ESP

[conor147]

im on a forum and theyre talking about ESP. its annoying me.

i said this

"im yet to experience anything that i can attribute to the supernatural, but even if i do one day, and i dont understand the natural means by which it can be explained, that doesnt mean i can discount the possibility of it being perfectly natural. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_Personal_Incredulity

the james randi 1 million dollars is not yet claimed because nothing supernatural has ever been proven to be real. this is because all supernatural claims so far have been subjective, anecdotal experiences. none are concordant or can be tested. even if they are real, there is no way to distinguish them from hallucinations, confabulations, paredolia or apophenia etc, so why treat them any differently?

just in case, the best weapon for fending off ghosts, spirits, ghouls and demons is the mighty camera. "


he said this

"In my case it was just two events, a few months apart, almost fifty years ago. How in the heck are you going to test that? Yet I'm a certain of what happened as I am certain that I'm sitting here typing right now. Also, I don't really lump E.S.P. in the same category as some other "supernatural" events. In Russia ESP is taken very seriously and the government has invested heavily in it. ESP is a particular realm of science that isn't understood yet. Maybe not in my lifetime, but I'm quite certain that events like the ones I described will eventually be considered if not commonplace, at least factual. I'm skeptical but keep an opened mind about most things. ESP is something that I have direct, first hand experience with. "

i want to pwn him using logic and reason, and maybe start a thread on here about ESP.

 

[MRaverz]

Urgh, sceptical and open minded? You can't be sceptical without being open minded!

I have a feeling that this person is mistaking 'gullible' with 'open minded'.


Oh and to his example. Does he argue that because he feels it, it must be true? If so, when he's feeling dizzy - he must think that he is actually spinning when he is not.

 

[conor147]

responded with this. i think i did quite well. the guy is an admin, so i dont want to make him mad

"skeptical but keep an opened mind? hmm, thats a bit of a tautology. one cant be skeptical without also being open minded.

and i dont doubt your sincerity, but im saying that something that is not real can seem as real as anything, yet not be real. objective reality is extrinsically independant of anything subjectively experienced. you could argue that because you feel it, that makes it true. but if you are dizzy and feel like you are spinning, are you? surely you have to draw the line somewhere. personally, i draw the line at the burden of proof/ evidence threshold, and so far all the money poured into ESP research has returned nothing. all tests so far are indistinguishable from the control. thats probably why all funding has been pulled and why james randis challenge stands as an enduring symbol of the consistency of skepticism. and esp isnt science, it makes no predictions that are reproducible and useful and is currently just pure subjective bias, which is the bane of science.

im reminded of this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEUFekGFsl0"

 

[lrkun]

im on a forum and theyre talking about ESP. its annoying me.

i said this

"im yet to experience anything that i can attribute to the supernatural, but even if i do one day, and i dont understand the natural means by which it can be explained, that doesnt mean i can discount the possibility of it being perfectly natural. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_Personal_Incredulity

the james randi 1 million dollars is not yet claimed because nothing supernatural has ever been proven to be real. this is because all supernatural claims so far have been subjective, anecdotal experiences. none are concordant or can be tested. even if they are real, there is no way to distinguish them from hallucinations, confabulations, paredolia or apophenia etc, so why treat them any differently?

just in case, the best weapon for fending off ghosts, spirits, ghouls and demons is the mighty camera. "


he said this

"In my case it was just two events, a few months apart, almost fifty years ago. How in the heck are you going to test that? Yet I'm a certain of what happened as I am certain that I'm sitting here typing right now. Also, I don't really lump E.S.P. in the same category as some other "supernatural" events. In Russia ESP is taken very seriously and the government has invested heavily in it. ESP is a particular realm of science that isn't understood yet. Maybe not in my lifetime, but I'm quite certain that events like the ones I described will eventually be considered if not commonplace, at least factual. I'm skeptical but keep an opened mind about most things. ESP is something that I have direct, first hand experience with. "

i want to pwn him using logic and reason, and maybe start a thread on here about ESP.

Ask him to demonstrate his claim. That's the logical thing to do. If he can, then ESP exists. If no, then he's lying.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

Well aside from the Russians being well known to have funded research into quite a lot of ludicrous things (see Lysenko's biology), I don't really know what to add to this.

I suppose there are quite a lot of things that used to qualify as 'supernatural' or some similar moniker that are, in fact, quite mundane. I know I've mentioned it before on these forums but I can - with some effort - cause myself to knowingly hallucinate using a form of meditation (which also produces a mild euphoria.) Surely such a technique, in even relatively recent history, would have been thought of as a strong indicator of spiritual ability or somesuch, and I can just imagine gurus making a lot of money teaching this 'secret' to gullible laymen. Of course, modern neurology has pretty much confirmed that it's just a method of overstimulating one area of the brain, with a corresponding dopamine spike.

 

[Commander Eagle]

the james randi 1 million dollars is not yet claimed because nothing supernatural has ever been proven to be real. this is because all supernatural claims so far have been subjective, anecdotal experiences. none are concordant or can be tested.

He's either incredibly ignorant or lying through his teeth. The Million-Dollar Challenge has been accepted many times. So far, no one has made it past the preliminary testing stage. This isn't because their claims cannot be tested. The applicants themselves come up with the tests. It's that they failed their tests.

even if they are real, there is no way to distinguish them from hallucinations, confabulations, paredolia or apophenia etc

Incredibly stupid and obviously false. If you can read minds, it's incredibly easy to distinguish the real thing from a delusion of mind-reading capability.

"In my case it was just two events, a few months apart, almost fifty years ago. How in the heck are you going to test that?

Why do you need to?

Yet I'm a certain of what happened as I am certain that I'm sitting here typing right now.

That doesn't make it true. His certainty or lack thereof is completely irrelevant to whether or not his experiences are actually evidence of ESP.

Also, I don't really lump E.S.P. in the same category as some other "supernatural" events. In Russia ESP is taken very seriously and the government has invested heavily in it.

So? Doesn't make it true. The U.S. government had several programs about ESP. They all failed to give results. So did the Russians'.

ESP is a particular realm of science

No, it isn't.

that isn't understood yet. Maybe not in my lifetime, but I'm quite certain that events like the ones I described will eventually be considered if not commonplace, at least factual.

All of which is irrelevant, since he has no proof that this is actually what will happen.

 

[Andiferous]

Moving this to the appropriate forum.

 

[nemesiss]

ESP is a particular realm of science

No, it isn't.

actually yes... it is.
it's called Pseudo-science, with also has tea-reading, magic potions and Intelligent Design.

 

[Commander Eagle]

No, it isn't.

actually yes... it is.
it's called Pseudo-science, with also has tea-reading, magic potions and Intelligent Design.

I personally don't consider pseudo-science "science". Hence the reason we affix it with "pseudo-" rather than simply calling it "science".

But whatever. Just depends on how you define pseudo-science, I guess.

 

[Andiferous]

I perhaps was wrong in the move by implication, but I consider pseudoscience controversial and unproven areas that are not really philosophy, but have neither passed the tests of science. In other words, it was not meant as a statement or judgement call. Actually, I'm not sure about the forum title myself...

 

[Yfelsung]

Until something can be replicated or observed in a laboratory setting, it can not be held as 100% true. If he doesn't understand this, he's not worth conversing with.

Choose your battles, allow the ignorant to wallow in ignorance.

 

[ArthurWilborn]

I've seen others who claim that ESP is difficult to verify because it happens so uncommonly. My question for them is; why do you want to court a power that even you claim is weak and situational?

 

[Mapp]

If he's "certain" about isolated events that happened years ago, that he can not test, and that he has nothing to rely on but memory, then he is neither being skeptical nor open minded. That kind of certainty is closed-minded and dogmatic, he's making an assertion. You might want to start by directing him to QualiaSoup's excellent video about open-mindedness: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI.

 

[Deleted member 619]

actually yes... it is.
it's called Pseudo-science, with also has tea-reading, magic potions and Intelligent Design.

Actually, no. The prefix 'pseudo' means fake, as in 'not'. Pseudoscience is most definitely not science. It may sometimes look like it, but it isn't.

 

[Prolescum]

I love how humour rarely works when people take themselves too seriously.

 

[QuantumOverlord]

LOL ESP

what does that stand for? Extremely stupid piffle?

 

[Squawk]

Until something can be replicated or observed in a laboratory setting, it can not be held as 100% true.

And once you've demonstrated it in a lab, it's still not 100% true. It's simply supported by evidence (or more appropriately, not falsified by evidence).

I think a little bit of Feynman is required




Damnit, this was part 1 of two parts, the second part is the one in which he discusses not being correct, just not yet wrong, and I can't find it. Pah.

##edit

Aha, found it, both rolled into one here


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMiQUStPvNA&feature=more_related

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I like to mention optical illusions: you absolutely have an experience, and your senses are fooled about what you are actually experiencing. We know for a fact that people can be both completely honest and completely wrong. Without corroborating evidence, the question I always have is why should anyone else take someone's past subjective experience seriously?

 

[CosmicJoghurt]

You know, in Soviet Russia, ... damn, can't think of a good Russian reversal... so I'll leave you with this.

 

[RigelKentaurusA]

LOL ESP

what does that stand for? Extremely stupid piffle?

Extrasensory perception. Perceiving things through means other than the senses.