Why do you seriously consider psi?

I put up this survey to get a rough idea of the main reason(s) people believe in psi. The poll questions are based on what people have said on the Skeptiko forum over the years. But if your reason is different, I also put in "Other". Please explain why, if you use this option.


This doesn't just refer to committed believers, but to anyone who doesn't dismiss psi out of hand - which probably applies to most everyone here. And by "psi" I mean any of the topics we talk about here.

Linda

I'll go first.

My main reason is that I have had personal experiences which are as compelling (if not more so) than similar experiences described by others. That doesn't mean that I dismiss others' personal experiences, but rather that I consider all of our experiences roughly equivalent.

Linda

Hi Typoz,

I apologize. I accidentally posted a test thread (and discovered that the poll options don't show up when using Safari on iPad) which I deleted once I got the poll properly posted. That means your post in response also got deleted.

Can you repost your answer, and maybe elaborate on it a bit? It looked interesting. I guess it would go under "other" (or maybe I need to start another poll: "why don't you believe in psi?" ).

Linda

[Laird]

Linda, this poll is so badly constructed that I refuse to participate. It misses out many possible alternative answers, including the one that I would have chosen. Rather than restricting it to single-choice, it ought to support multiple choices, including at least the three (potentially simultaneous) reasons "Personal experience", "The personal experiences of others" and "The results of scientific research".

Linda, this poll is so badly constructed that I refuse to participate.

Yes. If it's meant to be answered by anyone who doesn't dismiss psi out of hand, then it's not appropriate to title it "Why do you believe in psi?".

Linda, this poll is so badly constructed that I refuse to participate. It misses out many possible alternative answers, including the one that I would have chosen. Rather than restricting it to single-choice, it ought to support multiple choices, including at least the three (potentially simultaneous) reasons "Personal experience", "The personal experiences of others" and "The results of scientific research".

Laird, I think you've misunderstood the poll. And it really needs to go back in to "Other Things" because it has nothing to do with Skeptic v. Proponent discussions. If you don't move the thread, I will delete it instead, because the last thing I wanted was for this to turn into yet another stupid, stupid proponent/skeptic fight. We are all here, even those of us who are treated as hostile witnesses, because we take psi seriously, regardless of the extent to which we think it's proven. You don't have to be a "proponent" or not a "skeptic" to answer why.

If you don't think any of those options covers the main reason you believe in psi, then that's what I included "other" for, because I am interested in other reasons. Please share. 

Your point about multiple options is good, with respect to scientific research and personal experience. Can I edit the poll? Otherwise, my thought on the difference between "personal experience" and "scientific research" was that anyone who finds personal experience compelling also finds the scientific research compelling. So the scientific research option was there to distinguish between people who don't find personal experience particularly compelling, but still take psi seriously because they find the scientific research compelling.

Linda

I apologize for my previous outburst.

I would prefer that this poll be moved to "Other Stuff", otherwise it may give people the wrong impression. However, it's rude of me, when others have taken the time to participate, to delete the thread.

I would be interested in how members who don't yet think psi is proven would answer the question. That is - what do you find difficult to dismiss out of hand?

Linda

I'm not sure what the big deal is. If it is a question of semantics, then why not discuss it so that reasonable discussion could evolve?

I participated and I don't care if the poll is deleted.

But I do find the root question an interesting one. 

Personally I'm not sure I so much "believe" in psi. I mean, do I believe in my cell phone?

I'm not sure what the big deal is. If it is a question of semantics, then why not discuss it so that reasonable discussion could evolve?

I participated and I don't care if the poll is deleted.

But I do find the root question an interesting one. 

Personally I'm not sure I so much "believe" in psi. I mean, do I believe in my cell phone?

I don't think there's much difference between "believe" and "fact" anyways. For example, our brain lights up the same way whether we are asked, "do you believe in capital punishment?" or "is Ottawa the capital of Canada?" (unless, of course, this is another one of those irreproducible psychology/fMRI experiments ).

Linda

Looks to me like an attempt to corral "believers" into arbitrary groups. I'm suspicious of anything fls posts because of years of seeing her go to any lengths to undermine any and all evidence supporting psi. That post above about her finding her own experiences compelling is, therefore, laughable.

So, like others, I see the poll as pointless. I imagine that most proponents would say, as I do, that it is the sheer weight of evidence, not any particular experience (either personal or related by someone else) that is compelling. For some of us, that evidence - whether it be from psi experiments, NDE, OOB, after death communication, reincarnation research, etc. etc. - informs a worldview that generally goes against the prevailing materialist paradigm. 

We could turn the poll questions around and ask why the skeptics feel so threatened by this evidence supporting psi that they devote such a lot of time and effort to attempting to debunk or discredit such evidence. Sure, it does the proponents a service by making us question more thoroughly but I can't imagine anything less fulfilling than to take up residency in a forum where almost everyone disagreed with me. That must take a particular type of missionary zeal and/or an oversized ego.