Which types of PSI do you believe in?
Telepathy
14.75%
9
Precognition
14.75%
9
Psychokinesis
8.20%
5
Remote Viewing
13.11%
8
Survival of Consciousness 
14.75%
9
Reincarnation
13.11%
8
Mediumship
11.48%
7
Poltergeists
9.84%
6
61 vote(s)
* You voted for this item.

Which types of PSI do you believe in?

10 Replies, 1046 Views

Which types of PSI do you believe in?
[-] The following 1 user Likes berkelon's post:
  • Smaw
I mean I feel like they all have the potential to exist in SOME way, but the only two I'd mark off are poltergeists and psychokenisis, just cause they're the hardest to support. Though, we might have micro PK, and there's potential for ghosts to be some kind of mental thing rather than a physical ghosty boy.

Precognition probably weirds me out the most and remote viewing seems to have a lot of duds but also some remarkable hits, so I don't think we can rule anything off the table completely as long as we're getting info.
All of them, I have too much experience for any other answer to be rational.
"The cure for bad information is more information."
I also admit that I believe out of principle, as a locked down reality inflicted upon people with arbitrary and absurd rules that people are tortured into compliance of deserves only destruction.
"The cure for bad information is more information."
I said all, but "precognition" I think is some kind of predictable ability that probably collapses into one of the others.

I am very doubtful there's an arrow of causation going from Future to Present, and trying to make sense of this leads to absurdity IMO.
'Historically, we may regard materialism as a system of dogma set up to combat orthodox dogma...Accordingly we find that, as ancient orthodoxies disintegrate, materialism more and more gives way to scepticism.'

- Bertrand Russell


[-] The following 2 users Like Sciborg_S_Patel's post:
  • Mediochre, Larry
Quote:"Which types of PSI do you believe in?"
None.

We're here to discuss science.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Typoz's post:
  • Smaw
I can't really vote here because "belief" is too strong a word for "give open-minded credence to"  Except that I believe in poltergeists having been poked in the arm by one.  It cannot be mistaken for imagination.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Brian's post:
  • Typoz
It's also missing "Healing".

I believe in it but am unsure about specific instances like the Bengson Healing Method. It might be that he's the only one or one of the few that can make it work and the method itself is meaningless...
'Historically, we may regard materialism as a system of dogma set up to combat orthodox dogma...Accordingly we find that, as ancient orthodoxies disintegrate, materialism more and more gives way to scepticism.'

- Bertrand Russell


[-] The following 1 user Likes Sciborg_S_Patel's post:
  • Typoz
(2021-01-23, 09:22 AM)Typoz Wrote: None.

We're here to discuss science.

To expand on this, something like "Which types of PSI would be worthwhile to consider for either scientific research or as of practical usefulness in our own lives". The difficulty here is that there is some overlap between the two categories of scientific study and real life, but I don't think science can ever satisfactorily encompass all that is of value in our lives, such things as love, art and beauty should perhaps stand in their own right, without regard to science, while other areas may be beneficial to study and test. Certainly in my own life there are ideas or topics which I have discarded as not useful, though there may be scientific evidence to support them, thus it works both ways, neither science nor personal experience would give a complete picture on their own. But for me it is not about belief, which was the original sticking point. Rather it is about being practical.
(This post was last modified: 2021-01-24, 07:24 PM by Typoz.)
[-] The following 3 users Like Typoz's post:
  • Sciborg_S_Patel, Brian, Obiwan
(2021-01-24, 09:58 AM)Typoz Wrote: To expand on this, something like "Which types of PSI would be worthwhile to consider for either scientific research or as of practical usefulness in our own lives". The difficulty here is that there is some overlap between the two categories of scientific study and real life, but I don't think science can ever satisfactorily encompass all that is of value in our lives, such things as love, art and beauty should perhaps stand in their own right, without regard to science, while other areas may be beneficial to study and test. Certainly in my own life there are ideas or topics which I have discarded as not useful, though there may be scientific evidence to support them, thus it works both ways, neither science nor personal experience would give a complete picture on their own. But for me it is not about belief, which was the original sticking point. Rather it is about being practical.

Just so I can understand your perspective, are you saying that you do not believe things?

  • View a Printable Version
Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)