|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9 [Next] | ||||||||||
MrCyNic Loyal user England 238 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-05-18 11:46, Ed Hutchison wrote: You know, I just strongly disagreed with something posted on another thread, and now I find myself in total agreement with you on an entirely different matter. It's a weird experience, but somehow heartening. Cheers, Cy. |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Okay, are we ready to examine the therapeutic process and the placebo effect?
On a different tact, the rapport/calibration/pacing etc IS part of the process in whatever route/schema offered. This is necessary for there to be placebo effect. Unless you want to get into an NLP type approach where we take as apriori that how we associate feelings, memories and beliefs affects our perceptions of the world we live in. This would allow us to avoid any religious/political context stuff and focus on the internal process. My guess is we are probably better off walking around the specifics of religious/belief based ritual and start asking those who DO practice the stuff about HOW they know what to say and HOW they know HOW TO SAY IT. This is an adult topic, once you KNOW HOW, you are responsible for WHAT you do and how it affects others. A good example of how ignorance can be bliss. You want to be happy, or wise? The two might not go hand in hand at this time. Once you get into noticing how people respond to things, there are more doors and windows available. You might not want to go through the doors, and might not like what you see through the windows. Once you know, you can't un-know. It's your line to cross.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
jimtron Inner circle 2039 Posts |
Sludge:
As a skeptic, I don't have a problem with someone charging money or taking donations for "spiritual counseling" or "religious counseling," and I certainly have no problem with a religion taking donations. But I think, to most people, "psychic" means having paranormal powers. The objection is about using cold reading or other techniques to pretend to have paranormal powers (as Madam Rosa was doing), and charge money for it. But you're saying real readers don't use cold reading, so I guess PK's original point is moot, in a way (because there would be no reason for Rosa to use cold reading if she was "real"). As far as Derren not using a disclaimer, I believe that people who watch Derren consider him to be an entertainer. When someone goes to a reader, I don't think it's for entertainment, I think it's for advice or some kind of help. I don't think anyone is against the "deception" in movies or by magicians or mentalists. But if someone is being deceptive about a product or service they are selling, that's unethical in my opinion. "Well I've got news for you, readers ARE counsellors, and their techniques and systems are older, more firmly established and effective than the modern so-called science of psychology that seems to still be an infant set of theories with no real understanding of inner human nature. And many of them work in cultures like mine where it is perceived and generally acepted that only lunatics go to psychiatrists or people calling themselves counsellors." What is the evidence that reading is more effective than science and psychology? Do you believe that readers can treat mental illness better than modern science and psychiatry? Do you think that all psychiatrists are ineffective? "Belief in readers/spiritualism etc. is religious." I'm not convinced that everyone who believes in psychic readers and the like would call those beliefs religious. |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Folks we are one cognitive step from arguing that ANY and EVERY non empirical system, IE that is communicated by stories and not direct external observation, is equivalent. While such may be a rational truth, one of the common tenets of religion in our society is to hold all "other" systems as somehow flawed, inferior, undesirable and "bad". We are now on thin ice. Let's back away from the spiritualists who believe in direct contact etc and discuss the issue without treading on anyone's holy places.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
sludge Special user milton keynes, england 530 Posts |
Jimtron,
I consider psychology to be a sub-set of the multiple arts of "reading". Thereby, psychologists are readers. Surely therefore, the "reading arts" as a whole, including psychology, are bound to be superior and more effective than just one small subset thereof. No, I do not think that all psychiatrists are ineffective, I never even implied that, yet alone stated it. Are you aware that quite a few psychologists use Astrology as a tool in their work with clients? Even Jung did so. Is doing so immoral in your opinion? Herein lies the fundamental problem; the issue is not black and white, let alone the morality of the issue. Everyone of us has our own set of morals and ethics. To each their own, I propose. Quote:
I'm not convinced that everyone who believes in psychic readers and the like would call those beliefs religious. Well the fact is that many people do. Is it acceptable to you to denegrate the religious beliefs of the minority purely because they are a minority? |
|||||||||
jimtron Inner circle 2039 Posts |
Maybe we could stick to discussing ethics of psychic readings (per PK's original post)?
Do we all agree that "real" psychics never use cold reading? |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Perhaps we can agree that if someone is truly psychic, they will be getting more information than is available through known channels including cold reading. Cold reading is doing consciously what we do to some extent unconsciously.
BTW the NLP eye accessing cues etc are only applicable AFTER you establish rapport and calibrate to that person. Not everyone has the same internal model and associations. Using cold reading and a ritual (expected/stereotyped) used to format the establishing of rapport; that can be anything, cards, sticks, the point of the ritual is to establish rapport one can do some pretty effective reading stuff. Have a look at the crystal ball exercise toward the end of Trance-formations
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
jimtron Inner circle 2039 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-05-18 17:08, Jonathan Townsend wrote: Right--cold reading is getting information via the 5 senses, using deduction, psychology, vision, hearing, touch, intellect, etc. I'm not sure though if everyone would agree that a "real psychic" can get information through other means (a sixth sense or whatever). Does "real psychic" mean having supernatural power? I think that's the impression most people have. |
|||||||||
sludge Special user milton keynes, england 530 Posts |
The word psychic does not mean supernatural. To many it does mean paranormal. Supernatural and paranormal are not the same.
Paranormal: Beyond the range of normal experience or scientific explanation. Please note "or scientific explanation". It's evidently clear to all of us that scientific man does not know everything there is to know about man, his inner psyche and his exterior influences. After all, psychology is based upon theories, not fact. There is as of yet (as far as I know) no strictly scientific explanation of abilities such as intuition. Yet I have yet to meet a person who does not KNOW that intuition is very real. intuition 1. a. The act or faculty of knowing or sensing without the use of rational processes; immediate cognition. b. Knowledge gained by the use of this faculty; a perceptive insight. 2. A sense of something not evident or deducible; an impression. Does this sound familiar? It should. Psychics (and counsellors and psychologists) use their intuition in addition to common-sense and their "system", whether their "system" is a psychological questionnaire or an astrological chart. Thereby, psychics do use their own paranormal abilities. Just like we all do in our everyday lives. We are all psychic. Therefore, the question should be re-phrased: Is their a valid moral objection to readers using their natural (though not yet scientifically proven) psychic and paranormal abilities? If a reader is using purely his/her own natural abilities they are not indulging in deception, and they are not claiming abilities beyond those of you or I. Therefore, I believe that no objection based upon morality can be upheld. as an aside, you might find this funny: Quote:
If electricity come from electrons, where does morality come from? |
|||||||||
jimtron Inner circle 2039 Posts |
On 2005-05-18 14:47, sludge wrote:
"No, I do not think that all psychiatrists are ineffective, I never even implied that, yet alone stated it." Sorry if I misunderstood--I was referring to this: "Well I've got news for you, readers ARE counsellors, and their techniques and systems are older, more firmly established and effective than the modern so-called science of psychology that seems to still be an infant set of theories with no real understanding of inner human nature." "Herein lies the fundamental problem; the issue is not black and white, let alone the morality of the issue. Everyone of us has our own set of morals and ethics. To each their own, I propose." I agree with "to each his own." But when one charges money for a service, they are affecting another person. Of course people should have the freedom to do and believe in anything they want. My objection in the Rosa example is that Rosa was deceiving the sitter with cold reading. If the reader is completely honest with the sitter I don't have a problem. If the reader is stating or implying supernatural powers that they don't actually have, in my opinion that's fraud. If a drug company sells a drug that doesn't really do what they say it does, that's fraud. (jimtmron:) I'm not convinced that everyone who believes in psychic readers and the like would call those beliefs religious. (sludge:) "Well the fact is that many people do. Is it acceptable to you to denegrate the religious beliefs of the minority purely because they are a minority?" No, it's never acceptable to denigrate anyone's religious beliefs whether minority or not. My point is that I don't think everyone who sees psychic readers consider that to be religious, and I doubt that all readers consider themselves religious. But I don't know that for a fact. If you want to consider it religious, I don't have a problem with that. If you feel that I have denigrated anyone, could you please cite an example? I don't believe I've done that. "The word psychic does not mean supernatural. To many it does mean paranormal. Supernatural and paranormal are not the same." Of course everyone has their own idea about what words mean. But the Oxford English Dictionary (arguably the most highly regarded one) says: "A person who is regarded as particularly susceptible to supernatural or paranormal influence; having paranormal powers, clairvoyant." It's my impression that people go to psychics because they believe that psychics can foretell the future or communicate with the dead (like John Edward) or read minds. Perhaps my impression is wrong. "It's evidently clear to all of us that scientific man does not know everything there is to know about man, his inner psyche and his exterior influences. After all, psychology is based upon theories, not fact." Agreed. "If a reader is using purely his/her own natural abilities they are not indulging in deception, and they are not claiming abilities beyond those of you or I." I agree that situation is fine. If the reader is being honest and not implying that they can predict the future or talk to dead people and the like, that's clearly not an issue. best, Jim |
|||||||||
sludge Special user milton keynes, england 530 Posts |
Jim,
We seem to be making progress I agree that you have not personally denigrated anyone, my question was a general question to all reading - without meaning to imply otherwise. However, anyone can Quote: - we all do it all the time - but I don't think that that is what you mean. I think you mean predict or foretell the future of the client with more accuracy than the client themself.
predict the future Again, this is sensible in my opinion. Often a 3rd party can see clearly to the heart of a problem/issue and it's possible or likely future outcomes (through reasoning and deduction that is based upon past experience and intuition) when the client themself "cannot see the wood for the trees" because they are personally involved. This is one reason we often ask the advice of friends (and/or psychics). Psychologists would likely tell the client the same things as a reader in this instance - both would be predicting likely outcomes and foretelling the future. I think it would be very hard to find a psychic reader in the real world who stated that a specific non-general prediction would come true regardless of the clients behaviour or any other forces coming to bear. In my experience (of knowing different readers personally for over 20 years) readers always empower the client - that is to say they may make predictions, but they are uncertain predictions that are dependant upon the clients behaviour/life-choices. These are predictions just like our mothers made when we were young - i.e. they are insights based upon experience and intuition. So what is the fundamental difference between psychic readers, counsellors, psychologists and mothers? The systems. I think one thing that a lot of skeptics don't like is the use of certain "systems". I think it's interesting that I have personally perceived much more negativity towards tarot readers than astrologists for example. I wonder why this is the case, and if this is the same for others here? Additionally, many people believe in the power of these "systems" - tarot cards etc. and many of those (perhaps due to their own religious beliefs or the religious beliefs that they were subjected to when young) believe the power therein to not be positive. I know someone who calls himself an atheist, yet he believes that tarot cards are "dangerous" and "real". He himself now no longer has any faith in a deity, but his beliefs from his upbringing that are negative towards "telling the future" remain. I also know people that if at a social gathering and someone got a deck of tarot cards out, they would simply leave - they are afraid to be in the same building (I've seen this happen). Therefore I'd like to propose that there IS a moral objection to psychic readings, and that is specifically psychic readings being performed in a social gathering where it was not reasonable for all attendees to assume that there would be readings being undertaken. This would seem to be common courtesy for fellow man and his/her personal belief structures. Is that even more common ground I see? With regard to "talking to the dead". I do not personally believe that anyone has this ability, just like I do not believe that the head of any specific church has a direct line to God. However, I have seen and heard from close family members far too many puzzling anecdotes to close my mind to the possibility that I could be wrong on one or both counts though. |
|||||||||
ijones New user central Florida 6 Posts |
I learned recently about a practice in Commanche shamanism, where they use techniques such as pulls to vanish objects, and the better documented practice of using sleight of hand to pull "sickness" out of patients bodies.
This is dishonest, but what is important is the belief of the patient. Historically, there have been religious uses of everything from smoke and mirrors, to cold and hot reading, to con and otherwise hoodwink the believers. So, what I think is the important question is not whether a person is deceiving their audience, but why they are deceiving them.
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -M.K.Gandhi
|
|||||||||
chmara Inner circle Tucson, AZ 1911 Posts |
Yes there are moral objections to psychic readings. Yes there are moral objections to modern medicine. Yes there are troglodytes amongst the best of society.
Also there are moral superlatives that can be heaped on psychic readings, and modern medicine. There are also shut-eyes and early adopters amongst the best of society. I object strongly to "psychics" who drain older (and younger) peoples savings to remove a curse. I think their moral problem is akin to robbery. I strongly support those who use paranormal techniques to focus energy in the betterment of mankind. And I will fight with anyone who does not believe that Tony Robbins, Steven Covey and their type do not use paranormal focusing to build their goal and energy structures. Wilson, in his work "The Occult" says what makes us most human above the animals is our ability to creatively focus and concentrate on a goal. Often a greagt "reader" needs to do that for his subject -- jar them into real action and not dream thinking. It takes time to live and our perception of time needs to be moderated in reality. Our biggest curse is that of ignorance ---and it is supported by the demon of superstition. Our biggest opportunity is to teach how to face the demons fearlessly and practically.
Gregg (C. H. Mara) Chmara
Commercial Operations, LLC Tucson, AZ C. H. Mara Illusion & Psychic Entertainments |
|||||||||
13ofhearts New user Fayetteville, AR 21 Posts |
Bare with me here while I set up a metaphor.
This is a true story: In the Vietnam War, medics would sometimes run out of morphine to give to wonunded soldiers. So, they would give them saline and TELL them it was morphine. What happened? Well, thanks to the placebo effect, the soldier's pain was relieved. What's that got to do with all this? I'll try to explian the way I see it. When a person decides to go to a psychic reader OR a mental health professional, they are like the wounded soldier, in pain and looking for a way to fix it. But, in my opinion, there is no way that either of those groups can give the patient the mirical treatment that's going to fix their problems for them (keep in mind that I'm not really talking about serious mental health problems like schizophrenia or the like). All that either of those groups have to give is a kind of mental or spiritual saline. So, we give out our placebos and some people feel better and some don't. That's just the way it works. However, here is the clever bit: the soldiers in my story were able to overcome their own pain using their own will, they just didn't know they had it in them. And it didn't work (and it won't work) until someone they trusted and believed in told them it would. Both the psychic and the psychiatrist have to build a trusting relationship very quickly if they are to be of any help to anybody. I have thought much on this subject as a magician and a student of clicial psychology. I believe that the purpose of giving a reading or giving councling should be to empower the client, not to give them advice about what they should do. Giving advice can not only get them in trouble, it can get you in trouble too. Trust can be established with cold reading or what have you (use your favorite method ), but then you have to turn it over to them. You can't solve their problems for them. Don't even try, especially not in a half hour. But imagine how you would feel, as a client, to see someone, and witness that they are very powerful and wise and then have this powerful wise person say "YOU ARE POWERFUL TOO. if you use your power wisely, and follow your higher nature, and you can get through this." This could, however lead to dreadful things like people having to take responsibility for their lives and their decisions and people even thinking for themselves. To gain people's trust and then to tell them what they should do when you couldn't possibly know the full details of their situation is in my opinion, morally wrong. But, to que people in on the fact that they know better how to solve their problems than someone that they just met, what could be wrong with that? Oh well, just my little thought. Eric
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
|
|||||||||
jimtron Inner circle 2039 Posts |
I agree that empowering the client is a good idea. In my opinion using deception, or pretending to have nonexistent powers, is not going to empower them. Being honest and forthright and realistic might. It seems to me that some might go to see psychics because they're hoping to find an answer via magic--maybe there's a dilemma and they believe the reader can predict the outcome. Or that the reader has some supernatural insight to the client's situation.
I believe that a good psychotherapist can empower their clients and help them learn to help themselves. In fact, the largest clinical study of talk therapy has recently been conducted: "The study looked at a relatively modern type of talk therapy, known as cognitive therapy, which tries to teach people how to change harmful thoughts and beliefs. Patients learn to recognise unrealistically negative thoughts when they occur, and are told how to replace them with more positive ones. It may sound too simplistic to work, but other studies have shown it can be used to treat anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder and eating disorders." http://www.economist.com/science/display......=3860433 |
|||||||||
Slimfrinky Regular user Nicholson, MS 153 Posts |
I have run across instances where people have offered me money to do psychic readings after a mentalism show. My mind thinks two things.
1. Alright! An extra $50! 2. Don't be a jerk man, these people have feelings. So here is my deal. I'm a starving college student. I need the money. But, I have desided that I will never go down the psycic readings path for one simple reason. These are people who are in pain, either because of the loss of loved ones, or they have had some traumatic experience happen to them. I do not feel that it is my place to give someone a fraudulent cold reading just so I can make some extra cash, no matter how poor I am. These people are human being with thoughts, feelings, and emotions, and I could not look at myself in the mirror if I exploited their memories of their dead grandmother, or looked them in the face and told them that their husband would drop the cheap floozy and come back to them. It might make them feel good for a while, but in all honesty, more than anything these people probably need someone to talk to so they can get personal issues off their chest. I can talk to them, but it is not my job to lie about their personal details outside the context of cold reading in a show. So what I normaly tell people is that while I do have powers, I choose not to use them most of the time because I can pick up on personal details accidently that they might not want me to know. And then go on to say that in the context of a larger show, there is so much 'background noise' from all the thoughts, that I can't pick up information there, but it would be unwise to have a one on one reading. After I say that, they normally drop the subject of the readings, and I will ask them if they would like to have some tea and talk about what is bothering them. And then I will give them what is in my opinion the best advice I can. So far, I think this is the best way to go, and you make new friends while doing it, and you reinforce the psychic powers act a bit.
The eye of Katrina went right over my house. I now have a distinct distrust of nature.
|
|||||||||
13ofhearts New user Fayetteville, AR 21 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-05-22 17:40, jimtron wrote: I completely agree that people who tend to visit psychic readers are looking for a magic quick fix to their problems. But in a way, so are people who visit therapists. However, when it comes to pretending to have nonexistant powers, people come to psychic and therapists with preconcieved notions about their abilities. They believe that psychics can read their minds and see the future (if they didn't believe that, way would they go) and they believe, often, that a theripist, after talking to them for an hour, can say something or give them a pill that will make it all go away. While both professions may wish that they had the power that they are preceived to have, they don't. Now, you can be honest when the client comes in and tell them you have no psychic powers at all, tell them there is no easy cure-all drug and it's going to take a lot of hard work and money to fix their problems, but what do you think they'll do? They will go find someone else who will them them those things and God knows what else. It's not black and white, I know. There is so much gray in this issue that it lookes like silent movie. I, myself, have made the decision to very, very rarely give any reading of any sort (which makes them more valuable to the client, in a supply demand sort of way) and when I do, I don't claim to have any special power myself other than the knowledge to interperate what I see (the cards, the palm or what have you). I don't want to claim to be psychic or especially intuitive, because I'm not. I will, however, claim to be learn-ed and well read. Mainly because I like saying learn-ed, but also because about these sort of things I am (at least compared to a lay-person). This may sound contradictory to what I said earlier about being honest, but it's not really because I'm still letting the object (cards or whatever) have power. It may still be wrong to let them believe that the cards have power or that the lines in their hand tell the story of their life but it's less damaging than letting them think a weirdo in a turban can read their minds and see the future. Plus it's an easier believe to shake later on down the road. But even something wrong to a lesser degree is still wrong I guess. That's probably why I still haven't made up my mind fully on this subject... Eric
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
|
|||||||||
jimtron Inner circle 2039 Posts |
Whatever is truly effective in helping people with their problems, and is safe, and reasonably priced, it's ok with me. According to the Economist article mentioned a couple posts ago, talk therapy seems to have a good track record.
"While both professions may wish that they had the power that they are precieved to have, they don't...and they believe, often, that a theripist, after talking to them for an hour, can say something or give them a pill that will make it all go away. " Psychotherapists should not be stating or implying that they can solve someone's problems in an hour, or with a single pill. However, I think that there is evidence that some medications can correct chemical imablances in the brain. And there is evidence that psychotherapy can, but is not guaranteed, to help people with depression, anxiety, and other disorders. Obviously, psychoterapists and psychic readers should be honest about what they do, what their skills are, and what the client can reasonably expect. |
|||||||||
ChEeKy_MoNkEy Regular user FCCL 149 Posts |
Slimfrinky wrote:-
Quote:
So here is my deal. I'm a starving college student. I need the money. But, I have desided that I will never go down the psycic readings path for one simple reason. These are people who are in pain, either because of the loss of loved ones, or they have had some traumatic experience happen to them. I do not feel that it is my place to give someone a fraudulent cold reading just so I can make some extra cash, no matter how poor I am. In answer to the original question - "Is there a valid moral objection to psychic readings?" - Well, what Slimfrinky said above (other than outside the context of cold reading in a show) is a pretty good reason to have a moral objection in my view. |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-05-22 21:49, jimtron wrote:...Psychotherapists should not be stating or implying that they can solve someone's problems in an hour... Right, that's an NLP thing.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Is there a valid moral objection to psychic readings? (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.1 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |