Reading “Proof of Spiritual Phenomena”

I say far back because even thirty years ago Blackmore had already set out her sceptical position and hasn't made any significant contributions in the intervening years that I'm aware of.

The fact he says Blackmore's TPJ theory about NDE's/OBE's is correct with almost certainty, when she changed her own account to fit the explanation better, makes one think.....

[Ninshub]

Unfortunately there doesn’t seem to be really any evidence for it.

????
Dumbfounded.

The fact he says Blackmore's TPJ theory about NDE's/OBE's is correct with almost certainty, when she changed her own account to fit the explanation better, makes one think.....

By the way, that video interview appears in this thread from 2017:
https://psiencequest.net/forums/thread-s...47#pid5647

though most of that thread - which is worth reading - is on the exchange with Susan Blackmore & Graham Nicholls linked at the start of that thread.

I say far back because even thirty years ago Blackmore had already set out her sceptical position and hasn't made any significant contributions in the intervening years that I'm aware of.

Also Blackmore's Psi research was garbage.

So her whole "I really wanted to believe but found no evidence" marketing strategy is bunk. That said I'm sure this tale of crocodile tears has and will get her continued bookings at BBC and other places where they have a dedication to pseudo-skeptical bias...

The author of the review posted claims to have a similar background as Blackmore, yet I notice a lack of familiarity with NDE studies, given that he doesn't mention the responses to the rat study and Woerlee's claims.
He seems to like Blackmore's eliminativism but also enjoys the EM field theory of consciousness, which as far as I know is even less well regarded than quantum theories.

The pseudo-skeptics lost. That's all that really matters to me. The public doesn't care and their ground in academia is faltering.

New Atheist is another dead cult on the ash heap of history, and I don't see them making a revival any time soon.

It just isn't worth the limited time in this world to worry overmuch about pseudo-skeptics, at least not for me. My sights are set on trying to figure out, to the extent that I can, the nature of this reality...

The pseudo-skeptics lost. That's all that really matters to me. The public doesn't care and their ground in academia is faltering.

New Atheist is another dead cult on the ash heap of history, and I don't see them making a revival any time soon.

It just isn't worth the limited time in this world to worry overmuch about pseudo-skeptics, at least not for me. My sights are set on trying to figure out, to the extent that I can, the nature of this reality...

I kind of disagree. At least for my intuition, the "skeptics" did not really win or lose, but the interest in those topics for the general public simply fell, mostly because of political polarization. The general trend is a indifferent agnosticism, but there is a unconscious bias against the paranormal on the wider public indeed.

I kind of disagree. At least for my intuition, the "skeptics" did not really win or lose, but the interest in those topics for the general public simply fell, mostly because of political polarization. The general trend is a indifferent agnosticism, but there is a unconscious bias against the paranormal on the wider public indeed.

Globally good chunk of the public believes in something supernatural or paranormal. I'd say it's the vast majority, even if not everyone thinks it is a good idea to engage with paranormal phenomena that is apart from their conception of the Divine.

What people don't believe, IMO, is that any particular person trying to get fame or money has definitive paranormal abilities. That's different than disbelieving in Psi/Survival in their entirety.

If you look at the surveys and media in this thread, seems pretty clear the pseudo-skeptics lost. Another way to tell is the pedigree of new skeptics. Most of them seem like careerists with no serious STEM publication background, gone are the days of having a Dawkins or Harris taking up public limelight for pseudo-skepticism. Now we seem to have Youtubers who amass small followings if that.

Ultimately if the pseudo-skeptics are correct we are biological robots on a rail-road crash course with Oblivion, and my belief in the paranormal isn't even my own choice but apparently based on random swerves at the quantum level. So why not make life interesting for myself in the meantime by rejecting their dull paradigm? Their entire shaming strategy is negated by the hollowness of their belief, probably why to keep their cash flow so many of their thought leaders went into politics...

Globally good chunk of the public believes in something supernatural or paranormal. I'd say it's the vast majority, even if not everyone thinks it is a good idea to engage with paranormal phenomena that is apart from their conception of the Divine.

What people don't believe, IMO, is that any particular person trying to get fame or money has definitive paranormal abilities. That's different than disbelieving in Psi/Survival in their entirety.

If you look at the surveys and media in this thread, seems pretty clear the pseudo-skeptics lost. Another way to tell is the pedigree of new skeptics. Most of them seem like careerists with no serious STEM publication background, gone are the days of having a Dawkins or Harris taking up public limelight for pseudo-skepticism. Now we seem to have Youtubers who amass small followings if that.

Ultimately if the pseudo-skeptics are correct we are biological robots on a rail-road crash course with Oblivion, and my belief in the paranormal isn't even my own choice but apparently based on random swerves at the quantum level. So why not make life interesting for myself in the meantime by rejecting their dull paradigm? Their entire shaming strategy is negated by the hollowness of their belief, probably why to keep their cash flow so many of their thought leaders went into politics...

I think that young people should be considered. At least in my personal experience, most of them have a agnosticism and maybe disdain towards organized religions.
But I agree New Atheism/Rationalism has no future. Religion debates in general are a fringe topic on the internet nowdays, in my country videos of the "Rationalist League" don't pass the 50 thousand on the average. I don't watch much of their content but their debate methods are very toxic most of the time, with personal insults against opponents and strawmen being common.

It just isn't worth the limited time in this world to worry overmuch about pseudo-skeptics, at least not for me. My sights are set on trying to figure out, to the extent that I can, the nature of this reality...

That's an important point.

One of the reader comments on an article linked above described someone seeing an apparition of their dead mother, shortly after the latter's death. Making sense of one's own life and how the world behaves in practice seems more valuable than any tendency to dismiss such experiences simply because some celebrity sceptic says so. I mention that topic as I had a few different types of after-death communication and I consider they are for myself to comprehend as best I can. Not everything can or should be treated as a laboratory experiment.

That's an important point.

One of the reader comments on an article linked above described someone seeing an apparition of their dead mother, shortly after the latter's death. Making sense of one's own life and how the world behaves in practice seems more valuable than any tendency to dismiss such experiences simply because some celebrity sceptic says so. I mention that topic as I had a few different types of after-death communication and I consider they are for myself to comprehend as best I can. Not everything can or should be treated as a laboratory experiment.

Yeah ultimately I think it is very hard, based on personal experience, to capture that proof for one's self.

It happens or doesn't happen based on factors we don't seem to understand. That said, pursuit of this proof seems more worthwhile than hoping the next paper will convince you.

OTOH I am wary of, say, taking psychedelics in desperation. My experience with drugs like weed are quite limited, but it was more than enough to convince me that pursuing that path was quite dangerous for the layperson compared to those who grow up in a shamanic culture.