Bonzo77 Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 MODS: Please don't bury this in with one of the megathreads, it will likely go unseen by those who may contribute! Yes, mediums as in, the ones who claim to speak to the dead. If you need to get the "size" jokes out of your system, do so now . There's believers and non-believers. Some of the believers also accept that there are fakes. Let's accept for a moment that some mediums MAY be genuine, and that those of us taking part in this thread were members of an organisation similar to the "guilds" of builders and craftsmen etc, but for mediums. My question is this, can we come up with a test or exam for mediums to take which would prove them genuine (please don't reply "No, cuz their all fake innit!") ? The point of such a test would be to validate/authenticate the medium for business purposes. The details of the test would have to be agreed upon by both sides. As a start, from my own point of view, the test must be repeatable and it must be within a location that the medium has had no access to be able to tamper with anything. Sorry..........I can't even begin to take this seriously. A test, to prove someone can talk to the dead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghozer Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Firstly, a 'Medium doesn't always claim to be able to talk to the dead... there is the other type... Secondly, a test is impossible, as those who do future telling and mind reading, and are actually good at it are just very good psychologists who use key words and phrases to work out a persons profile, who they are, and they use specific questions and give vague (common) answers to start with while they work out who you are and what you are like.. They then, (once they have built up a profile) can tell you about yourself, perhaps even get lucky and tell you something that normally, they wouldn't have known.... at this point, you're drawn in, hook line and sinker, and they could pretty much tell you anything. It's then, from this point, -if you are susceptible to things like hypnotism etc- that you fall for what they say, and you make things happen, sub consciously... As for the sort that do claim to be able to talk to the dead, they use a very similar method, asking questions, but they build up a profile of the person who you wish to contact, to claim that they have talked to them, and use similar techniques to make you believe.. Those who claim to be able to contact people, and can pull a name out of thin air, and tell you something about them, which is later verified as correct by a 3rd party would be impossible to 'test' as there's never a singular constant which is the same... The only possible way I could see about doing it, would be knowing where someone totally unknown died, and using a medium that could in no way have any knowledge of this location and/or person or other person(s) involved.. then place them in a room, with a chair, a table and a few candles, and ask them to see who they can contact... you COULD be specific and give them a name, (as there's 100's of people died in any given location at any given time) and ask them to find out some details from said person.. Which then would be verified by yourself (or whoever knew the person) But the location, and person(s) involved would have to change each time, for each medium, and you would have to guarantee that they didn't communicate with another medium informing them of the procedure etc which could give them a slight edge... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 As a start, from my own point of view, the test must be repeatable and it must be within a location that the medium has had no access to be able to tamper with anything. I'm slightly puzzled as to how you could make a test 'repeatable'. It's not like say a test for ESP, with the squiggly shaped cards thing. Do they need to talk to the same dead person over and over again? I reckon I could feign that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I don't think it can be proved satisfactorally. Or indeed, is meant to be. I do think it occurs, but not to order. That is why I'm always a bit dubious of people making a living from it. If it's just 'not happening' in front of a paying public, what can they do but cheat? It's one of those things that can't be measured or probed which is why science has such difficulty with it. There is a school of thought that says that when something is watched, it changes. I think this is probably a good example of that. Science really doesnt have any difficulty with it - you set up a testable falsifieable experiment and let them get on with it. Every one that's been tried so far has show that the medium does no better than random chance. Your school of thought that when something is observed it changes is Heisenbers uncertainty principle and it only applies to the very small such as atoms etc, on a larger scale you have "classical" mechanics which does follow predicatable rules when observed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirmisher Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 MODS: Please don't bury this in with one of the megathreads, it will likely go unseen by those who may contribute! Yes, mediums as in, the ones who claim to speak to the dead. If you need to get the "size" jokes out of your system, do so now . There's believers and non-believers. Some of the believers also accept that there are fakes. Let's accept for a moment that some mediums MAY be genuine, and that those of us taking part in this thread were members of an organisation similar to the "guilds" of builders and craftsmen etc, but for mediums. My question is this, can we come up with a test or exam for mediums to take which would prove them genuine (please don't reply "No, cuz their all fake innit!") ? The point of such a test would be to validate/authenticate the medium for business purposes. The details of the test would have to be agreed upon by both sides. As a start, from my own point of view, the test must be repeatable and it must be within a location that the medium has had no access to be able to tamper with anything. I've seen some crazy threads on here but this takes the biscuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereolab Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Well i can think of a very simple one for physics You ring them up and if they really are physic then they will know exactly who is calling with out the need for caller display! So is this why you are prank calling Prof. Brian Cox? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirmisher Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Science really doesnt have any difficulty with it - you set up a testable falsifieable experiment and let them get on with it. Every one that's been tried so far has show that the medium does no better than random chance. . From this all I can see is that there is no test that works, therefore science must have a problem with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 From this all I can see is that there is no test that works, therefore science must have a problem with it. Why? Science isn't about showing a theory is correct, it's about proving a theory, which means you set an experiment, and a control up up to test (or prove) a theory my means of seeing if it's incorrect. If you get a repeatable series of results that show a theory is incorrect then you have proved it false. eg. "eggs are indestructible" Prove the theory by throwing an egg at the wall. QED - eggs are not indestructible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirmisher Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Why? Science isn't about showing a theory is correct, it's about proving a theory, which means you set an experiment, and a control up up to test (or prove) a theory my means of seeing if it's incorrect. If you get a repeatable series of results that show a theory is incorrect then you have proved it false. eg. "eggs are indestructible" Prove the theory by throwing an egg at the wall. QED - eggs are not indestructible. But the theory is only proven to be unproven if it's just a game of chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted August 16, 2012 Author Share Posted August 16, 2012 Firstly, a 'Medium doesn't always claim to be able to talk to the dead... there is the other type... Firstly, in the OP, I specifically said the type who do talk to the dead. Secondly, I didn't say that mediums always claim to talk to the dead. Thirdly, where do you get your definition of a medium from? I've only ever known it to mean those that communicate with the dead or the "spirit world". Secondly, a test is impossible, as those who do future telling and mind reading, and are actually good at it are just very good psychologists who use key words and phrases to work out a persons profile, who they are, and they use specific questions and give vague (common) answers to start with while they work out who you are and what you are like.. They then, (once they have built up a profile) can tell you about yourself, perhaps even get lucky and tell you something that normally, they wouldn't have known.... at this point, you're drawn in, hook line and sinker, and they could pretty much tell you anything. It's then, from this point, -if you are susceptible to things like hypnotism etc- that you fall for what they say, and you make things happen, sub consciously... As for the sort that do claim to be able to talk to the dead, they use a very similar method, asking questions, but they build up a profile of the person who you wish to contact, to claim that they have talked to them, and use similar techniques to make you believe.. Those who claim to be able to contact people, and can pull a name out of thin air, and tell you something about them, which is later verified as correct by a 3rd party would be impossible to 'test' as there's never a singular constant which is the same... Ah, you mean "clairvoyants, fortune-tellers and psychics" ? Wrong thread I'm afraid. Feel free to correct me if you have some information contrary to this though, I'm always happy to be corrected with facts. The only possible way I could see about doing it, would be knowing where someone totally unknown died, and using a medium that could in no way have any knowledge of this location and/or person or other person(s) involved.. then place them in a room, with a chair, a table and a few candles, and ask them to see who they can contact... you COULD be specific and give them a name, (as there's 100's of people died in any given location at any given time) and ask them to find out some details from said person.. Which then would be verified by yourself (or whoever knew the person) But the location, and person(s) involved would have to change each time, for each medium, and you would have to guarantee that they didn't communicate with another medium informing them of the procedure etc which could give them a slight edge... Okay, you'e just given an example of a test you think could work. Why did you think it was impossible at the start of your post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.