Woo or not?

[babbityann]

Hello, I am new to Mumsnet. I would like to start a discussion on Clairvoyants, psychics, etc. Am I being AUBU to think that they are all charlatans just taking troubled people's money?

Capsium That is total tripe and you have (deliberately?) misunderstood that dictionary definition.

It does not mean "something that cannot currently be understood by science", it means, "beyond the realms of scientific investigation".

Science investigates reality - the reality of the natural world. Anything that manifests within the natural world (universe) would be a natural event and open to scientific investigation. Therefore...not supernatural.

Science CANNOT investigate the supernatural, because the supernatural would not leave a natural world train of evidence to investigate.

In other words.....there is NO EVIDENCE for this supernatural codswallop that you have chosen to believe, therefore science cannot investigate it.

And with regard to the OP....there are three types of "psychics" - con artists, the mentally ill and the silly, deluded ones who kid themselves as much as others.

It is bullshit - and we are a very odd species indeed when you consider that anyone still believes this rubbish given the remarkable strides science has made in the last few hundred years.

"Oh, but we don't know everything" is a cop out. We know enough to be certain that "spirits" are not talking to a select few - and anyone who doesn't know that has gaps in their education that need to be dealt with.

And WHY is is largely women that believe this shit? It's embarrassing.

Caffe Back I do believe some things are beyond the realms of scientific investigation.

In mine and many other's experience, the more that is learnt, the more you realise how much is not yet understood. The evidence of the past (how many years is it?) would suggest this, there is still much that is not understood. Whilst there is still lack of knowledge, there is still mystery - the supernatural.

Science investigates reality - the reality of the natural world. Anything that manifests within the natural world (universe) would be a natural event and open to scientific investigation. Therefore...not supernatural.

Splitting hairs here. I believe supernatural events can occur within the natural world. Hence they can be part of reality. However upon manifestation the supernatural phenomenon becomes physical spontaneously. The supernatural bit is the pre existent / pre physical state - which some people may be able to detect.

Duh....any event that occurs in the NATURAL world cannot be regarded as SUPERNATURAL.

And, really, who cares what you believe other than you?

Evidence, or it didn't happen.

Duh....any event that occurs in the NATURAL world cannot be regarded as SUPERNATURAL.

And, really, who cares what you believe other than you?

If I can regard it as supernatural Caffe, it is possible to regard it as supernatural. To illustrate, a spirit could be considered as a supernatural agent causing physical manifestations to occur through interacting with physical matter. Cause is supernatural, product is physical.

As for who cares about what I believe, who cares about what anyone believes? People do, hence this thread, which I have as much right to contribute to as anyone.

And I view it a matter of courtesy to state my beliefs as beliefs and not fact ( as some would)...

So, you get to make up your own personal definition of words and other people are supposed to take you seriously?

Give over...that is ridiculous.

If I believe that a sheep is a cow in a wooly coat, therefore it is possible to believe that a sheep is a cow in a wooly coat?

Certainly possible...but wrong.

You are wrong. You don't understand the definition or the real world implications of the word "supernatural".

Oh, and a "spirit" cannot be considered to be anything until you prove that any such thing exists. Can you?

Nope.

Caffe I don't need to prove anything. Consider the point I was making concerning how a spirit could act as hyperthetical, a thought experiment, if you like. It works.

I don't need to make my own definitions of words up either. My understanding fits current definitions.

Capsium has the right to believe in anything she likes and that has frigg all to do with anybody else, equally she has right to express said beliefs without ridicule!

And you know very little about me and what I might understand Caffe...

Thank you Balls.

Capsium. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Sadly for you, there is scant scientific evidence for psychic abilities.
Balls, capium has the absolute right to believe what she does and others have the absolute right to find it to be ridiculous!

Ladystinky - Yes, of course they do, but do they really HAVE to express said ridicule in such an unnecessary manner?

I only claim a belief concerning what might be possible Lady. Not really that extraordinary. Many people have similar beliefs. No evidence is needed in order to state a belief.

Yes I agree capsium, having 'belief' is the same as having 'faith' no evidence necessary to have faith, this is the whole point in having faith!

Just because many people hold the same beliefs, it doesn't make it to be true.
And as regards to faith and belief, then yes no evidence is required. However that seems a very strange way to go through life to me. To not require any proof and not to enquire further.
There's not a lot of evidence in favour of psychic ability and a massive amount of scientific evidence against it.
Watch Derren Brown he would be able to demonstrate that he is able to do what these "mediums" do - and better! He doesn't claim to hold any psychic gift and ability to communicate with the dead and people who do, in my opinion are fraudsters, feeding off the vulnerable and misinformed.

Lady I never said believing something does make it true.

I also believe there are fraudsters out there and attempting to communicate with the dead is not necessarily a good thing, it could actually be very harmful IMO, to the emotional health, if nothing else.

However I do have spiritual beliefs, I am a Christian. I also believe we do not know the limit of what can be perceived by people, at all. I talked about chemical communication between plants (some would consider this languages), a dog's sense of smell, people's varying perceptions including marked cultural differences and people with altered auditory visual perception (people seeing sounds in colours) earlier just to highlight how amazing perception and the world around us can be. In this context, some kind of psychic ability would not seem that extraordinary to me.

By the same token, millions the globe over believe in 'God' or some other spiritual entity of their choice without proof of their existence, therefore, just because you don't, you surely can appreciate their right to do so without any actual evidence forthcoming.

I just don't find it appropriate to ridicule a person's spiritual beliefs, they are as entitled to theirs as you are entitled to your own beliefs (or none) so go ahead and ridicule all the billions of people across the globe for having a different opinion to your own if you will, but personally I find that disrespectful.

Well said capsium, we crossed posts!

Balls

Capsium...and anyone else....has absolutely every right to believe whatever fatuous nonsense makes her happy.

If you don't mind, I have an EQUAL belief to express my disdain in a public forum.

No, having "belief" is not even the slightest bit the same as having "faith".

Rational people base belief on evidence. When you have no evidence, and can offer no sensible justification for what you have chosen to believe then out comes "faith".

Faith = an insult to human intelligence and dignity. Not a notion that requires any respect from me.

And Capsium call me presumptuous, but I don't believe you have super powers that allow you access to secrets of the universe that are not available to every other mind on the planet....including scientists.

And that, in a nutshell, is what you and every woo-raddled person is actually saying.

Of course it's nonsense, OP. But complicated nonsense in that people who see a 'psychic' repeatedly unconsciously exaggerate the 'correct' guesses and minimise or ignore the incorrect ones. My mother, who is a gentle, credulous person, talked for my entire childhood about the astonishingly accurate reading she'd had from a locally famous 'white witch' when she was pregnant with me.

Almost 30 years later, we found a transcript of the reading that my aunt, who sat in, had taken down, at the bottom of an old handbag, and the 'correct' elements were massively outnumbered by generalisations, guesswork and completely wrong statements. My mother's (and my aunt's) recollection of the reading had clearly borne little relationship to what had actually been said.

Caffe - well when it comes to the right to express disdain - I think you will find that works both ways, you have disdain for anybody who has faith, I have disdain for anybody showing such disrespect to people of faith in general and am expressing such!

I speak as someone with no particular religious persuasion myself! Just as someone with common decency!

Capsium I am very interested in what you are saying and plan to research the things you have mentioned about extra sensory perception. You are very inspiring and I wish to explore this subject further!

I have just caught up with this thread (having been away all day) and it's both interesting and a comfort. The link on 'Cold Reading' says it all really and I have sent it on to my bereaved friend. Thank you for all your replies.