Seances

[redruby]

54 minutes ago, Bellatrix said:

No, it isn't.  Beliefs aren't testable.  Faith isn't testable.  Activities and claims related to belief in supernatural phenomena can be testable, as I've mentioned above in relation to psychics' activities, claims and methods at seances.  A particular phenomenon can be examined and accounted for scientifically, as I mentioned above in relation to, for example, illusions. This is why I said in my previous post you should make it clear whether you're talking about 'spirituality' or the original subject in the title of the thread.

 

I thought it was genuinely amusing, and rather interesting, that you chose the most literal meaning of the word 'fervent' and associated it with mental health and superstition.  No offence intended.

 

As I've said three times now: people can, of course, believe what they want, and reject or accept whatever explanations they like for supernatural phenomena.  The information is out there; do with it what you want.  Ignoring it or rejecting it, however, doesn't make those explanations any less valid. I'll refer you to my previous post for my comments on spirituality.

Well it was me that started this thread, really in rather light hearted and fun way, asking ‘ if anyone  was there?’ at a séance.  I was wasn’t asking for detail of whether specific activities relating to the paranormal were scientifically provable!  It was supposed to be a general discussion, and anything related to faith, religion and spirituality can be included in the discussion. But it has all got rather bogged down in pedantry.

I maintain that the topics discussed are indeed interchangeable and a matter of belief.  Someone, for example, may genuinely *believe* they hear ‘a voice from the other side’.  Whether that voice does actually exist is another matter but to that person it is real. You may reply, ‘this could be tested for’ well, of course it could.  But even if it is imagined  by the person, it may still be real to them and have meaning to them on a spiritual level.

 

[Draggletail]

8 hours ago, Anna B said:

 I've always believed that being spiritual is different to being religious; whatever floats your boat, so I have to agree whole heartedly with your last paragraph Hauxwell. 

Yes, I've believed for a long time that spirituality and religion are different.

[Bellatrix]

10 minutes ago, redruby said:

Well it was me that started this thread, really in rather light hearted and fun way, asking ‘ if anyone  was there?’ at a séance.  I was wasn’t asking for detail of whether specific activities relating to the paranormal were scientifically provable!  It was supposed to be a general discussion, and anything related to faith, religion and spirituality can be included in the discussion. But it has all got rather bogged down in pedantry.

Well, you don't get to dictate who responds to a thread, for what reason or in what manner (other than for reasons of asking for clarity, as I mentioned in my previous post, which you seem to be confusing with pedantry).  I'm interested in the subject, but from a different perspective from those who believe in the supernatural, so I replied accordingly.

 

15 minutes ago, redruby said:

I maintain that the topics discussed are indeed interchangeable and a matter of belief.  Someone, for example, may genuinely *believe* they hear ‘a voice from the other side’.  Whether that voice does actually exist is another matter but to that person it is real. You may reply, ‘this could be tested for’ well, of course it could.  But even if it is imagined  by the person, it may still be real to them and have meaning to them on a spiritual level.

 

You're missing my point.  You can't test a belief that, for example, there is a giant pink unicorn sat on a cloud mountain floating somewhere above Skegness.  You can't test a belief that someone is talking to that giant pink unicorn.

 

You can test the hypothesis that someone who claims to be talking to that giant pink unicorn, extracting information from it and passing it on to grieving relatives in a reading is actually a demonstration of cold reading.  I described in a previous post how that has been done and how the results demonstrated that once you remove a medium's ability to use cold reading techniques the hits become duds.

 

That something is testable or explainable by scientific method says nothing about people's belief in that thing, or whether people should accept the rational explanation for the thing.

[redruby]

50 minutes ago, Bellatrix said:

Well, you don't get to dictate who responds to a thread, for what reason or in what manner (other than for reasons of asking for clarity, as I mentioned in my previous post, which you seem to be confusing with pedantry).  I'm interested in the subject, but from a different perspective from those who believe in the supernatural, so I replied accordingly.

 

 

You're missing my point.  You can't test a belief that, for example, there is a giant pink unicorn sat on a cloud mountain floating somewhere above Skegness.  You can't test a belief that someone is talking to that giant pink unicorn.

 

You can test the hypothesis that someone who claims to be talking to that giant pink unicorn, extracting information from it and passing it on to grieving relatives in a reading is actually a demonstration of cold reading.  I described in a previous post how that has been done and how the results demonstrated that once you remove a medium's ability to use cold reading techniques the hits become duds.

 

That something is testable or explainable by scientific method says nothing about people's belief in that thing, or whether people should accept the rational explanation for the thing.

No I don’t get to dictate who replies to my thread and I don’t want to.  My response was referring to the fact that you appear to think the thread is going off topic by including matters of faith, spirituality and religion.  I think all these matters can be discussed here.  
 

I know exactly what you referring to with regards to testable matters.  I however, think that only  discussing testable matters is rather narrow and limiting.  If you want a narrowly defined discussion on this , please do start a new thread on this.  This thread has broadened to include matters of faith, spirituality and religion.

[lavery549@yahoo]

3 hours ago, redruby said:

I’m not sure if that’s a serious reply but if it is that’s absolutely not what I was saying! I keep trying to stick up for people with alternative beliefs but it’s like putting up a tent in a gale!  I was only referring to people who let an interest in the supernatural overwhelm their lives in that instance.

Yes , I am a Witch & believe , but I didn't take what you said in a sensitive way ☺️

[Bellatrix]

17 minutes ago, redruby said:

No I don’t get to dictate who replies to my thread and I don’t want to.  My response was referring to the fact that you appear to think the thread is going off topic by including matters of faith, spirituality and religion.  I think all these matters can be discussed here.

I didn't say it was going off topic (though it is, now I think about it, according to the title you gave the thread, your original question in your first post, and your comments in your first few other posts on the subject), and I didn't say that those matters shouldn't be discussed here.  As I've already said, I suggested that you should make it clear whether you're referring to supernatural phenomena or spiritual beliefs, as aspects of the former are testable (and so applicable to what I've mostly been talking about) and the latter not.

 

25 minutes ago, redruby said:

I know exactly what you referring to with regards to testable matters.

Well clearly not, or I wouldn't have had to correct you and offer further explanation of what's testable, what isn't and why.

 

26 minutes ago, redruby said:

 I however, think that only  discussing testable matters is rather narrow and limiting.   If you want a narrowly defined discussion on this , please do start a new thread on this.  This thread has broadened to include matters of faith, spirituality and religion.

Again, I didn't say only those matter should be discussed here.  As I've said twice before now, I suggested that you should make clear what you're referring to, for the reasons I mentioned above.

 

 

[Gormenghast]

3 hours ago, Padders said:

Well I was on the toilet last night in "Padders Bar" and this happened.   

Something sort of  related to that this morning....

 

I was  assembling ingredients for yet another culinary masterpiece, (25 in all) when I suddenly had to retire to the same place here.

 

The dearly beloved was a bit miffed at having to wait ĺonger to eat, and  shouted  '"Well hurry up then, and dont make a meal of it." Oh how I laughed. 😬

[redruby]

11 minutes ago, Bellatrix said:

I didn't say it was going off topic (though it is, now I think about it, according to the title you gave the thread, your original question in your first post, and your comments in your first few other posts on the subject), and I didn't say that those matters shouldn't be discussed here.  As I've already said, I suggested that you should make it clear whether you're referring to supernatural phenomena or spiritual beliefs, as aspects of the former are testable (and so applicable to what I've mostly been talking about) and the latter not.

 

Well clearly not, or I wouldn't have had to correct you and offer further explanation of what's testable, what isn't and why.

 

Again, I didn't say only those matter should be discussed here.  As I've said twice before now, I suggested that you should make clear what you're referring to, for the reasons I mentioned above.

 

 

You’ve accused me several times now of ‘misinterpreting’ and ‘misunderstanding’.  I’m going to throw that back at you now!

 

You appear to be keen to put across that seances/fortune telling etc etc are all cons and are not scientifically proven.  Well fine - but where have I disagreed with that?  I don’t!  I’ve only said that if some people find them helpful in some way, what does it matter?  People waste their money on all sorts of rubbish to keep themselves happy if it’s the financial gain of mediums etc you are concerned about.

[Bellatrix]

13 minutes ago, redruby said:

You’ve accused me several times now of ‘misinterpreting’ and ‘misunderstanding’.  I’m going to throw that back at you now!

 

You appear to be keen to put across that seances/fortune telling etc etc are all cons and are not scientifically proven.  Well fine - but where have I disagreed with that?  I don’t!   I’ve only said that if some people find them helpful in some way, what does it matter?  People waste their money on all sorts of rubbish to keep themselves happy if it’s the financial gain of mediums etc you are concerned about.

Where have I said that you've disagreed with that?  In fact, I explicitly acknowledged as much in this post:

 

8 hours ago, Bellatrix said:

You seem to acknowledge that belief in the latter amounts to belief in a con and belief in the former involves manipulation and control.

 

What does it matter that it's a con?!  Of course it matters!  This isn't just poor grieving people seeking comfort from those who have no moral qualms about telling them what they desperately want to hear, even if it's made-up bull****.  It's parents being preyed on by parasites, telling them that their murdered children are alive and working at strip clubs, that they've been trafficked overseas, that they've forgotten about their parents; giving them hope based on terrible lies when their children are dead in a gutter somewhere.  Or telling parents that their kidnapped children are dead, extinguishing all hope, when they're still alive and waiting to be found.  It's utterly despicable.

[Slighty batty]

1 hour ago, Gormenghast said:

Something sort of  related to that this morning....

 

I was  assembling ingredients for yet another culinary masterpiece, (25 in all) when I suddenly had to retire to the same place here.

 

The dearly beloved was a bit miffed at having to wait ĺonger to eat, and  shouted  '"Well hurry up then, and dont make a meal of it." Oh how I laughed. 😬

25 ingredients! Are you Yotam Ottolenghi ??