True that Chris. Coincidentally (is there really any such thing?) I just posted about that fact in another thread. What you said is spot-on.
(2017-09-04, 10:25 AM)jkmac Wrote: [ -> ]They should want to be considered legitimate,,, and they should relish the chance to demonstrate that fact to the average person (they will never provide enough proof for an extreme skeptic,, but who cares?)
I'm right with you. This is what got me into hot water with folks in a TK thread at Skeptiko. All this theorizing regarding the myriad of possible rationales for why practitioners are unable/unwilling to demonstrate such phenome under scientific controls. I hoped to hear a reasonable rationale, but never did and was instead derided for not, simply, taking it on faith.
(2017-09-04, 05:38 PM)jkmac Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for patiently dealing what may sound as criticism from me, but is really me just thinking out loud about how to open this up to a wider audience and reduce the obvious sources of skepticism.
Of course anything I was suggesting would have to be managed and accepted and planned by the medium and/or spirit. I would never suggest doing this sort of thing surreptitiously. I have heard about a death back in the 30's I think, of a famous female PM. Can't remember her name.
I hope to gain more insight into this whole process when I visit a PM in the next few days. After that experience, I assume I will have a deeper insight into the process.
Can't wait!
I'm interested to hear about your experience.
A question that would nag at me going into such an experience would be: How can I trust what I am going to experience? Knowing how easily our own perceptions can be 'fooled' and all. Curious as to your thoughts here.
(2017-09-06, 03:16 PM)Silence Wrote: [ -> ]I'm right with you. This is what got me into hot water with folks in a TK thread at Skeptiko. All this theorizing regarding the myriad of possible rationales for why practitioners are unable/unwilling to demonstrate such phenome under scientific controls. I hoped to hear a reasonable rationale, but never did and was instead derided for not, simply, taking it on faith.
Faith just doesn't work for some of us...
I'm going to a PM seance later this week, and I hope that what I see (even given that the medium is hidden behind a curtain for parts of the session) will be so impressive, and so compelling on it's own merit, that my concerns will be nitpicking in comparison. Fingers crossed.
(2017-09-06, 03:22 PM)Silence Wrote: [ -> ]I'm interested to hear about your experience.
A question that would nag at me going into such an experience would be: How can I trust what I am going to experience? Knowing how easily our own perceptions can be 'fooled' and all. Curious as to your thoughts here.
I'm going to give it a chance. I trust my ability to sort through the details.
I am not so afraid of being fooled, that I wont give myself a chance to see and decide.
(2017-09-06, 05:39 PM)jkmac Wrote: [ -> ]I am not so afraid of being fooled, that I wont give myself a chance to see and decide.
I think that's about where I would fall out. Again, will be very interested in getting your take after the event!
(2017-09-06, 06:22 PM)Silence Wrote: [ -> ]I think that's about where I would fall out. Again, will be very interested in getting your take after the event!
I'll do a post on it when I get back. May not be until Monday.
(2017-09-06, 10:36 AM)jkmac Wrote: [ -> ]True that Chris. Coincidentally (is there really any such thing?)
Co-incidence, sure, just no accidents.
(2017-09-06, 06:36 PM)jkmac Wrote: [ -> ]I'll do a post on it when I get back. May not be until Monday.
I posted it. Probably in wrong place. If so, sorry Moderators..
The problem may sometimes be setting realistic expectations. I haven't heard any contemporary reports anywhere near what was claimed for Alec Harris, Leslie Flint, John Sloan or Emily French for example.
The above was an interesting report but sounded rather pointless, assuming it was genuine.