My name is Sean Connelly, and I've gone by the pseudo-name Peebrain while on PsiPog.net. This blog was a running stream of my thoughts, beliefs, and experiences about PsiPog and psychic abilities in general.
I highly suspect this will be a long post on skepticism and how certain beliefs will affect our practice in psionics. I will try to keep it interesting .
It is healthy to be skeptical. I won't go into specifically why, but the basic idea is: not everything is true, there are crazy people out there, and overall it's just a good policy to not take someone's word for it. It's more effective to be intelligent and ask questions, to figure out exactly what's going on. This is skepticism - to postpone judgement until enough evidence is presented to prove either way, and then still be open for more evidence to make you reconsider your judgement.
This is healthy! This is good! A sharp and intelligent mind will make you more effective in discovering what things are legit, and what things are bullshit.
However, this skeptical mind can mutate a little bit and become a problem. Unhealthy root beliefs can exist that apply healthy skepticism in a bad manor. The major holes in skepticism are that: 1. we must judge how much evidence is needed to be convinced of something, and 2. when we are presented with more evidence, and decide to reconsider something, we are required to remember all the old evidence that first influenced our original decision.
It's good to need evidence, but how do you determine how much evidence is required? It's largely intuitive and subjective. For example, if you tell me that you have $100, I could require you to show me the contents of your wallet. Upon seeing the evidence of the money, I could then be convinced that your claim is accurate. This is reasonable.
What if you claim you have $1000? I could ask for evidence. And then you produce the cash in bill form. Now I am thinking: why on earth would you have $1000 cash just laying around? That is weird. And what is your motivation for convincing me you have $1000 cash? All of the sudden, the requirements for "enough evidence" has changed.
Now I have a whole lot of other questions that need to be satisfied before I would be willing to draw a conclusion. Perhaps you counterfeited the money? If that was the case, then your original claim would be false. However: it never really crossed my mind in the first example to demand proof that the $100 was counterfeit.
So, in this example we can see how the magnitude of the claim will make us require more evidence. Where does skepticism lead us astray though?
What if we go back to the original claim: you have $100. I ask for proof, and you present the $100 bill. Now I demand that the $100 might be counterfeit. So I demand a method by which you can prove the bill isn't counterfeit. Maybe I will check out this site from the Secret Service for instructions on how to determine if a bill is counterfeit. Suppose we go through every test on that page (which is about 8 pages of information), and I still demand more evidence. I demand that we must check the serial number to determine where the bill came from. If you pass that test, then I demand that we must perform chemical tests on the paper to see if we can find traces of counterfeit methods. I could even go so far as to demand that we check EVERY SINGLE $100 serial number to ensure that your $100 is unique.
This is just silly. Clearly, I am demanding way too much proof. Skepticism allows us the freedom to demand as much proof as we want, but there becomes a point where it is unreasonable. Where do you draw the line? Where do you say, "Ok, this is getting a little silly, don't you think?".
Where does this happen in psionics? I notice this phenomenon a lot, but the most obvious display is when you talk to people about the Media section at PsiPog.net. Some will be completely content with the amount of evidence provided, and conclude that it is "probably real". Others will demand some other form of proof. For example, the media section was created when people kept demanding that I make a video of me doing the psi wheel. I said, "Ok, sounds reasonable". So I made a video and put it online.
Now a video online can be easily faked in a million ways. Some skeptics came to me after that, and said that what I should really do was get a video of a psi wheel under a container.
So we did that.
Then the skeptics came back and said we should get a video that shows the inspection of the objects involved.
So we did that.
And when you ask around, you will STILL hear people complaining about how the media on psipog.net is bullshit and that it's "obviously fake", and other things like that.
Well, 1. the media on PsiPog.net is not meant as evidence to PROVE that psionics is real - because that is impossible to make. But more importantly: 2. as we presented evidence, more people would change their qualifications for what evidence they needed.
I.e., when we gave the skeptics what they wanted, they would change their demands. In their minds it was the same demand - the demand for evidence and proof. However, when they asked for something specific, and we provided it, they would backtrack and talk about how it really isn't proof and that we would have to do more to be convincing. If it wasn't really proof in the first place, then why did you demand it earlier?
This is an example of the "receding evidential horizon" (which you can read about here).
I swear to god, when you find that reason, I will rejoice and we will have a banquet in any state of your choosing on me.
I will ponder long and hard about this subject, thank you.
All Content, Images, Video, Text, and Software is © Copyright 2000-2006 PsiPog.net and their respective authors. All Rights Reserved.
You must agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy to view this website. Click here to contact the webmaster.