts a whole lot of what you typically state, Craig. I gave you a lot more credit than that.
REMEMBER: I'm not just a believer I'm a professional Psychic & Metaphysical Counselor/Teacher. I'm likewise tied to a very long family history when it comes to spiritual work so I have a hell of a lot at stake when I speak up, encouraging those that think they are psychic to reconsider their position and vice-versa, encouraging skeptics to put on a pair of our shoes for a while. YOU CANNOT "KNOW" SOMETHING AS "FACT" until you have studied it from all sides. . . YOU HAVE SAID AS MUCH IN YOUR OWN POSTS and yet, you are contradicting that wisdom in this single paragraph.
When I speak to Pagan groups I challenge them in a very point blank manner by asking them what it means, "The Way of the Wise"?
Those Wise One's of old weren't superstitious idiots they were educated in how nature worked; their "Magick" was based on nature and the essence found in specific plants, minerals and even animals. In its own way and for the era, it was "Science" and not some kind of fantasiful adventure; and we're talking about "low" magick in this case. Even in more recent times (the past couple centuries) you had your regional mystics; spiritual people that were Seers, Healers and Teachers sat in very rural/rustic communities. Many of these people were Midwives and Dowsers and most of them used biblical elements as part of the work they did with folks. While they may not have fully understood the analytical or scholastic perspective on what they did, they did recognize a good deal of it from a more carnal point of view. . . or at least that was the case in my family and most other "hillbilly" and even Gypsy elements I've known over the years.
To be a "Wise One" means to be open and willing to not just learn but see and willing to accept new points of view so as to balance one's perspectives in life and on life. To refuse to do such things brings on stiffness and dogmacy and as such falseness -- an incomplete perspective.
My goal is not to convert you or anyone, just to help people open their eyes and their mind a bit for the sake of making WISE choices -- decisions based on direct knowledge and personal investment (not just study but literally getting into the trenches so as to absorb the knowledge in ways outside the analytical). Any person claiming faith in something; sincere belief that's undeniable, shouldn't have a problem enduring such an experience and would accept up front that the encounter might very well embellish their belief and understanding. Put another way, if "God" is infinite and "ALL" then who are we to limit it by way of our arrogance? If it is "ALL" . . . if the Universal Mind is infinite, then aren't we, as believers, obliged to learn all that we can of it and from it -- all that it offers to us?
Just some things to think about. Again, I mean no insult to you that's never been any remote part of what I've shared. I'm just trying to help someone who is stuck -- entrenched -- in a very limiting state of mind to take a deep breath and become willing to be willing to once again step back onto the path of discovery and personal growth.
I considered the question carefully and answered truthfully. I would consider it a lack of respect to do otherwise.
Since I have personally experienced psychic ability my whole life, I see no need to question its existence.
A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are for.
Amongst others Edgar Cayce points out that being psychic starts with an expansion of natural consciousness -- an awareness of your surroundings at the finest, most minute level of detail alongside the ability to recollect that information. Mnemonicist Harry Loraine echoes a similar point in THE MEMORY BOOK when pointing out how those with heightened recall are often accused of being "Psychic". We find similar examples in the law enforcement, investment and other arenas in which awareness or "sensitivity" to both, the thing of focus and one's surrounding hosts a magical/mystical feel to it. As I've shared before, this IS what it means to be a "Psychic" in the most common sense of perspective; what would be better defined as a "Diviner" or "Reader" but only to a point. There is a threshold or condition that exists in which all these skill factors is or becomes "natural" -- intuitive -- while everyone is born with a degree of this innate factor, not everyone has a natural penchant in connecting to it let alone understanding it.
Skeptics love to question/doubt "Intuition" because it's non-tangible and can't be touched, smelled, or sustain through countless redundancies of trail and effort. Yet, many in the skeptic's community are more amicable towards it because it isn't a full of boogiemen and whispering dead people as other modes of Psychic things tend to get. Thing is, I know of few that don't get "gut feelings" or "a hunch" about people, places & things throughout life and even they have to admit that there are some "maybe" scenarios to think on.
Knowing how the "trick' works does not mean it's "fake" or even "fraud", only that you know the mechanics behind the effect and why it creates the affect it has on people. I can show you two dozen ways of floating someone in the air but that will not prevent you from being mesmerized by the illusion when staged and presented properly (and besides that, there's more than 100 other methods out there you won't know about ). Context is another factor that cynics detest, forgetting the fact that the Magick of our ancestors IS the science of our present; on that point alone understanding the observational elements in context, sustains the claim of one being "Psychic" or "Sensitive" at least on the mundane level.
When it comes to other psychic abilities like Clairvoyance, Mediumship, etc. the jury is still out for me. I've had experiences in several such areas that I've openly shared about here and elsewhere, based on those experiences I honestly can't imagine why anyone would want to commune with the dead on a regularly basis -- it's just creepy and when you are able to help others. The Clairvoyant/Astral Projection side of things I've had a life-time's worth of experiences in and yet, I can't define it. On one level I have to look at it from a psychological dream analysis perspective seeing more akin to "Mental Projection" and in part, how my own subconscious helps make me consciously aware of things (because of all the subliminal data collected in the course of a day or week). But then we have situations such as on-going dreams and shamanic visions that go on for months with growing intensity that are in common with other members of the Psychic/Spiritual Community, each having the same feelings of impending doom or whatever. Such things can't be ignored but because they are so fantastic skeptics will demean both, the claim of the vision (precognition) and all the evidence sat around in that it does not fit their black & white idea of life.
Anyone with the guts to actually do as I've encouraged several times now, to set their preconceived "pragmatism" on a shelf for the next year and work with the book "Wisdom of the Mystic Masters" for one year, exactly as it is outlined. Digest that text and the results you get from an honest "personal" perspective, and then tell me there's nothing to it with a straight face. Tell me that you did not have experiences, insights and even "blessings" that went outside the carnal realm of understanding and explanation.
I think it is ProfWag, if you mislead that the information you gain is from other sources when it is from your eyes yes. And I am a 'believer' as you would term it. I firmly believe all psychic work should be done blind for this reason.
"I am definitely open to physics explanations of psi. I think the electromagnetic spectrum has a lot to do with it."
Craig that's unlikely or the would be zero effect in EM sheilded rooms.
Then if all psychic work was done blind, how successful would they be? Would psychic abilities be as popular if every neighborhood psychic was operated like a confessional booth?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests