THE TRUTH!
Allowing for any obvious religious connotations that might arrise by using such an ostentatious title as “The Truth!,” I would like to take this opportunity to officially announce my new promo video. The title was chosen to both entice and inveigle. I need to lure the attention of as many people as I possibly can! With a title like “The Truth!,” how can I go wrong? I finally sat down and managed to cull together a cogent collection of video clips with the avowed intention to once and for all dispell which side of the psychic/skeptic fence I’m speaking from. I’m happy to report this eight minute – fifty five second piece says it all…
I’m posting my announcement here because, 1) Hey, if I can’t self publicize myself here at Skepticblog, where can I do it? 2) I know there has been a lot of criticism here and elsewhere of my checkered past. It’s time to clear the air. It took months to collect the best television bits, news clips and guest spots I had amassed over the past fifteen or so years. Not that I’m some kind of psychic super-star of any stripe mind you. Far from it. I’m not. Believe me when I say I had to fight hard to get any of that work. Try working as a “professional psychic medium” in Hollywood for a few years and you’ll see what I mean. On second thought, don’t bother. It’s not terribly rewarding.
It was revealing when I actually took the time to review and mentally edit the programs I had appeared on with a now much more more critical eye. I definitely “pitched some woo” back in my early magician/mentalist days. That was what was expected of me. There were shows like the Sci-Fi Channel’s “Mysteries, Magic and Miracles,” and “Mysterious Forces Beyond ” where I really pushed the believer envelope by performing “miracles,” ballyhooing seances and selling that image. No excuses. I played that role and was paid for it. I can understand how if any skpetical folks saw the “Mysteries” episode, (hosted by Patrick MacNee of “The Avengers” fame …my hero) they might take a dim view of my involvement in anything skeptical.
There were other medium character roles and bit parts too. Back then in the larval days of paranormal programming, no one ever questioned whether I was real or not. They wanted what I was performing at the time to sell their program. Again, this is not meant as an excuse for what I did, just a grim reality of what I was dealing with. The producers and writers of those early shows could care a fig about how the trick was done, who might believe or who was getting conned. They wanted shock value and I gave it to them. The infomercial I did for “The Psychic Revival Network” with Nell Carter and Eric Estrada was a foray into the darkest underbelly of exploited woo and caused a huge uproar with both magicians at The Magic Castle and the head honchos at The Skeptical Inquirer. It was a time when both sides wanted nothing to do with me and is detailed in my book “Psychic Blues” …hence the title.
Still, that bittersweet experience allowed me to learn firsthand the tricks of the infomercial trade close-up and personal. Perhaps a bit too close-up and personal for some people! Convincing the real world psychic market that I was the best they were going to find while remaining skeptical was an arduous but exhilarating experience. I walked both sides of the street and learned a hell of a lot. There was no way I could have gotten that kind of “on the job” education at a Skeptic’s Toolbox. I climbed to the top of the dung heap, took a look around and came running back down the mountain with my tail between my legs. You won’t see any of that crap on “The Truth!,” but I mention this period only to underscore the fact that scaling that mountain gave me the confidence to know that anybody who really wanted to could become the World’s Greatest Psychic if they had enough chutzpah, no conscience whatsoever and the evil mind necessary to con a nation of the bereaved and the horribly gullible. I moved on rather quickly after that experience.
The two episodes I did of “Exploring the Unknown;” one on “psychic readings” and the other on seances were both excellent barometers of where I was heading back then. Working skeptically with the producer of that series; Star Price, gave me the creds that paved the way for my break on “Bullshit.” Thanks Star, wherever you are.
Penn Jillette’s introduction to my work on the premiere episode of “Bullshit: Talking to the Dead” where he labeled me a “reformed con artist” smarted a little when I first heard it, but over the years I have grown to accept that was pretty much what I was in the eyes of serious skeptical people like Randi, Shermer and Andrus. The work I did with the line producer on “Bullshit” still stands as the single most important piece of video I have to date. On that show, all the training and work I had done in the past as a magician, mentalist and medium (in that order) were finally put to the right use I was always aiming for. Seeing how that show was skillfully edited to expose a fake medium of the worst order was one of the most totally satisfying show-biz experiences of my life.
It’s been a long and winding road. Since I first started doing mentalism and seance work, I have always held a skeptical view. How could I not have been skeptical? After all, I’m a magician. It’s all a trick! The financial inducements offered from the Other Side were always a mighty tempting piece of low hanging fruit to avoid. It’s sad, but there’s not much money in telling the truth.
At least not yet anyway.
Imagine what would happen if someone like John Edward decided to come clean? Wheww. Now that would be worth watching, wouldn’t it? Don’t hold your breath. Sometimes I walk down the street and look at all the stupidity, corruption, criminality, dishonesty and waste and just wonder if putting myself out there is really worth all the hassle and trouble. As critical thinkers, are we thought of as dangerous intellectuals in a society where thinking rationally seems to be avoided at all costs and brains have atrophied? We are often targets for ridicule and mockery. Why not just sit back and let the idiots who so clearly outnumber us fight it out amongst themselves and just accept that this is the way it’s going to be?
Nope, I can’t do that! If I have to shout from the rooftops and end up in a detention camp behind barbed-wire one day – so be it!
“The Truth!” tells it like it has always been deep down in my heart of hearts. It is the truth as I have come to know it.
My talented sixteen year old son Miles Wilson did a really marvelous job editing together all the pieces to under 8:55 to get in the Youtube restriction of nine minutes. Thanks again Miles. I’m very proud of this kid of mine. He’s going places. His choice of color schemes and music cues hits just the right notes. There could have been much more, but Miles instinctively knew what to put in and what to leave out. It was a great bonding experience for the both of us. If he harbored any doubts about where his father is coming from, what I stand for and what I have been trying to say for the last twenty years, those thoughts are now forever banished.
I hope that everyone who goes to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asA2jqmPgVY will feel the same way after seeing “The Truth!”
* Road signs from Karl-Eic Tallmo’s “American Road Signs” Gallery Bibb, Stockholm 1-7 Sept. ’07
First!
That was a lot of build up for a bad URL =[
Yeah well, I guess we just can’t handle the truth.. ;)
Here we go:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asA2jqmPgVY
So you’re aware, the link to the video doesn’t work.
This has the tone that while others might have seen you as a con artist, you still don’t see it that way yourself. I find that interesting. By your own admission, you led people to believe that you genuinely did have “psychic” abilities when you didn’t, and you profited from that deception. I don’t know what to say, man. You were a con artist. I’m glad you aren’t anymore, though.
I have to say I agree with this sentiment.
Most of the hard feelings toward him seems to be the scamming part,not the fact that he was involved in woo.
I liked the article,but I think he should have had more of a sympathetic tone towards the people he conned.Don’t get me wrong:I really like the man and don’t think he should go around with this “I’m reformed now,please forgive me.” attitude but the hard truth is that many people fell for his tricks and while I have no reservations about him currently,he should realize how long we had to put up with Bad Edward.
On the other hand,we skeptics could do with a little forgiveness and just be grateful he’s helping us now.
P.S. Apologies for any spelling or grammar errors,which I’m sure are myriad.I’m writing all this on about 5 hours sleep.
My wife got her PhD in education by looking at response latency in analyzing performance in computer assisted instruction. One interesting thing one could do with a detailed response latency analysis is determine informational structures that no one talked about.
An example.
Say I asked you if a bird had wings. You might say yes in 100 milliseconds.
I then asked you if a bird flew. You then say yes in 100 milliseconds.
I then asked you if a bird had skin. You say, yes, but this time it takes you 200 milliseconds.
Now, response latency might be explained by the informational structure in your head. You might think something like, well a bird is an animal, and an animal has skin, so yes.
I asked you a question that made you think about the concept ‘animal’ but I didn’t ask about animal per se.
In fact, each question can be considered a vector in a state space that creates a CAT-scan type image of the ideas in your head. Even ideas we don’t talk about, but you think about privately.
Even if you answer untruthfully.
Now, magic operates by mis-direction. If I can get you thinking you are witholding information from me, and I ca guess about a thing you DIDN’T EVEN TALK ABOUT – its fairly easy to covince you that I have access to information by some technique unknown to you (I do, I just explained how it works)
So, the power of this technique when fully developed can be seen by noting a person listening to two people talking – both lying through their teeth – can reveal information neither of them spoke of.
Now, someone who develops this technique as a native skill, without state space diagrams and modern computational machinery, might concieve of themselves as being special. In fact, they may relate to the skill in a certain way. At this naive level they may be totally honest, and totally capable – at an interpersonal level.
Also, people who suffer significant loss in their lives have natural needs, emotional needs. Sometimes it is hard for them to express those needs. Interacting with someone who is able to get ‘below the surface’ of the mental processes of a person’s day to day mundane thought process – and release buried emotions and ideas – can actually be useful. Again, in an earlier age, one can imagine this sort of process being of benefit – and leading to legend.
Where we fail is attempting to use science inappropriately to understand this naive process in ‘scientific’ terms. We cannot help but create bullshit in that process.
We also fail when we use these capacities and needs (I wouldn’t call them weaknesses, I would call them vulnerabilities) for commercial or political exploitation.
At root these are very powerful psychological processes that have the potential to help people on a personal level. This doesn’t mean we should tolerate their misuse for exploitation any more than we might tolerate the use of psychoactive drugs by capable doctors for amusement or as part of making investment decisions or political decisions for example. A Dr. Feelgood who distributed XTC to folks at a political rally in order to garner votes, or collect investment dollars would not be tolerated. Why do we tolerate specialists who are good at this particular bag of tricks to push vulnerable people’s buttons? Only because we don’t understand the process that well, and we’re still learning the tricks of the trade – and most of all lack the human compassion to always do the right thing. That’s a biggie. But we’re learning – and videos like THE TRUTH are a step in the right direction.
When a person we love dies they are still with us in our memories. The *idea* of that person lives on. So, certainly they live on after death – as an idea. No one would disagree with this.
When we love someone there may also be emotional baggage attached to that person for us. Unfinished business that can only be finished by dealing with the ideas that survive, since the person is no longer here in mundane reality, this forces us to deal with the ideas in our mental or emotional reality.
Realists, or rather those who fear feelings or for some other reason approach emotional reality with caution or at a naive level, do not get that this can be a very important satisfying and meaningful process.
Idealists, optimists, romantics and other assorted dreamers don’t get that at the emotional level, ideas are enough to sustain the meaning you seek.
On this ground, both groups can move from a naive argument over whether Santa or God or the Soul exists, and enjoy the Spirit of giving and joy, the growth possible through Faith, and the knowledge that those who have gone before live on in our memories, and that is enough.
Sorry for that,that was the time in all my interweeble history I’ve had a chance to do that ;)
But in all seriousness this article was exceptional.When I read my first post of Mr. Edwards’s about a week ago I thought the name sounded familiar but could’nt quite place it.After reading this I instantly remembered:he was quite psychic big-shot in my younger years and I heard of him quite often on television and later on that episode of Bullsh*t!.
Anyway,as someone who has read your articles (temporarily) unaware of your “checkered past”,I can say that it is very clear to me where you stand and I think that having someone like you to tell their story is a wonderful asset to the skeptical movement.
Mr. Edwards,you are one of us and we’re glad to have you,history or not. =)
Should’ve said “first time” in that first paragraph.
I think you may be missing a letter in that URL to your video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asA2jqmPgVY seemed to work for me. (Note the “s” after the first “a” in the video ID.)
Here’s the corrected URL for the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asA2jqmPgVY
Oh.. I’m somewhat disappointed.. at 6:20 in the video the Mark Edward utters the following the statement:
“My philosphy about psychic phenomenon is that it does occur from time to time with all of us..”
With just one statement, the whole premise of the video, at least for me, collapses.
Duncan.
This also raised an eyebrow for me. Was that part of the old Mark Edward or do you still believe it? If you still believe it, I’d like to hear what you would consider a genuine psychic phenomenon, even if it’s just a little anecdote. Better still, I’d suggest you run it by your fellow Skeptologists and see if they don’t have any thoughts on the matter.
I like what you are trying to do and wish you luck
I was going to comment after Mark originally linked to the video a few posts ago, but I had a busy weekend shortly afterwards, so I didn’t.
I was interested in the bit where Mark says he believes that psychic phenomena exist but that no-one can produce them consistently / “at will”, and would like to see an elaboration on that. I would agree as far as saying that psychic phenomena may exist (may, not do), and that if they exist then they almost certainly occur only in that unexpected, unpredictable manner and never with anyone’s conscious manipulation.
Here’s a related thought. In the past I’ve spent a little time on certain online magicians’ forums, and noticed that quite a few magicians, particularly certain mentalists, hold rather strong anti-Randi sentiments. I’ve rarely seen such a concentration of people who believe that Randi is a fraud and that the Challenge is just a publicity stunt than I’ve seen among magicians and mentalists online. If Mark has some insights into why that is, I think that would make an interesting topic.
I predict that Mark will agree with the above statement.
Are we as skeptics so close minded that we can’t allow for some hope/wish that the freaky counicidences we see from time to time could not be linked to psychic abilities? Yes it is a reach, and it probably can be explained by science.
I’ve seen a lot over the years and nearly all of it can better be explained using science. But I’ve seem a couple of weird things from the rocky mountain group. Does notean it is ghosties, just means they do nit have an answer and may never have an answer. If it is not testable and repeatable then it is not science and just something freaky and fun.
You’re a skeptic? Bullshit. “My philosophy is about physic phenomenon is that it does occur from time to time with all of us, but when people say that they can make it happen, and that they can do it on a consistent basis, I don’t buy it.” Is that your old philosophy or your current one? If it’s old, take it out of the movie. It will only confirm believer’s preconception. If it’s your current philosophy, your thought process is as flawed as the believers. Go study Occam’s Razor.
Also this movie will not convince believers. They will not believe you when you say you are not gifted.
“The URL contained a malformed video ID”
Mr. Edwards,
Until you answer the two questions raised above with unequivocal, direct answers, you have failed. One, do you believe you used to be a con-artist or do you not? We are not interested in whether you acknowledge that others think or thought of you that way.
Two, you have stated that psychic phenomenon is something that does exist. You then qualify it but the basic question is does it exist at all or does it not. Do you mean paranormal or not? Since you seem to be taking the position that it does, and this is a suspect claim, first give us a precise definition of psychic phenomenon and then please cite even one example that others in this forum would even consider accepting as a legitimate example. In other words there better be some evidence that it wasn’t luck or coincidence, some reason to explain it and why it doesn’t fit within normal human capabilities and there better be some form of measurability.
Just my opinion, but please do not post again on this blog until you have answered these two questions.
Thank you in advance for your response,
WELL! Gee Peter! Who died and left you in charge?
Don’t post here again on YOUR blog until you answer these two questions
Clearly marked as my opinion only. Just because it’s a strong opinion does not suggest i have any delusions of being in charge. In any case I’m really more interested in your response to the content rather than the tone.
I was not familiar with your past, but you have been inspirational to me, personally, in my first awkward stumble into activist skepticism. Whatever happened in your past, I would like to thank you for what you are in your present.
Welcome cthandhs!
What a breath of fresh air you are.
Okay. Some people are never satisfied.
Those who jumped on the one line I uttered about my philospophy that the paranormal exists need to underestand that the comment was edited from an extremely skeptical episode of “Exploring the Unknown.” That episode was about psychic phenomena. I was asked to state my opinion on the paranormal.
Duncan says:
“With just one statement, the whole premise of the video, at least for me, collapses.”
To Duncan and others of the “somewhat disappoinred:”
Hold on a minute! This is a personal philosophy! It doesn’t have to conform to everyone else’s. It’s not an “old” or “new” me. I’m essentially the same guy I have been all along. There’s never been a Bad Edward. You must be confusing me with John Edward. That comment I made was how I felt then and still feel today, like it or not. But let me elaborate:
I may have matured a bit more into the skeptical mode, but I still retain a very personal philosophy. The second half of the statement about “making it happen” and “…that they can do it on a consistent basis, I don’t buy it.” should have been enough to clarify my position, but some people want “unequivocal, direct answers.” anecdotes and evidence – or I have failed. Failed? Failed what? Might I suggest this lack of “evidence” may be only your personal perception of failure. Ever read any of my books? I doubt it.
Taken out of context, the first part of the statement I made may sound to the ultimate skeptic that I don’t have my feet firmly on the ground, or a least what those hard-liners who have posted such unyielding responses to my video might want to think of as an ambiguous stand. Watch the show if you can: It’s a freakin’ SKEPTIC SHOW!
I have always had detractors. I simply cannot please everybody. What I said on “Exlploring the Unknown” was my own philosophy based on years and years of talking with people on both sides of the paranormal issue.
When I said my philosophy about “psychic phenomena” was,
“… which occur from time to time with all of us..,” perhaps I might have instead said something like the time honored,”..shit happens,” or “…weird stuff occurs,” or maybe: “…the unknown or un-identifiable sometimes makes itself known to us in strange ways.” Maybe then those so easily offended might be less uptight? I had no idea back then that the “old me” would be under such a microscope ten years later. “Exploring the Unknown” was a program about PSYCHIC PHENOMENA, not about shit, weird stuff or whatever each indivdual might want to identify as something mysterious or unexplainable happening in any given circumstance. I’m sincerely interested in these unexplainables. There are countless examples of these mysteries that pop up every day. I can’t always be there to verify or investigate each and every oddball situation that arises, but I’m certainly going to try to keep an open mind about them until they are scientifically quantified or dealt with. That’s why I do what I do here and in my day to day life. I actively seek out those kinds of experiences or “phenomena” and deal with them on a case by case basis in an attempt to hopefully one day identify what it is or isn’t.Only then I will put a label on it. Until then it’s just – whatever happens. What do you call it Peter?
Call it what you will. And if it happens to not coincide with your own personal semantics, I have no regrets. I can’t be all things to all people. In my years as a performing mentalist and seance medium, I certainly can vouch for the possibility of things (read as “shit” if you like)happening to me personally in the context of a show situation or in the seance room that I had no idea how to explain to myself or to any of the “we” that people like Peter challenge me to defend myself to. Who is “we.” Please define.
If you want anecdotes, read my books. There’s plenty of them. But that’s all I can offer up right now and don’t skeptics say that anecdotes are not evidence?
“If it’s your current philosophy, your thought process is as flawed as the believers. Go study Occam’s Razor.”
What condscending crap. How do you know how long or at what degree I might have wielded Occam’s Razor in my lifetime? Shouting “there better be” this and “there better be” that is just incredibly insulting.
Is this the New Inquisition that Robert Anton Wilson wrote about so eloquently in 1991?
Walk a mile in my shoes Doug, Peter and Duncan. Then you can come back at me and ask me not to post my thoughts here on my own blog. Until then, navigate your own straight-jacketed reality tunnels where they may lead you and please take your dogmatic attitudes with you.
“I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn human actions, but to understand them.”
—Baruch Spinoza
Me too.
When I make a sponge-ball bunny appear in a six year old kid’s hand at a birthday party and see the look of excitement and wonder momentarily cross that child’s face or see the look of genuine enchantment on a bunch of faces who might be seeing magic performed in front of their eyes for the first time, this gives both parties in that moment a joy that cannot be easily measured. I don’t stop and consider myself a con artist then nor do I do a disclaimer for them. If I have done well, this albeit commercial bit of “magical thinking” makes me and the audience very happy for a few brief seconds. I’m bringing a little magic into people’s lives. Although there’s no Occam’s Razor in my bag of tricks, by my attitude, using humor and “entertaining” them, I’m hopefully getting them to think, consider what is real and not real and showing them that things in life are not always the way they seem.
As a skeptic, I know they most frequently are not.
In this way, I’m a teacher, not a con artist. Read about the myths of Coyote, The Fool or other manifestations of the Lord of Misrule and Trickster figures of deep-rooted mythologies. I’m down with that.
When unexpected, unpredictable and unexplainable things happen that lie outside my “conscious manipulation,” that’s what I live for. I would have stopped doing magic many years ago if those moments never happened. Some might later be explained away by coincidence and science – and some might not. Am I a believer for wondering about that?
I consider myself wise enough to never attempt to say never and those who are so narrow-minded to think they have all the answers to life’s mysteries are in large part why I spent so many years on the fringes of the skeptical movement.
To me, life is s series of encounters with unknowables and improvisations with those unknowables. In my best work, I seek to simulate and if possible; inculcate the very experiences we as skeptics understand the least.
“The Truth!” was not produced or supported in any way by The Skeptologists, JREF, CFI, or any other skeptical organization.
“The Truth!” is just what it says about ME: no more and no less.
Mark said:
“I had no idea back then that the “old me” would be under such a microscope ten years later”
You created, edit and then posted this new video and chose to dredge up the footage.. Its not like I scoured 1000’s of hours of dusty archival footage and cherry picked a single statement.
Your rambling defense has left me even more bewildered about you. It borders on being weird.
And, for the record, I never asked you not to post again as you’ve stated in your comment.
Duncan.
Mark,
Incidentally.. here’s what you said in your initial post on this video:
“I finally sat down and managed to cull together a cogent collection of video clips with the avowed intention to once and for all dispell which side of the psychic/skeptic fence I’m speaking from. I’m happy to report this eight minute – fifty five second piece says it all…”
Personally.. I’d have another crack at it, because you seem to have ended up somewhat straddling that fence you mention.
Duncan.
Sorry Duncan, it was Peter who wanted me to stop posting.
No fence mending needed. Most people who have seen “THE TRUTH!” get where I’m coming from. As Doug has stated after labeling my skeptic stand “bullshit:”
“….Also this movie will not convince believers. They will not believe you when you say you are not gifted.”
You are so right there Doug! Brilliant!
And this strident sort of believer stand is not far in terms of extremes from the other end of the believer/skeptic spectrum where those who continue to haggle over my choice of words on the issues of whether or not there even is a “paranormal” or “psychic” keep demonstrating.
Peter wants a “precise definition” from me of what “psychic phenonmenon” is. Okay. Other than my own words I have already put in above such as “shit happens,” “weird stuff” or “…whatever,” etc., Websters defines psychic phenomena as:
“phenomena that appear to contradict physical laws and suggest the possibility of causation by mental processes.”
“Appear to contradict” is key. If you want to read an example about what kind of situation “appeared to contradict” my own perceived physical laws, how that event affected me at the time it happened and what others here on this blog had to say about it, please read my post of 7 Feb. 2009 : “Coincidence” and you will get an idea of the types of incidents that crop up when working as a mentalist or seance performer.
Things like the “Nine of Spades” event might have been considered “paranormal” by some, but as posted after my intital blog; mathematicians and others more educated in statistics and data manipulation saw everything in a different light. I am not a scientist. I’m a mentalist trained in deception. That’s the point of my being here and putting it up in the first place.
Yes, I frequently border on being weird. I celebrate the weird, the fantastic and the grotesque. That’s what I do. I’m not a journalist either. If I can’t ramble here on my own blog, where else?
Doug wrote: “…It (THE TRUTH!)will only confirm believer’s preconception.”
There’s nothing I can do about that. If someone who is a believer sees “THE TRUTH!” as their confirmation of my mediumship, they are not watching it closely enough and as with any perforamnce they are seeing only what they want to see. I clearly state (and it is looped several times: “..It’s a trick.” Wtach that part again please. I’m clearly tagged under that repeated statement with the title “magician” too.
Any of us that work as professional mentalists know that you can shout yourself blue in the face about how “it’s a trick” and still there will be a certain percentage of people who will go away believing you are a true medium anyway. In fact, it is my experience that if I “doth protest too much,” I can leave the impression that I really am psychic and want to somehow cover it up by disclainming too strongly. My friend Doc Shiels and many other mentalists including Geller make use of this ploy. This is another reason I don’t do disclaimers for most shows I do. It all depends on the venue, host’s intentions and event theme.
I won’t be “having another crack at it” anytime soon. Please bear in mind that “THE TRUTH!” was not produced for the sole purpose of appeasing angry skeptics. Although my primarily reason was to dispell the fence straddling issues discussed, “THE TRUTH!” is a promo piece for talent scouts, agents, party planners and event coordinators, mentalists, magicians and anybody else who might want to sample my wares. This lot may unfortunately include believers, lunatics and Connie Sonne. Those who may get their “preconceptions confirmed” by watching it are the same crowd who populate Bigfoot conventions and UFO seminars. I’m not a saint sent out from JREF to convert the masses! At least not yet.
Well said Mark! And that should be the end of it.
So a natural phenomenon, such as a coincidence, is a psychic or paranormal phenomenon as long there are people who don’t realize that it’s natural?
Like Venus is a UFO as long as there are people who don’t realize that it’s Venus.
Wow, weird back and forth here.
A genuinely psychic phenomenon would contradict many known, immovable natural laws. This should be enough for Mark to rule it out as a possibility. His anecdotes, however strange they seemed to him, must have another explanation or science would need to be gutted and be sent back to the starting line. One of these possibilities is far, far more probable than the other. Subsequently, Mark should leave behind any and all ambiguity that he appears to still be attached to on the subject, or be prepared to continue copping it from many skeptics.
Then you’re defining it into nonexistence.
If someone came along who could demonstrate “psychic phenomena”, repeatedly and under laboratory conditions, said phenomena could be studied scientifically and the mechanism would become a part of “natural laws”…but then the phenomena in question wouldn’t contradict any natural laws, so wouldn’t be “psychic” according to the above. That seems wrong.
Until “far more probable” possibilities are proven facts,I’m fully prepared to continue “copping it” from “many skeptics.” There’s no abiguity in remaining open-minded.
Mark, you didn’t say that psychic phenomena may or may not occur with some of us, you said “it does occur from time to time with all of us.” That’s an extraordinary claim that warrants extraordinary evidence, depending on your definition of psychic phenomena.
1. Supernatural phenomenon that defies the laws of physics.
2. Natural phenomenon that defies the known laws of physics.
3. Natural phenomenon that follows the known laws of physics, but some people believe that it doesn’t.
There’s nothing close minded about stating in unambiguous terms that the known natural laws work, are constant and are immovable. Stating otherwise is treading into relativism, the festering swamp where all psuedo-scientific and supernatural ideas breed and thrive.
“There is no such thing as a psychic” is as true a statement as any statement could be – not absolutely true, but only because no statement is. Try saying it, it’s very freeing.
Ugh.
I should say I was being partly tongue in cheek, that may have not come across. I just feel like its not helpful to pay lip service to a competing idea on this topic, you give the true believer an inch…
To me, the idea that psychics might be real is on par with the idea that the earth might be 6000 years old. But you don’t hear many scientists making even the tiniest concession on that idea, and nor should they. It doesn’t make them close minded.
But then, skepticism thrives with multiple approaches.
Fuller:
I agrre with what you are saying. I’m not giving the believers an inch. I’m a skeptic,remember? I’m out to bust the believers whenever I can! This is called SKEPTIC BLOG for cryin out loud. You have reminded me of a line I once heard from the people I once associated with in a spiritualist church (some of which were incognito skeptics working on the inside just like me)
They use to say:
“Give a skeptic an inch and they will measure it.”
very excting!
an insiders take…you can’t talk the talk unless you’ve walked the walk!
Well said Kitty.