A Sylvia Browne Fanatic

[Legend]

Just something I thought I'd share. Should make you laugh.

This link will lead you (http://au.youtube.com/user/Realpsychichere) to a youtube account of a Sylvia Browne fan.

I thought I'd share something hilarious that I found on her page.

Click on the link and scroll down to "Recent Activity" on the left hand side of the page.

Have a read of the first sentence and a good laugh.

It was made 3 days ago from the time of this post. So at this time, it's the first sentence, but it might fall down the list later on.

:D :D :D

Alex.

[MattusMaximus]

I like to condom things regularly, too. But usually in my case it's a lot more sexy :D

[Legend]

How rare an occasion, when you really do "LOL". This was one of them.

Alex.

[Jonquill]

I might have found it funny if I wasn't too busy being disgusted seeing people sing the praises of that horrid old bat. "She is the light of the world".
Blaaggghhhh!

[Legend]

I know.

Just goes to show...

Alex.

[tyr_13]

The grammar! It burns!

[Legend]

Get the gun get the gun get the gun get the gun get the gun!

Alex.

[Jackalgirl]

"...the actions of Israel are beyond out of bounce and unhumanitarian".

(bolded by me)

"Beyond out of bounce" -- is that some sort of Sylviaspeak for something, like "out-ethics" or "low tone" is for Scientology (http://www.xenu.net)?

[Legend]

Further backs up the point, that people who follow Sylvia, truly aren't the smartest people on the planet.

Alex.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

I chuckled but the idea that you can condemn an attacking government's actions without supporting an organization like Hamas is actually a fine one to have.

Good for you, anonymous YouTube user!

Edit: Enspecially "as an American citizen"- Middle Eastern politics can be a tricky subject here.

[Femke]

I read 'condone'... :o

[Ducky]

Rabid SB fan is also a mythbusters fan?

That doesn't track...

[Legend]

I know, Ducky! That's precisely what I thought when I read that.

Alex.

[ExMinister]

Further backs up the point, that people who follow Sylvia, truly aren't the smartest people on the planet.

Alex.

Well, some of them may not be hopelessly ignorant. I know one personally.

[RSL's better half]

My husband would disagree with your assessment, Alex.

There are a good deal of very bright people who fell under this woman's con. Let's not pass judgment on others. Instead, let's continue to provide evidence against Ms Browne and change the minds of as many of her fans as possible.

[Legend]

I fail to see how a smart/bright/intelligent person could be fooled by a psychic. I really don't know how. Every smart/bright/intelligent person I know do not get fooled by psychics.

You probably all know some though, so perhaps, you're better equipped to provide a comment, than I.

Alex.

[RSL's better half]

I'm asking you to keep your perspective. Is it more important to judge others, or to try to coax them into seeing things your way? "Honey works better than vinegar" my dear mother used to say. When you assume others are less intelligent than you, you come off sounding arrogant, and that gets you nowhere. You've told me you admire my husband's work. If you know his work, then you must know that he applies patience and understanding (most of the time) with SB fans. In doing so, he provides evidence as he gently coaxes them round to his way of thinking. It works much better than telling them they have no intelligence would. Do you see what I'm saying?

I think you would do well with a "What Would Robert Do?" t-shirt. ;) (I mean that in a very loving way.) See Chillzero's thread in Forum Community.

[ExMinister]

Well said RSLBH. :)

There are unintelligent Sylvia Browne fans and there are intelligent ones. I think the difference is that the intelligent ones respond to logic and will change their minds based on evidence when they see it.

When I said I personally know one, I was sort of being facetious and I should apologize - I forget not everyone here knows I used to be a minister for Sylvia Browne (saying that nowdays makes me nauseous and grumpy and causes me to make retching sounds as I type, but there you have it). Of course, it's probably debatable which category I happen to fall into, but when I finally discovered the truth, with a little bit of investigation, it was all over. For the record, I haven't stopped reading skeptical material since.

Anyway, you can't lump people into categories like that. Smart people get fooled, too.

[Seanette]

ExMinister, when you say "I used to be a minister for Sylvia Browne", would you be willing to clarify what that entailed? Is that as in being the leader of a congregation she was in, is she setting herself up as a religious figure in her own right, ...?

[Legend]

I'm asking you to keep your perspective. Is it more important to judge others, or to try to coax them into seeing things your way? "Honey works better than vinegar" my dear mother used to say. When you assume others are less intelligent than you, you come off sounding arrogant, and that gets you nowhere.

You're right.

What I was trying to say, is not that I am smarter than them, but simply that they aren't too bright, which I still believe. I'd never say that to a "believer" if I was trying to convince them otherwise.

Of course, this lack of thought, is, of course, not on the same page as stupidity. My comment may have ignited that idea, not my intention. It can be turned around with a minute amount of thinking. In other words, this doesn't mean that overall they aren't clever people, simply that they are silly for being fooled for something so simple. And of course, I know, some people are that desperate, which can be understood. They aren't completely stupid people, just ditsy for being fooled. I'll never let go of that ideology.

And this should also be made clearer: the comment wasn't necessarily all that serious. It's intention was light-hearted; not all encompassing gospel.

Alex.

P.S. "What would Robert do?" eh? ;) Now that should be what they make us write on top of every English essay. WWRD. :D

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

I fail to see how a smart/bright/intelligent person could be fooled by a psychic. I really don't know how. Every smart/bright/intelligent person I know do not get fooled by psychics.

You probably all know some though, so perhaps, you're better equipped to provide a comment, than I.

Alex.

Robert's site has a letter from a university professor who was fooled by her. Where the lady taught was not mentioned and perhaps censored by Robert but you have to be pretty bright to teach at even a third-rate institution.

This teacher cited her depression as a contributing factor to being suckered in by someone who was offering answers. She did, however, see the truth quite quickly.

You don't have to be dumb to be fooled by a psychic. Many of us here are former believers in one woo or another or several and we're pretty smart people. Academics, scientists, journalists, politicians, physicians, nurses, psychiatrists, psychologists, artists, actors, musicians, writers and humanitarians have fallen for fraud.

The great poet Adam Mickiewicz was a believer in woo. The great engineer John Roebling died because of quackery. Isaac Newton believed in alchemy. The Beatles fell for a con man who claimed to be able to levitate. Fyodor Dostoevsky, a genius, had interest in the occult.

Edit: I was once robbed of $5 and let my friend be robbed of $15 by a palm-reader that the friend had dragged me to. I was 15 at the time, had not wanted to go in the first place and, even then, I thought there were several very fishy things about my reading. Although I had big doubts about some things she told me, other things the woman seemed to know about me I was quite startled by. I think I was half-convinced at the time. I wouldn't say I was stupid; I was uninformed about matters like cold-reading and the probability of certain things being true.

[Legend]

I always see a difference between common sense and a BS detector, and intelligence (good grades, good job). Always have. I usually denote the two as being "smart", and being "intelligent".

My post will now be editted to exclude the "intelligent" part.

EDIT: No it won't as I can't edit it.

Alex.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

You can be very intelligent and not have good grades or a good job. The most brilliant student in my high school was a pot-headed pretty boy who came into class late every day, coasted by on B grades and spent most of his time after school drinking, smoking cigarettes and hanging out with girls. This was a boy who had often read more books on the given subject than the teacher had and who astonishingly was once asked by an Honors history teacher in 9th grade to teach a full class on the Crusades- and did! This was someone everyone was sure would be famous one day. Fittingly, his yearbook quote was Einstein's "I never let my education interfere with my learning". That's another matter, though.

You're right about there being a difference between being street-smart and shrewd and being intelligent. A person who is smart but not very intelligent might have the advantage over a person who is intelligent but not smart when it comes to fraud.

James Randi once got a letter from a man who wrote to him asking what he could do about his Sylvia Browne fan sister. He added that his sister believed in many crazy things but was actually very intelligent. Randi said something to the effect of "You say your sister is very intelligent but that does not mean that she is smart".

Edit: Even though Sylvia Browne is an uneducated person with little intellectual curiosity, I'd call her pretty smart. I believe she's also intelligent enough.

John Edward I'd call a smart person with average intelligence.

[Legend]

You explain precisely what I mean. I'm very glad to hear that other people share an observation that I've had for many years. Being smart is more important than being intellingent, to me anyway.

So I'm not calling them stupid or dumb, just not smart. I don't care if you're Stephen Hawking, a certificate doesn't tell me you're smart.

Alex.

[Jonquill]

Some people seem to think that because they have wierd ideas that they are more intelligent than anybody else, especially the folks that like aliens and conspiracys. They think they can see the evidence that everyone else has missed.

[TruthBeTold]

Although I wasn't fooled by Sylvia, I was involved but I was smart enough to have my husband hold my belt loop just in case I decided to jump into the pool! Believing in the unseen doesn't make a person unintelligent, but their actions based on their beliefs can be pretty ignorant!!

None of this explains the horrible grammar and spelling that Sylvia Browne fans seem to use as a common language. I can understand people being in a hurry or even using text lingo but they don't...its as if they're using a language known by no others than the Novus clan!


ETA:
Some people seem to think that because they have wierd ideas that they are more intelligent than anybody else, especially the folks that like aliens and conspiracys. They think they can see the evidence that everyone else has missed.
Some people will feel that they are above everyone else regardless of their beliefs. :cool:

[Skeptic]

Michael Shermer, to name one, noted perceptively that very often it is smart people who are fooled, since they're far more likely to accept, or invent, all kinds of elaborate excuses for why Sylvia is psychic after all, while less intelligent people -- or simply less interested people -- will just look at her absurd claims and abysmal "hit" rate and ignore her.

[Legend]

Michael Shermer, to name one, noted perceptively that very often it is smart people who are fooled, since they're far more likely to accept, or invent, all kinds of elaborate excuses for why Sylvia is psychic after all, while less intelligent people -- or simply less interested people -- will just look at her absurd claims and abysmal "hit" rate and ignore her.

That's interesting, but...I dunno.

If someone is fooled by a psychic, I'm sorry, but they are not smart.

Alex.

[RSL's better half]

Alex, you are, quite obviously, a very intelligent person. You are also pretty smart, in the sense of your description of the word. You are a wonderful and participating new member of this forum.

Given certain circumstances, certain life experiences, you could still fall prey to a con. Kinda depends on the con and the artisit, I imagine. Never say never.

[alfaniner]

Psychics are similar to con men. The ones who make the most money are the best at what they do, bilk people. Con men prey on greed, psychics prey on grief. They are very experienced at overcoming any resistance to their wiles because they've seen it all before.

[ExMinister]

Legend, all kidding aside for a second, I do take offense at your continued insistence that people (like me) who have believed that people like Sylvia Browne are for real, are somehow less intelligent, even smart (as defined by you as common sense or whatever) than you. That is not only arrogant, it is simply wrong.

People believe for many different reasons, and individuals much cleverer than you have written whole books exploring the reasons (Michael Shermer is one notable example). My father was well educated, my family upper middle class, and I was raised to believe in psychic ability, I had an aunt who believed she could trance channel (married to an uncle who held a Master's degree) and it was he who recorded her channeled material. His passion was physics, and it was he who taught me to use a Ouija board. I had a grandmother who saw people who died at the foot of her bed, apparently before anyone knew of their death. I was raised this way. When I dreamed vivid dreams of deceased relatives, my family and friends all assumed I was psychic like my grandmother. I also went to college. I do not need to defend myself to you or to anyone else, but I am tired of people like you making ignorant statements claiming you are more intelligent than believers.

Many years ago, I went to Sylvia Browne with an expectation and hope, based on my own past experiences, that she would be real. My mother paid for my first reading. Because of the way I was raised, I actually felt guilty for the small amount of skepticism I did feel in my first reading with her that day. But even after I discovered Sylvia Browne wasn't legitimate, I still assumed others were. In fact, I had no concept of the skeptical view of things until I met Robert Lancaster and found this forum. Am I smarter now? No! I am now aware of a whole different dimension to the world, one that includes con artists and people who prey on others at their most vulnerable, but I still remain the same thinking, questioning, searching individual I was when I started. Growing up I spent a lot of time on the "streets," and I prided myself on being street savvy and having common sense. That has never changed. It did not help me one iota to defend myself against a tendency to believe that Sylvia Browne was probably real when I first met her. My assumption that paranormal phenomena were real was not an indication of a lack of common sense or intelligence, just as religious belief is not due to a lack of smarts. Common sense has nothing to do with this either.

One's personal environment has an effect: Take a reasonably intelligent child and raise them to believe in any sort of woo or paranormal phenomena and you will have a much different result than if you take a child and raise them to appreciate the scientific method, teach them critical thinking and an understanding that the world of the paranormal is full of con artists. Teach a child that their dreams are real events happening in a spiritual dimension and you will have different results than if you teach them that the brain is capable of all manner of hallucinatory experience. That child who believes in woo may grow up to be just as intelligent as the child who doesn't, with only a belief in woo to set them apart.

But it goes way beyond one's personal environment. The world is full of magical thinking - religions galore, psychics, mediums. We are inundated with it, some of us steeped in one form or another of it from the time we are small. There are paranormal researchers in universities - encouraging people with a background like mine to believe there must be something there to research. There are medical doctors and scientists who promote "woo" beliefs, again encouraging intelligent people to believe. I think this had an effect on my uncle. We may have personal experiences, spooky or even profoundly meaningful hallucinatory sleep-related personal experiences (true in my case) which, when you look at all of the professionals in the world who promote this sort of thinking, the sheer number of people who believe in this sort of thing, and you combine it with the very convincing feeling of such personal experiences, make it very hard NOT to believe.

It so happens that when one begins to actively search out evidence, to really look deeply at the track records of the psychics, at the history of the paranormal movement, the lack of convincing research, the number of frauds down through history touching on most every area of so-called psychic phenomena, when one begins to really explore the way the brain works, how cold reading works, at how Ouija boards and pendulums work, when one begins to take apart the claims of psychics and spiritual teachers and hold them up to scrutiny one by one, the sad fact emerges that much of it crumbles away and there simply isn't much left. If you know all of this and I don't, this may make you better informed in this one area, but it does not make me unintelligent or "stupid."

I am glad Robert Lancaster and most of the members of this forum withheld that type of judgment and instead offered freely the type of information I shared above or I might never have ventured out beyond the realm of ideas I had held sacred for so long. With a few exceptions, most people here seem to understand the difference between one's intelligence and one's propensity toward belief, which is influenced by so many factors, including as I've said above, one's environment. Many of us had "intelligent" reasons to believe, if intelligence can be partly defined as an ability to be logical and formulate sensible ideas about the world based on the knowledge we have at hand.

I'm not arguing that there aren't stupid people who are fans of Sylvia Browne. I've met plenty of people who, in spite of being shown the facts about Sylvia Browne, continue to believe against all logic. When I'm around these people, it almost seems to me that they are incapable, or just plain uninterested in thinking rationally. Of course, there are all sorts of people in this world with varying levels of intelligence and we all know that, just as people have all sorts of motivations, unrelated to intelligence, for wanting to believe in "woo" and the likes of Sylvia Browne.

But I feel strongly that belief itself can't truly be considered a lack of intelligence or "smarts." It goes far beyond that, and I just really feel this needed to be said.

ETA: Legend, I don't know how old you are or what your background is, and I probably shouldn't come down so hard on you personally. All I can ask is that you might consider what I've shared here and consider things from a slightly different viewpoint.

Best wishes,
ExM

[ExMinister]

ExMinister, when you say "I used to be a minister for Sylvia Browne", would you be willing to clarify what that entailed? Is that as in being the leader of a congregation she was in, is she setting herself up as a religious figure in her own right, ...?

Yes, she started a church some 20 years ago called Society of Novus Spiritus. She has 25 ministers or so and a handful of churches. In the early years, she used to give the Campbell church services herself with the help of a few ministers. In later years, this stopped and now she has ministers who do this.

[desertgal]

That's interesting, but...I dunno.

If someone is fooled by a psychic, I'm sorry, but they are not smart.

Alex.

I don't agree with that. They may not be allowing logic and reason to prevail when they believe a psychic, but that doesn't mean they are not intelligent.

All human beings, in times of stress, or grief, or anger, can behave beyond reason or logic. And a great many people have not been trained to apply objectivity. Doesn't mean they aren't smart enough to do so. The mind behaves the way it has been trained. It follows patterns of behavior and thought that, for most of us, have been ingrained in us since our childhoods.

Fortunately, people have the intelligence to stretch their minds beyond those patterns of behavior and thought. It might require a catalyst to do it - such as being fooled by a psychic-but the intelligence IS there.

Vincent Bugliosi, who authored Helter Skelter and prosecuted Charles Manson, in the prelude of his book on the JFK assassination, wrote of attending a dinner party at the White House where a woman-an attorney, well educated, high powered, and very intelligent-cornered him to elaborate on her reasons for believing that Princess Diana was assassinated. He said that she quoted globs of baseless rhetoric that appeared on websites and blogs across the Internet. It was his opinion that she had, as a result of reading all those endless, groundless, prejudiced diatribes and opinions, trained her mind to believe in the assassination theory, regardless of reason or logic.

As well, he pointed out, she had embraced what so many people embrace: the fascinating and the extraordinary. IOW, for some people, it could not simply be that a woman as famous as Diana could die, like so many other people every day, at the hands of a drunk driver, in a preventable road accident. Diana was "extraordinary", hence, her death must also be "extraordinary".

This is the attitude that psychics prey on. Unfortunately, they are also most likely to encounter it in the grieving and the vulnerable.

But, "not smart"? No. Sadly, it is never that simple.

[Legend]

Alex, you are, quite obviously, a very intelligent person. You are also pretty smart, in the sense of your description of the word. You are a wonderful and participating new member of this forum.

Given certain circumstances, certain life experiences, you could still fall prey to a con. Kinda depends on the con and the artisit, I imagine. Never say never.

Thankyou and I agree that I could possibly be fooled by a con man. But never a psychic. All psychics are con men, but not all con men are psychics; as, of course, we all know...

Legend, all kidding aside for a second, I do take offense at your continued insistence that people (like me) who have believed that people like Sylvia Browne are for real, are somehow less intelligent, even smart (as defined by you as common sense or whatever) than you. That is not only arrogant, it is simply wrong.

And we'll stop it there. Firstly, no I never said I am smarter than anyone. EVER. So stop putting words in my mouth. I simply stated that those who are being fooled by Sylvia Browne are not smart people.

If you are paying attention, you'd have noticed I did actually state that intelligent people can be fooled by psychics. I stated that fully. Smart people, on the other hand...nup.

Also, if you were paying attention I said this:

Of course, this lack of thought, is, of course, not on the same page as stupidity. My comment may have ignited that idea, not my intention. It can be turned around with a minute amount of thinking. In other words, this doesn't mean that overall they aren't clever people, simply that they are silly for being fooled for something so simple.

People believe for many different reasons, and individuals much cleverer than you have written whole books exploring the reasons (Michael Shermer is one notable example). My father was well educated, my family upper middle class, and I was raised to believe in psychic ability, I had an aunt who believed she could trance channel (married to an uncle who held a Master's degree) and it was he who recorded her channeled material. His passion was physics, and it was he who taught me to use a Ouija board. I had a grandmother who saw people who died at the foot of her bed, apparently before anyone knew of their death. I was raised this way. When I dreamed vivid dreams of deceased relatives, my family and friends all assumed I was psychic like my grandmother. I also went to college. I do not need to defend myself to you or to anyone else, but I am tired of people like you making ignorant statements claiming you are more intelligent than believers.

I'll tell you what I'm tired of. People making a straw man, and putting words in my mouth. Don't do that I hate it.

I never said that INTELLIGENT PEOPLE (surgeons, astronauts, you get the picture) can't be fooled by psychics. I said that SMART PEOPLE can't be fooled. Smart people being people with a good BS detector, can understand "people", they have common sense, that sort of thing.

Again, NEVER did I say I was smarter, or more intelligent than anyone.

Many years ago, I went to Sylvia Browne with an expectation and hope, based on my own past experiences, that she would be real. My mother paid for my first reading. Because of the way I was raised, I actually felt guilty for the small amount of skepticism I did feel in my first reading with her that day. But even after I discovered Sylvia Browne wasn't legitimate, I still assumed others were. In fact, I had no concept of the skeptical view of things until I met Robert Lancaster and found this forum. Am I smarter now? No! I am now aware of a whole different dimension to the world, one that includes con artists and people who prey on others at their most vulnerable, but I still remain the same thinking, questioning, searching individual I was when I started. Growing up I spent a lot of time on the "streets," and I prided myself on being street savvy and having common sense. That has never changed. It did not help me one iota to defend myself against a tendency to believe that Sylvia Browne was probably real when I first met her. My assumption that paranormal phenomena were real was not an indication of a lack of common sense or intelligence, just as religious belief is not due to a lack of smarts. Common sense has nothing to do with this either.

1. "Priding yourself" as being street smart doesn't mean you are.
2. You are smarter now than you were. I.e. Mary used to be conned, she now has been taught and taught herself to not be conned anymore. Mary is now a smarter person.
3. Common sense has everything to do with this. Although, obviously, it can be influenced by the context and determinants of your life, like your family.

Look at you now. You do not believe in psychic ability despite a huge amount of contextual influences that would see otherwise. Common sense should prevail with anyone who gives it any amount of real thought. Unbiased, two-sided thought.

One's personal environment has an effect: Take a reasonably intelligent child and raise them to believe in any sort of woo or paranormal phenomena and you will have a much different result than if you take a child and raise them to appreciate the scientific method, teach them critical thinking and an understanding that the world of the paranormal is full of con artists. Teach a child that their dreams are real events happening in a spiritual dimension and you will have different results than if you teach them that the brain is capable of all manner of hallucinatory experience. That child who believes in woo may grow up to be just as intelligent as the child who doesn't, with only a belief in woo to set them apart.

Last sentence is correct. And I hope you understand why as I've now addressed this twice.

As I have said, context and the whole "brainwashing" thing is right. I got slammed with "believe in God". Every Tuesday I had to go to classes to learn about Him, and to receive the sacraments. That was when I was a child.

Psychic ability was believed in, when I was a kid too. My extended family is in full support and belief of psychics. They go and see live shows, they go to fortune tellers, they go to these 'psychic fairs' and their love it. Ghosts are the same.

In the end, I do not believe in psychics, nor ghosts, nor God. I attribute that to simply "getting smarter".

Don't get me wrong, people do get these "brainwash" type things occur, as you've pointed out. That doesn't take the fact away that you may just have been "brainwashed" to not being smart. To put it simply.

But it goes way beyond one's personal environment. The world is full of magical thinking - religions galore, psychics, mediums. We are inundated with it, some of us steeped in one form or another of it from the time we are small. There are paranormal researchers in universities - encouraging people with a background like mine to believe there must be something there to research. There are medical doctors and scientists who promote "woo" beliefs, again encouraging intelligent people to believe. I think this had an effect on my uncle. We may have personal experiences, spooky or even profoundly meaningful hallucinatory sleep-related personal experiences (true in my case) which, when you look at all of the professionals in the world who promote this sort of thinking, the sheer number of people who believe in this sort of thing, and you combine it with the very convincing feeling of such personal experiences, make it very hard NOT to believe.

Fair enough. It doesn't change the "not smart" premise.

We are smothered with it, we are "inundated" with it. The fact remains that if we're smart enough, that will and should pull through. People have been crazed believers and converted, if you will. People have it in them to, again, observe both sides of a coin. It's not as if people are born 'smart'. They learn it, like everything else. The ability to learn it might be hindered, by upbringing, advertising and experiences, but it doesn't mean we can't learn it.

If you were 'smart' enough, and it doesn't take all that much, you could, unlike my 20 y/o cousin, understand that no, that isn't a ghost "bobbing behind a bush".

It so happens that when one begins to actively search out evidence, to really look deeply at the track records of the psychics, at the history of the paranormal movement, the lack of convincing research, the number of frauds down through history touching on most every area of so-called psychic phenomena, when one begins to really explore the way the brain works, how cold reading works, at how Ouija boards and pendulums work, when one begins to take apart the claims of psychics and spiritual teachers and hold them up to scrutiny one by one, the sad fact emerges that much of it crumbles away and there simply isn't much left. If you know all of this and I don't, this may make you better informed in this one area, but it does not make me unintelligent or "stupid."

Last sentence: again, don't put words in my mouth; especially when I specifically wrote otherwise. Check the quote I outlined when addressing your first paragraph.

My other cousin has a really nice boyfriend. Great bloke and I get along with him really well. He, I consider, a 'smart' person. He doesn't 'research', doesn't "scrutinise them one by one", he just thinks, unbiased, double-sided thought. Obviously, he does not believe in psychic ability.

I am glad Robert Lancaster and most of the members of this forum withheld that type of judgment and instead offered freely the type of information I shared above or I might never have ventured out beyond the realm of ideas I had held sacred for so long. With a few exceptions, most people here seem to understand the difference between one's intelligence and one's propensity toward belief, which is influenced by so many factors, including as I've said above, one's environment. Many of us had "intelligent" reasons to believe, if intelligence can be partly defined as an ability to be logical and formulate sensible ideas about the world based on the knowledge we have at hand.

I'm hoping you understand the irrelevance and inaccuracy of this paragraph by now. If not, then I'm not going to keep arguing with you.

I'm not arguing that there aren't stupid people who are fans of Sylvia Browne. I've met plenty of people who, in spite of being shown the facts about Sylvia Browne, continue to believe against all logic. When I'm around these people, it almost seems to me that they are incapable, or just plain uninterested in thinking rationally. Of course, there are all sorts of people in this world with varying levels of intelligence and we all know that, just as people have all sorts of motivations, unrelated to intelligence, for wanting to believe in "woo" and the likes of Sylvia Browne.

They are not incapable. Not at all are they incapable. They just choose not to.

They choose to see it their way without exception at all. No matter anything anyone says, it's in one ear and out the other, without even stopping for a rest along the way. These people are not smart.

But I feel strongly that belief itself can't truly be considered a lack of intelligence or "smarts." It goes far beyond that, and I just really feel this needed to be said.

ETA: Legend, I don't know how old you are or what your background is, and I probably shouldn't come down so hard on you personally. All I can ask is that you might consider what I've shared here and consider things from a slightly different viewpoint.

Best wishes,
ExM

I would be a hypocrite if I didn't consider things from a slightly different viewpoint. I have, and will continue to.

I don't agree with that. They may not be allowing logic and reason to prevail when they believe a psychic, but that doesn't mean they are not intelligent.

You should read some more of what I have said.

Alex.

[Seanette]

Yes, she started a church some 20 years ago called Society of Novus Spiritus. She has 25 ministers or so and a handful of churches. In the early years, she used to give the Campbell church services herself with the help of a few ministers. In later years, this stopped and now she has ministers who do this.

Thanks for the clarification. (I'm still learning about a lot of the subjects under discussion in these parts.)

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Alex, it's also worth mentioning people who are shrewd, hard-nosed, "down to earth" and rational and all of those other qualities you mentioned can still believe in something that's simply not true.

Take Deepak Chopra as an example. I believe that this is a man who is hard as nails under the "soft-spoken and gentle Southwest Asian mystic" and "kindly but eccentric grandfather" image. He fumbles, he sometimes pretends to be innocent and naive about things like politics and current events, he seems a little "lost in the clouds" in his public appearances and feigns humility to celebrities such as Mike Myers.

I believe that some of this is part of Mr. Chopra's real personality but that most elements of this are a hard-boiled cynic affecting the image of a harmless dreamer. And remember, this is not a person who is knowingly lying and deceiving, like Sylvia Browne, or even a person who knows they are conning others but justifies it as helping them. This is a person who is a true believer in his own BS.

These suspicions were in part confirmed by a minor incident on an American chat/debate show Chopra was asked to appear on some time ago. He was driven into a corner by another member of the panel who insisted on asking him some hard questions (and another member of the debate had expressed some polite but firm skepticism to him during the discussion.)

He responded by spreading his arms and proclaiming something to the effect of "You know, I'm just a poor simple dumb fool. What do I know, really?", managing to entirely deflect the heat on him.

The host (a personal acquaintance of Chopra's), however, affectionately patted his back and exclaimed something like "Poor simple fool?! You're as dumb as a fox!"

My thoughts exactly. Chopra is airy-fairy and irrational when it comes to areas of life such as past-life regression and alternative medicine but in everything else, he's quite a cool customer and plenty rational. He's both intelligent and pretty smart.

[Legend]

I don't think I can comment on that. I don't know who Deepak is.

Alex.

[ExMinister]

Sorry, Legend, but it is you who are moving the goal posts. I did not create a strawman, not have I put words in your mouth. Go back and read your own stuff, if you must. First you lumped smart/bright/intelligent people all in one category, saying you failed to see how such people could be fooled by a psychic. You later came right out and stated you considered those who can be fooled to be "not too bright." It is this point that I took a lot of time to address, hoping to provide some insight into why, IMO, your passing judgment like this is incorrect and insulting. That is my opinion and you are welcome to disagree with me but that is not the same thing as trying to weasel out of what you actually said. For example, you are now trying to say that you never claimed to be smarter, but in this you are being disingenous; your statement that people who fall for psychics are not "smart," and that you yourself would never fall for psychic implies as much, does it not? At any rate, I was once a part of the group of people of whom you speak, and you are speaking of other people who may find their way over to this site by way of Robert's site, people who may have been included in one of his articles, who believed in the abilities of Sylvia Browne at some point in time. It bothers me to think that they will read these types of careless comments and be hurt any more than they already have been. Again, you are free to disagree.

[ExMinister]

Alex, it's also worth mentioning people who are shrewd, hard-nosed, "down to earth" and rational and all of those other qualities you mentioned can still believe in something that's simply not true.

Take Deepak Chopra as an example. I believe that this is a man who is hard as nails under the "soft-spoken and gentle Southwest Asian mystic" and "kindly but eccentric grandfather" image. He fumbles, he sometimes pretends to be innocent and naive about things like politics and current events, he seems a little "lost in the clouds" in his public appearances and feigns humility to celebrities such as Mike Myers.

I believe that some of this is part of Mr. Chopra's real personality but that most elements of this are a hard-boiled cynic affecting the image of a harmless dreamer. And remember, this is not a person who is knowingly lying and deceiving, like Sylvia Browne, or even a person who knows they are conning others but justifies it as helping them. This is a person who is a true believer in his own BS.

These suspicions were in part confirmed by a minor incident on an American chat/debate show Chopra was asked to appear on some time ago. He was driven into a corner by another member of the panel who insisted on asking him some hard questions (and another member of the debate had expressed some polite but firm skepticism to him during the discussion.)

He responded by spreading his arms and proclaiming something to the effect of "You know, I'm just a poor simple dumb fool. What do I know, really?", managing to entirely deflect the heat on him.

The host (a personal acquaintance of Chopra's), however, affectionately patted his back and exclaimed something like "Poor simple fool?! You're as dumb as a fox!"

My thoughts exactly. Chopra is airy-fairy and irrational when it comes to areas of life such as past-life regression and alternative medicine but in everything else, he's quite a cool customer and plenty rational. He's both intelligent and pretty smart.


That is an excellent example. And as DesertGal said, to attribute this type of thing to a lack of intelligence or "smarts" - it just isn't that simple. Far from it.

[Legend]

This is where you further get away from what I'm saying. Did I say that you can attribute it to it? No! People who believe in Sylvia's ability aren't smart. Not, their lack of smarts results in a belief in Sylvia.

First you lumped smart/bright/intelligent people all in one category, saying you failed to see how such people could be fooled by a psychic.

Ay ay ay. That's why I wrote this:

I always see a difference between common sense and a BS detector, and intelligence (good grades, good job). Always have. I usually denote the two as being "smart", and being "intelligent".

My post will now be editted to exclude the "intelligent" part.

EDIT: No it won't as I can't edit it.

Alex.

You later came right out and stated you considered those who can be fooled to be "not too bright."

When have I deviated from this? Not too bright = not too smart. I'd rather not use the exact same word over and over again.

It is this point that I took a lot of time to address, hoping to provide some insight into why, IMO, your passing judgment like this is incorrect and insulting.

Perhaps it is insulting. Incorrect...nope. That's a matter for opinion.

That is my opinion and you are welcome to disagree with me but that is not the same thing as trying to weasel out of what you actually said.

For the love of...

**deep breaths**

I did not weasel out of anything. I'm not going to say anymore on that. That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

For example, you are now trying to say that you never claimed to be smarter, but in this you are being disingenous; your statement that people who fall for psychics are not "smart," and that you yourself would never fall for psychic implies as much, does it not?

That's better.

Again, I'm not saying this as all-encompassing. In certain parts of being "smart", I consider all skeptics to be smarter than those who believe in psychics. Not in every aspect of the word. I've an intricate understanding of that word.

It bothers me to think that they will read these types of careless comments and be hurt any more than they already have been. Again, you are free to disagree.

Don't put me on the same page as the devil. You're exaggerating everything.

If you believe that a woman, despite clear evidence and regardless of personal experience and context, can speak to your dead relative, or tell you what you were in your previous life, or tell you the first letter of your Aunty, or tell police where a body is directly from the ability of being able to speak to the dead, you are not smart. Sorry.

This is not to say you are inevitably not smart for the rest of your life, as is the case with yourself, and, I'm sure many others.

Alex.

[Legend]

Alex, it's also worth mentioning people who are shrewd, hard-nosed, "down to earth" and rational and all of those other qualities you mentioned can still believe in something that's simply not true.

I can understand that.

However, psychic ability. Sorry, it's really something that requires little thought to agree that "psychics" have no ability at all.

Alex.

[Legend]

Again, I'm not saying this as all-encompassing. In certain parts of being "smart", I consider all skeptics to be smarter than those who believe in psychics. Not in every aspect of the word. I've an intricate understanding of that word.

FTR: As I've said, many of my extended family believes in psychic ability. They, are not smart people. While some intelligent, perhaps, none smart people.

Also, if you see what I've said as arrogant, I don't mind. I don't think so, but hey...

Alex.

[ExMinister]

Hi Alex - Well, you did weasel just ever so slightly ;) and I did not exaggerate - it is very hurtful for people to read such things. However, I do want to say that I understand most of the underlying sentiment you are expressing here, and your feeling that skeptical people or people who don't believe in paranormal phenomena are smarter than people who do, in the sense that they are better informed and less gullible. Stated like that, I will even agree with you. :)

It reminds me of a principle that I have tried to live by, which is that it's much less offensive to criticize a behavior than it is to label a person. So "behavior that isn't smart" is a much friendlier and more legitimate thing to say than, say, "people like that are not smart." But even aside from kindness, it is just much more accurate to say that smart people sometimes act in ways that seem less than intelligent to those who know better, especially when it comes to woo. Can we agree on that and call it a truce? Anyway, I've read some of your other threads here and I think I understand a bit better where you are coming from and I have to tell you I do admire you for being interested in critical thinking skills and for thinking these kinds of issues out and being willing to discuss them here.

ExM

[Legend]

Agreed on everything.

I'm glad that you "admire" my interest in critical thinking. Thanks for those comments.

Alex.

[AliasN]

For some reason this thread reminds me of a mindset of mine that I still have to struggle with occasionally, but was much more prevalent when I was younger:

A) If I've figured something out, it should be ridiculously easy for others to do the same and I'm impatient with them for not doing so. E.g. "Well, spluh! Everybody knows that!"
B) If I can't figure something out or a concept is new to me, that must mean it is ridiculously hard to figure out and not immediately obvious. E.g. "How is anybody supposed to know that?!"

I wish I could say I don't do this any more, but (frustratingly) every once in a while...

[Legend]

I've never had that sort of a problem, but it's very common. Many people say those comments and they're real common.

I wouldn't worry too much, just keep your cool, it really isn't too bad of an issue anyway. Plus, as you say, it is only "every once in a while".

Alex.

[Wowbagger]

Legend, although you are quite bright, you are acting on personal incredulity.

Just because you can't think of how a smart person could possibly be fooled by Slyvia Browne, does not mean it could never happen.

Read a good book on cognitive dissonance, and the haphazard evolution of the human mind. You'd be surprised at the depths of foolishness many otherwise exceptionally bright people sink to.

[Legend]

Just because you can't think of how a smart person could possibly be fooled by Slyvia Browne, does not mean it could never happen.

Isn't that a little bit exaggerated?

I'm over that discussion and we've moved on.

Alex.

[Silly Green Monkey]

How nice for you.

[Legend]

It sounded rude, so I editted.

Alex.

[Wowbagger]

I'm over that discussion and we've moved on. It does seem as though my comment ended up getting added late in the game. I apologize.

(But, I don't think it was much of an exaggeration. Seriously, have you read a good book about the human psychology?! Rational species, my foot!)

[Old man]

For some reason this thread reminds me of a mindset of mine that I still have to struggle with occasionally, but was much more prevalent when I was younger:

A) If I've figured something out, it should be ridiculously easy for others to do the same and I'm impatient with them for not doing so. E.g. "Well, spluh! Everybody knows that!"
B) If I can't figure something out or a concept is new to me, that must mean it is ridiculously hard to figure out and not immediately obvious. E.g. "How is anybody supposed to know that?!"

I wish I could say I don't do this any more, but (frustratingly) every once in a while... Me too.

Alex, like you, I also believe that I would never be taken in by a psychic, or a Nigerian scammer, or a host of other cons. That's not the point. The point is that, when we're vulnerable, you and I can be scammed by somebody. I've just spent the last three and a half years being scammed by a stripper. I'm intelligent, I'm hard nosed, I'm street smart, and I'm a hell of a lot older than you (and many of the people that've been scammed by Sylvia). Heck, I even knew, all along, that I was being scammed. I just didn't want to believe it. I wanted her to be in love with me so bad that I just kept going back, making excuses, 'accepting' her lies as possible truths, and hoping that my gut reaction, my 'street smarts', if you will, were wrong. I'll bet that most of Sylvia's victims would NOT have fallen for this girl's scam. I'm sure most of them would have said I was 'stupid', in the same way you apply that term to them.

In your "My Mum..." thread, you talked about how your mother uses the 'Just trust me, I'm older and wiser than you' line, and how you're willing to accept it from some people. Well, this is one of those times. Really. Print out this thread, put it in a safe place, and read it again in about ten years. You'll be surprised, and, I think, embarrassed.

[Beeg Seestor]

I haven't read the entire thread word for word so maybe this has been covered, but...

It appears that people who might otherwise be very intelligent and smart can be swayed by emotions. I can only imagine how desperate Shawn Hornbeck's parents and others like them had to be to seek out Sylvia Browne. I don't care how high someone’s IQ is or the degree of their street smarts or how much common sense they normally use, I can see people trying anything if they think there is the remotest chance it might help them find their missing child. That little voice in the back of your mind saying "this is silly" might have a tough time winning out over the heart saying "but what if".

And until we get rid of the Sylvia's of the world, desperate people will turn to these fakes in desperate times. We seldom hear the stories about other psychics, but obviously Sylvia is chosen because she is well known; the hope being that if anyone is a "real" psychic, it has to be her. And, as we all know, she takes full advantage of this.

Maybe this makes these people temporarily "not smart" but I know I would never have the heart to say that to a desperate parent, especially after the fact. And talking them out of it before hand could prove impossible.

Janie

[Legend]

Me too.

Alex, like you, I also believe that I would never be taken in by a psychic, or a Nigerian scammer, or a host of other cons. That's not the point. The point is that, when we're vulnerable, you and I can be scammed by somebody. I've just spent the last three and a half years being scammed by a stripper. I'm intelligent, I'm hard nosed, I'm street smart, and I'm a hell of a lot older than you (and many of the people that've been scammed by Sylvia). Heck, I even knew, all along, that I was being scammed. I just didn't want to believe it. I wanted her to be in love with me so bad that I just kept going back, making excuses, 'accepting' her lies as possible truths, and hoping that my gut reaction, my 'street smarts', if you will, were wrong. I'll bet that most of Sylvia's victims would NOT have fallen for this girl's scam. I'm sure most of them would have said I was 'stupid', in the same way you apply that term to them.

In your "My Mum..." thread, you talked about how your mother uses the 'Just trust me, I'm older and wiser than you' line, and how you're willing to accept it from some people. Well, this is one of those times. Really. Print out this thread, put it in a safe place, and read it again in about ten years. You'll be surprised, and, I think, embarrassed.

Your story is fine, and understood, and agreed.

My premise was that smart people can't be fooled by psychics...not strippers.

And to the "one of those times". Well, we'll see... :D

Alex.

[AliasN]

I've never had that sort of a problem, but it's very common. Many people say those comments and they're real common.

I wouldn't worry too much, just keep your cool, it really isn't too bad of an issue anyway. Plus, as you say, it is only "every once in a while".
Yes, I can really see how you completely understand my point of view.

[Legend]

A) If I've figured something out, it should be ridiculously easy for others to do the same and I'm impatient with them for not doing so. E.g. "Well, spluh! Everybody knows that!"

Oh the irony.

I guess I won't get along with everyone. Although sometimes, I just wonder why people go about saying some things in the way that they did. :rolleyes:

I give advice and try to comfort a small problem and you react like that. You shove it back with sarcasm? How pathetic. Even if your motive was to get me to think if I do that sort of thing. Just pathetic.

Oh geez sorry, I'm not understanding what you said and went over the top with my reaction...I don't know why, but that sounds familiar.

I can't believe your post and I hope to God that I've misread it.

I strive in "real life" if you will, NOT to do either "A" or "B". I hate when people shove that on to me.

Alex.

[Legend]

This thread has gravitated way too far, and I'm getting ridiculous comments from someone who has decided to be pathetic.

So, perhaps, I'll be pathetic too and try and ignore whatever AliasN has to say.

Alex.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Alex, I think it also depends on which psychic and how good they are.

An impoverished gypsy woman who practically snatches your dollar bills from you after she rattles off predictions about your romantic life is not a convincing con artist. That is someone who is a transparent liar and is quite clearly only out for the money. That might be someone most people would not fall for (and those who do fall for them might only do so at first and are very quickly disllusioned).

Not to pick on gypsies (more precisely, the Roma/Romani), it's just that in Europe and parts of North America, it's common for many fortune-tellers to be of that ethnic group. And I'm the first to admit that there are plenty of Caucasian psychics (indeed, psychics of practically every ethnic/racial group found in America).

Someone like Sylvia Browne is easier to fall for because she's endorsed by the likes of Larry King and appears on networks such as CNN, she's a multi-millionaire and she has been in buisness for 50 years.

All of these attest to her veracity and her success as a psychic. And her success as a psychic attests to her veracity.

[Jonquill]

I think that once you know about cold reading and how the tv shows are edited to make it look like the psychics are always right when in fact they are alway wrong, it is bleedin' obvious it is all fake and you'd have to be pretty desparate to cling to that belief.

But if you approach it without knowing anything of these things, psychics seem much more plausible. They magically seem to know stuff, the tv host is praising them for their accuracy in sloving crimes and finding lost children, people speak highly of them, they sell bucket loads of books, all the things that we accept in our society as measures of sucess.

Unless your head is really fine tuned into that skeptic way of thinking (where you start to doubt everything) most of the time unless you have some special reason to think what you are viewing is untrue you accept what is on the tv and in the newpapers as being right.

[Legend]

Alex, I think it also depends on which psychic and how good they are.

An impoverished gypsy woman who practically snatches your dollar bills from you after she rattles off predictions about your romantic life is not a convincing con artist. That is someone who is a transparent liar and is quite clearly only out for the money. That might be someone most people would not fall for (and those who do fall for them might only do so at first and are very quickly disllusioned).

Not to pick on gypsies (more precisely, the Roma/Romani), it's just that in Europe and parts of North America, it's common for many fortune-tellers to be of that ethnic group. And I'm the first to admit that there are plenty of Caucasian psychics (indeed, psychics of practically every ethnic/racial group found in America).

Someone like Sylvia Browne is easier to fall for because she's endorsed by the likes of Larry King and appears on networks such as CNN, she's a multi-millionaire and she has been in buisness for 50 years.

All of these attest to her veracity and her success as a psychic. And her success as a psychic attests to her veracity.

Yeah.

I'd certainly agree on that. Very much so. I think that it's important to go to demonstrations with skepticism, even if you do believe in wooish things.

Agreed.

I think that once you know about cold reading and how the tv shows are edited to make it look like the psychics are always right when in fact they are alway wrong, it is bleedin' obvious it is all fake and you'd have to be pretty desparate to cling to that belief.

But if you approach it without knowing anything of these things, psychics seem much more plausible. They magically seem to know stuff, the tv host is praising them for their accuracy in sloving crimes and finding lost children, people speak highly of them, they sell bucket loads of books, all the things that we accept in our society as measures of sucess.

Unless your head is really fine tuned into that skeptic way of thinking (where you start to doubt everything) most of the time unless you have some special reason to think what you are viewing is untrue you accept what is on the tv and in the newpapers as being right.

Personally, you could criticise me like crazy, but I think that simply thinking will allow you to evade belief in psychic ability. Before I'd even heard of Cold Reading, I was doubting it. It was something that amazed me, so I gave it decent thought, and bingo!

Obviously I can't speak for everyone, so perhaps I'm a little misguided with thinking that. If I was, people who believe in something, should believe in it for reasons. "He told me the initial of my cat", is not a valid reason. If they are keen enough to say that they do have faith in the ability of psychics, then they should know about it from both sides. Obviously this is turning into a rant because I'm blurting things we all know anyway.

Thanks for your comments.

Alex.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Before I knew what cold-reading was, I had very mixed feelings about psychics.

It certainly occurred to me that they should be able to find Osama, that they seemed a little too eager for money, that they did not predict 9/11 or events like it and the dozen other things that naturally arise.

On the other hand, though, "how did she know that?!".

I second what Jonquill said. When they appear on TV, appear to solve crimes, are consulted by famous people and sell millions of books, their legitimacy goes up about 100%.

[Legend]

Yeh. I couldn't agree more with the legitimacy rise. It's all publicity and attention, though. Advertising. That's how people sell products, get their name out there and a reason to believe that people need or want the service or good.

Alex.

[Jonquill]

Alex, maybe you do have a natural talent for spotting BS (like some people have a natural talent for playing the piano) or maybe you haven't got round to being badly tricked by anyone yet. I think most of us get tricked by a psychic or a stripper or a lover or a business partner or we make a really incredibly stupid decision and we look back and see our own stupidity staring us in the face and wonder how we could have made such an awful error.

Maybe it would make a good subject for a poll :D it would at least be entertaining if not enlightening.

[Legend]

Making an awful error is different to believing that someone can talk to my Grandad.

Although the poll could be hilarious...:D

Alex.

[Jonquill]

Go on, make the poll then, see how many people have been fooled by strippers and psychics and don't forget real estate agents, 'cos they are as slippery as Silvia.

(My apologies to any non-slip real estate agents who may read this.)

[AliasN]

Oh, the irony!

I guess I won't get along with everyone. Although sometimes, I just wonder why people go about saying some things in the way that they did.

I give advice and try to comfort a small problem and you react like that. You shove it back with sarcasm? How pathetic. Even if your motive was to get me to think if I do that sort of thing. Just pathetic.

Oh geez sorry, I'm not understanding what you said and went over the top with my reaction...I don't know why, but that sounds familiar.

I can't believe your post and I hope to God that I've misread it.

I strive in "real life" if you will, NOT to do either "A" or "B". I hate when people shove that on to me. Please, just don't play the "I'm older therefore you should listen to me" card. I'll listen if you have something that I should hear.
Whoa, methinks the lady doth protest too much. Seriously, dude, if you can't handle sarcastic rejoinders, I think you're in the wrong forum.

My original reflection on my propensity to make assumptions about what others should do or think based solely on my own abilities or knowledge base was a sincere, and I thought, valid one. I expressed frustration because, no matter how much I am aware that is not the ideal way to think, and no matter how much I try NOT to do that, no matter how much experience I've gained over the years, it still comes up.

Yes, I was drawing a parallel between this thread and my experiences. But I really don't understand your violent reaction to me inferring that you may be subject to the same propensity as me (and every other human on the planet).

So, perhaps, I'll be pathetic too and try and ignore whatever AliasN has to say.
It seems to me you're upset because you think I'm attacking you. I can assure you that is not what I'm doing, I'm trying to make a point that perhaps you aren't as empathetic as you think you are. You brushed off my first post very superficially, I felt. I used sarcasm to point that out a little more clearly.

But I understand that if you don't get that, that is my failing and not yours.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

People tell me I have a natural talent for spotting BS. My friend calls me "the human BSdetector" and says that I'm practically allergic to it :D.

Even my detector can go into overdrive, overlook something or need a little tuning. For instance, a telemarketer once called me with a shifty-sounding "special offer" for a vacation and I sternly told him I thought he was a scammer and hung up the phone. Just to be sure, I looked up the Internet address he gave me for the company he worked for...and discovered it was apparently real. :o

As another example of otherwise very shrewd people who believe in nonsense, I have a family friend who is an otherwise extremely rational and hard-nosed person besides the fact that she believes in a compendium of woo.

She spots non-woo scams easily, she's very manipulative with men, family and friends, she spots lies and evasions in an instant, she's hard-nosed about matters of money, she's not religious and doesn't much fall for any nonsense or cliches in culture and politics. She's not an educated person but she's very shrewd- she even now considers psychics a scam from here to there.

...but she stocks her room with crystals and believes swimming with dolphins is therapy for autistic children. Go figure.

You can be very, very rational about some things- but not others.

[Legend]

Whoa, methinks the lady doth protest too much. Seriously, dude, if you can't handle sarcastic rejoinders, I think you're in the wrong forum.

My original reflection on my propensity to make assumptions about what others should do or think based solely on my own abilities or knowledge base was a sincere, and I thought, valid one. I expressed frustration because, no matter how much I am aware that is not the ideal way to think, and no matter how much I try NOT to do that, no matter how much experience I've gained over the years, it still comes up.

Yes, I was drawing a parallel between this thread and my experiences. But I really don't understand your violent reaction to me inferring that you may be subject to the same propensity as me (and every other human on the planet).


It seems to me you're upset because you think I'm attacking you. I can assure you that is not what I'm doing, I'm trying to make a point that perhaps you aren't as empathetic as you think you are. You brushed off my first post very superficially, I felt. I used sarcasm to point that out a little more clearly.

But I understand that if you don't get that, that is my failing and not yours.

Don't call me "dude".

So belittling a problem to make people feel that their faults aren't as exaggerated as they think actually offended you?

I stick with my reply earlier. Pathetic.

Don't say I "violently" protested...just stop. I'm not continuing this. Finished.

People tell me I have a natural talent for spotting BS. My friend calls me "the human BSdetector" and says that I'm practically allergic to it :D.

Even my detector can go into overdrive, overlook something or need a little tuning. For instance, a telemarketer once called me with a shifty-sounding "special offer" for a vacation and I sternly told him I thought he was a scammer and hung up the phone. Just to be sure, I looked up the Internet address he gave me for the company he worked for...and discovered it was apparently real. :o

As another example of otherwise very shrewd people who believe in nonsense, I have a family friend who is an otherwise extremely rational and hard-nosed person besides the fact that she believes in a compendium of woo.

She spots non-woo scams easily, she's very manipulative with men, family and friends, she spots lies and evasions in an instant, she's hard-nosed about matters of money, she's not religious and doesn't much fall for any nonsense or cliches in culture and politics. She's not an educated person but she's very shrewd- she even now considers psychics a scam from here to there.

...but she stocks her room with crystals and believes swimming with dolphins is therapy for autistic children. Go figure.

You can be very, very rational about some things- but not others.

Absolutely. Directed to your second paragraph: However, I'd rather the scales tipped in the favour of skepticism outweighing gullibility.

Alex.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

I was very embarrassed at accusing a quite-probably-honest telemarketer from an actual travel agency of being a con man pulling a travel scam. I wish I hadn't happened to answer the phone at all that day; the man must have believed me to be the worst person in the world. :boxedin: I also might have lost out on a real travel discount that could have saved me good money on a trip.

There is such a thing as being too skeptical but given the vast amount of bogus travel offers (including bogus deals on cruises, which was what was being offered), it probably is better to be too suspicious of someone offering you a vacation by phone.

Who knows, maybe whatever I lost by hanging up on this one has been offset by the thousands of junk emails and junk letters I deleted or threw out over the years.

Edit: This is something most people on this forum probably know already but there's also a difference between being skeptical and cynical. Just because you're inclined to ask hard questions and demand to know more before trusting someone doesn't mean you should be distrustful. You should like and trust people, absolutely, and believe that they are mostly ok.

[Jonquill]

I'd never feel guilty at being rude to a telemarketer, if someone disturbs you for the sole purpose of trying to sell you a product for their own profit that you could have sought out yourself had you thought you needed it doesn't deserve kindness.

I wonder if you can be too skeptical? Every time my husaband says there is an interesting program on tv I always ask him how he knows it's true, then I always critise how they they have gathered the information, and then we have an argument :D

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

I'm afraid I was rude to him. :( I could have been alot more gracious about saying "no" than implying he was a liar and throwing down the phone.

After all, the person at the phone is just an employee trying to pay the rent and put food on the table. Just a representative and one that probably earns the least in the office.

[Jonquill]

I agree, it would be a most horrid way of earning a living.

[Legend]

I always muck around with telemarketers.

"I'll just get my Dad". I then loudly shout for Dad to come to the phone into the mouthpiece of the phone. I'll pretend I'm Dad, and call for Mum screaming into the phone again. I'll pretend I'm Mum and call back Dad, to which I'll say we aren't interested.

I've done plenty more:

"Where did you say you work at again?"
"Sunday Resorts, sir."
"Does Andy still work there?"

"Hold on a second, I'll tell you what, I'll buy it if you sing for me."

"Sorry I'm a little deaf, you'll have to repeat everything you've said and make it a little clearer."
"Okay."
"You'll do that, thanks, loud and clear please."
(practically spelling the words) "I am from Sunday Resorts, sir."
"Sorry?"
(almost yelling) "Sunday Resorts, sir."
"Okay."
"I'm offering you a discounted trip to one of our worldwide resorts."
"The last part again, please?"
(I'll usually hold the phone inches from my ear at this point) "A trip to one of our worldwide resorts."
"Yep, go on."
"It costs [number] dollars a week for five weeks."
"How many weeks?"
"Five."
"Sorry?"
"FIVE WEEKS."
"No need to yell. Go on."
"All you need to..."
"Sorry?"
"All you need to..."
"I'll tell you what, I'll make it easier, I'll go and grab a pen and paper and we'll start again."



Then some person from China added me on MSN. The transcript is quite rude, I swear in it and probably shouldn't post it.

I know, I know. "It's mean", but I'm young so I have a license to be a little s***.

Alex.

[Jonquill]

Your techniques are pretty sophisticated actually Alex compared to mine, I ususally just make mooing noises at them, you don't have to be young to be a little ....

[Legend]

Mooing noises. That's hilarious. Making me laugh thinking about that.

I stay up all night thinking of my material. It's the highlight of my day when a telemarketer rings...sadly.

I kid.

Alex.

[Old man]

Alex, maybe you do have a natural talent for spotting BS (like some people have a natural talent for playing the piano) or maybe you haven't got round to being badly tricked by anyone yet. I think most of us get tricked by a psychic or a stripper or a lover or a business partner or we make a really incredibly stupid decision and we look back and see our own stupidity staring us in the face and wonder how we could have made such an awful error. To be fair to Alex, I think he’s trying to say that it’s more ‘stupid’ to fall for a scam that involves the impossible rather than merely the improbable.

Alex, is there anything that’s impossible that you’d really, really like to be true?

We both know that talking to the dead is impossible, but we also don’t really care about it, one way or the other (sure, it’d be cool, but it wouldn’t be of profound importance to us).

Sure, psychics claim to do the impossible, but what about –
FTL flight?
Star Trek transporters?
Hydrogen from water as a fuel?
Cold fusion?
Perpetual motion?
Bigfoot?

Could you be misled about any of those?

My original reflection on my propensity to make assumptions about what others should do or think based solely on my own abilities or knowledge base was a sincere, and I thought, valid one.
It is, and it is something Alex is doing, right now.

Yes, I was drawing a parallel between this thread and my experiences. But I really don't understand your violent reaction to me inferring that you may be subject to the same propensity as me (and every other human on the planet).
AliasN, he’s still a kid (16, IIRC).

Alex, you’re being arrogant.

Originally Posted by AliasN
It seems to me you're upset because you think I'm attacking you. I can assure you that is not what I'm doing, I'm trying to make a point that perhaps you aren't as empathetic as you think you are. You brushed off my first post very superficially, I felt. I used sarcasm to point that out a little more clearly.

But I understand that if you don't get that, that is my failing and not yours.
I stick with my reply earlier. Pathetic.

Don't say I "violently" protested...just stop. I'm not continuing this. Finished. She’s trying to help you, Alex. Ignoring good, sound advice that’s respectfully offered is, to coin a phrase, ‘stupid’. You’re acting like the people you’ve been denigrating.

[AliasN]

Don't call me "dude".

So belittling a problem to make people feel that their faults aren't as exaggerated as they think actually offended you?

I stick with my reply earlier. Pathetic.

Don't say I "violently" protested...just stop. I'm not continuing this. Finished.
I'm sorry you continue to misunderstand me. Good luck with the rest of your thread.

[Pythra]

Also, to say something is "false because it's ridiculous" is not much more skeptical or smart than to say "it's true because I like to believe it". Telephones and microwave ovens might sound ridiculous and implausible in concept, but we've grown up with these things so we aren't astounded and we don't doubt them. If they had never existed and someone suggested them, I imagine most people would be pretty incredulous.

[Legend]

Oh my God. :rolleyes:

AliasN (by the way, your avatar is driving me insane): I understand what you were trying to say. Rather than actually make a comment on it, I decided that I'd just ignore the actual motive of it and try to comfort the problem that you are still "having" with that type of thought. I know that you were trying to subtly make reference that I was doing A and/or B.

Alex, you’re being arrogant.

I'm sorry? That's absolutely ridiculous. Please elaborate.

This is why I'm hesitant to tell people my age online. As soon as I do, "Bah he's just a kid, don't worry about him." It sickens me. If, and I say this with complete conviction, if someone of older age said the opinions I said, would you have called them arrogant? Not a freakin' chance. People come into it with ageist feelings and the pure willingness to say that they're arrogant because it's some ticket out. It's like because I'm on the other side of the fence to you, you guys can simply say something that's so aggravating, only because I'm not on the same side as you. I'm "different". Honestly, nothing annoys me more. I get this every day from these people who've "lived life and therefore have a right to call be an arrogant, uninformed, idealogical rebel who's not on the same page as them because they're 400 years more ancient than I am".

She’s trying to help you, Alex. Ignoring good, sound advice that’s respectfully offered is, to coin a phrase, ‘stupid’. You’re acting like the people you’ve been denigrating.

I've already stated multiple times that:

NOT BEING SMART doesn't equal STUPIDITY.

So I'll write it one more time:

NOT BEING SMART doesn't equal STUPIDITY.

"Respectfully" my collarbone. Some subtle, encrypted message with a nice dollop of sarcasm. I hate when people do that. Why not say, you're doing 'x' and that's it?

I'm fed up with this thread and having to continually explain an opinion that I can't through typing letters on a screen.

Also, to say something is "false because it's ridiclous" is not much more skeptical or smart than to say "it's true because I like to believe it". Telephones and microwave ovens might sound ridiculous and implausible in concept, but we've grown up with these things so we aren't astounded and we don't doubt them. If they had never existed and someone suggested them, I imagine most people would be pretty incredulous.

Again, I'm being exaggerated, merely because I haven't elaborated. I don't need to, because I don't want to argue my view on the whole, "smart people wouldn't get tricked by psychics". So please don't.

And for the record: I do not view myself as an extremely smart person. I don't pride myself with that comment, nor do I try to force that onto other people. I could be conned, but NOT by a psychic. This is the premise I've stated and stuck with. The fact is that I don't think smart people can be fooled by psychics. Not based on the supremely aggravating "Well I'm smart so you should be able to understand what I can understand" tripe that I'm being juxtaposed with. It's based on the fact that there is easy information available to people out there and to the fact that someone who is "on the fence" will always lean toward skepticism if they think about it and/or research, because I've seen it happen. It's not a careless assumption.

Alex.

[Jonquill]

Old man said
"To be fair to Alex, I think he’s trying to say that it’s more ‘stupid’ to fall for a scam that involves the impossible rather than merely the improbable."

That is a good point, whether or not that is what Alex is trying to say, I didn't think of it like that.

[Legend]

He's correct with that statement.

Alex, is there anything that’s impossible that you’d really, really like to be true?

A real-life object which would give you the ability to pick up any girl in the universe.

Truly, though. I truly, honestly, want psychic abilities to be real. I want to speak to the dead, and visit people who can tell my Nonno that he's a great bloke and that I can't thank him enough for the stuff he's done, and so I could ask (through the psychic) what my Nonno needs to say to me.

It's "cool", but also something that I wish was true, really, honestly.

Alex.

[Old man]

This is why I'm hesitant to tell people my age online. As soon as I do, "Bah he's just a kid, don't worry about him." It sickens me. You’ve got quite a chip on your shoulder, my friend. I was DEFENDING you, and pointing out a behavior that’s not in your best interest to be engaging in.

If, and I say this with complete conviction, if someone of older age said the opinions I said, would you have called them arrogant? Not a freakin' chance. Really? You’re half a world away from me, and you know how I talk to everybody? :eek:

People come into it with ageist feelings and the pure willingness to say that they're arrogant because it's some ticket out. It's like because I'm on the other side of the fence to you, you guys can simply say something that's so aggravating, only because I'm not on the same side as you. I'm "different". Honestly, nothing annoys me more.
I get this every day from these people who've "lived life and therefore have a right to call be an arrogant, uninformed, idealogical rebel who's not on the same page as them because they're 400 years more ancient than I am". Perhaps you could try to not be so arrogant? :confused: Just sayin'. :)

She’s trying to help you, Alex. Ignoring good, sound advice that’s respectfully offered is, to coin a phrase, ‘stupid’ 'not being smart'. You’re acting like the people you’ve been denigrating.

I've already stated multiple times that:

NOT BEING SMART doesn't equal STUPIDITY.

So I'll write it one more time:

NOT BEING SMART doesn't equal STUPIDITY. Sorry. Fixed it.

"Respectfully" my collarbone. Some subtle, encrypted message with a nice dollop of sarcasm. I hate when people do that. Why not say, you're doing 'x' and that's it? Kind of an odd statement, considering that you’re saying it right after getting upset with me for doing just that.

I'm fed up with this thread and having to continually explain an opinion that I can't through typing letters on a screen. That’s too bad. You’ve done an excellent job expressing yourself in other threads. The reason I joined this thread was your articulate, thoughtful posts.

Again, I'm being exaggerated, merely because I haven't elaborated. I don't need to, because I don't want to argue my view on the whole, "smart people wouldn't get tricked by psychics". So please don't. If you didn’t want to discuss your view, why did you start this thread?

And for the record: I do not view myself as an extremely smart person. I don't pride myself with that comment, nor do I try to force that onto other people. I could be conned, but NOT by a psychic. I hold EXACTLY the same views.

[Old man]

Quote: Old man
Alex, is there anything that’s impossible that you’d really, really like to be true?
A real-life object which would give you the ability to pick up any girl in the universe. Me too, mate, me too. ;)

I actually thought about this as an option in my previous list. :D

[Old man]

Quote: Old man
Alex, is there anything that’s impossible that you’d really, really like to be true? Truly, though. I truly, honestly, want psychic abilities to be real. I want to speak to the dead, and visit people who can tell my Nonno that he's a great bloke and that I can't thank him enough for the stuff he's done, and so I could ask (through the psychic) what my Nonno needs to say to me.

It's "cool", but also something that I wish was true, really, honestly. This adds a lot of perspective to your OP. Sounds like maybe you've got a lot of anger, and you're directing it towards those lying bastiges who are trying to build up false hope in the impossible, just so they can steal people's money. One of the stages of grief is rage. I can see how you might be raging at them. I do the same thing, myself, sometimes.

I wish you well, Alex.

[Legend]

Really? You’re half a world away from me, and you know how I talk to everybody? :eek:

It would've never happened and I think you know that.

Perhaps you could try to not be so arrogant? :confused: Just sayin'. :)

That was actually an immature comment. That's something a dumb mate of mine would say. What I don't understand is when I've been arrogant.

Kind of an odd statement, considering that you’re saying it right after getting upset with me for doing just that.

Imagine what would've happened if you didn't.

That’s too bad. You’ve done an excellent job expressing yourself in other threads. The reason I joined this thread was your articulate, thoughtful posts.

I'm very glad.

If you didn’t want to discuss your view, why did you start this thread?

The answer lies in the OP. Your question should've been why did I say that they weren't the smartest people in the world. The answer was to simply say just that and not start World War 3.

Me too, mate, me too. ;)

I actually thought about this as an option in my previous list. :D

Well, yes. It's something I've only really wanted since...a few years ago. Strange...

This adds a lot of perspective to your OP. Sounds like maybe you've got a lot of anger, and you're directing it towards those lying bastiges who are trying to build up false hope in the impossible, just so they can steal people's money. One of the stages of grief is rage. I can see how you might be raging at them. I do the same thing, myself, sometimes.

I wish you well, Alex.

Thankyou. I wish you well.

Alex.

[Pythra]

That was actually an immature comment. That's something a dumb mate of mine would say. What I don't understand is when I've been arrogant.

"Dumb", "stupid", "not smart". These are all things you have applied to people who do not share your views and beliefs. And is that not arrogant?

[Legend]

Oh come on. Seriously?

It's a joke within my circle of mates. It's not serious, we just say that he's that type of nonchalant almost "blonde" type of guy. What a ridiculous comment. How on Earth did you come up with the information that he doesn't share the same views as me, anyway? Do you know him? What about me? Neither? Geez.

To put it into context, would he be my "mate" if I called him "dumb"?

Honestly, you must've put very little thought into that.

How about we all stop attacking me? Or in this case, if you're going to, know what you're on about before you make absolutely unbelievable comments like the one you've just made. You don't know me or the way I converse with other people, or my mates. You wouldn't have a clue about the conversations or the way I speak with friends, so please don't assume...it only severely aggravates me.

Alex.

[Legend]

Honestly, I strive in my life not to be an arrogant person. If that's told to me, I like to know how. The answer has not yet been answered. Not once.

So, Pythra, instead of making pathetic comments, try and explain yourself a little better.

Alex.

[Legend]

Alright.

2 hours later and I feel so guilty.

I apologise if I've come across arrogant to anyone. I didn't intend to do so, but my instincts tell me that I'm not correct, if four other people are wrong; four older people too.

Perhaps I came off as harsh to some too. Again, sorry.

Allow me a second chance to answer to this comment:

"Dumb", "stupid", "not smart". These are all things you have applied to people who do not share your views and beliefs. And is that not arrogant?

I never said anyone was stupid, in fact I specifically said that no one was multiple times, so that second one is ruled out. The "dumb mate" is a good mate of mine. He doesn't think too much, and me and my other mates make amicable jokes about him being a "blonde" and hyperactive sort of kid who does knee-jerk things and can get himself into strife for it. Calling him "dumb" isn't insulting to him, and it isn't intended to be that.

I try my best not to get too "angry" with people online, and it truly does only happen very rarely (promise).

Anyways, I'm hoping this will alleviate most negative thoughts about me, that people may have picked up because of the way I've come across. Obviously it's my fault, because more than one person holds the view. I'm not an arrogant person, and I try hard not to come across that way.

This isn't purely directed at Pythra either, this is to everyone.

Alex.

[Ladewig]

This is the premise I've stated and stuck with. The fact is that I don't think smart people can be fooled by psychics.

I'd like to echo Beeg Seestor's point. Smart people can fall for psychic scams when they are overwhelmed by grief. Witnessing the violent death of one's child can lead to unbearable sorrow. A con-man who pretends to talk to the dead may seem attractive to even a smart parent crushed by grief. Perhaps even worse is the parent of a missing child who cannot know if the child is dead or alive. I cannot fathom the emotional juggernaut that must have weighed upon parents of Shawn Hornbeck. There are intelligent people, there are smart people, there are street-smart people that can all fall for the lies that Sylvia pitches if their grief overrules their commitment to rationality.

[Old man]

Alright.

2 hours later and I feel so guilty. You're not following my instructions, matey. I said ten years, not a couple of days! You're waaay ahead on the maturity curve! :)

I apologise if I've come across arrogant to anyone. I didn't intend to do so, but my instincts tell me that I'm not correct, if four other people are wrong; Words to live by, friend.

ETA: I've always liked: "If one man calls you an ass, pay no attention. If ten men do, go get a saddle."

four older people too. It ain't the years, it's the mileage! :jaw-dropp

The "dumb mate" is a good mate of mine. He doesn't think too much, and me and my other mates make amicable jokes about him being a "blonde" and hyperactive sort of kid who does knee-jerk things and can get himself into strife for it. Calling him "dumb" isn't insulting to him, and it isn't intended to be that. You'll find this kind of humor a lot out in the working man's world. I think we're trying to find out who we can rely on, who we can trust, even when we're being real jerks. My true friends and I do this all the time. :cool:

I try my best not to get too "angry" with people online, and it truly does only happen very rarely (promise).

Anyways, I'm hoping this will alleviate most negative thoughts about me, that people may have picked up because of the way I've come across. Obviously it's my fault, because more than one person holds the view. I'm not an arrogant person, and I try hard not to come across that way.

This isn't purely directed at Pythra either, this is to everyone.

Alex. Great job, Alex. :D

[Old man]

It would've never happened and I think you know that.
Would too. :mad:

That was actually an immature comment. That's something a dumb mate of mine would say. So maybe that makes me one of your 'dumb mates', eh? :D

What I don't understand is when I've been arrogant. :confused: Yea, I know. I don't always understand when I've been arrogant, or rude, or bossy, or a know it all, either. That's why I listen to my mates. :blush:

[Legend]

You're not following my instructions, matey. I said ten years, not a couple of days! You're waaay ahead on the maturity curve! :)

Words to live by, friend.

ETA: I've always liked: "If one man calls you an ass, pay no attention. If ten men do, go get a saddle."

It ain't the years, it's the mileage! :jaw-dropp

You'll find this kind of humor a lot out in the working man's world. I think we're trying to find out who we can rely on, who we can trust, even when we're being real jerks. My true friends and I do this all the time. :cool:

Great job, Alex. :D

Thanks a lot for your comments.

By the way, I would've thought you were British, based on the use of the word "mate", coupled with the way you said "other side of the world". I thought, "well he says 'mate', other side of the world...probably a Pom". You live in NY, though. I'm impressed. I've always wanted to go to NY. Big city with lots of people, and guys holding breifcases while talking on their mobile phones, just beaming importance.

Alex.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

I live in New York, too. I can expect to see plenty of buisnessmen in briefcases talking on phones in Midtown Manhattan and in the vicinity of Wall Street but not so much elsewhere. In my neighborhood, you're more likely to see women in enormous sunglasses and hipster fashions and guys in skinny jeans and designer shirts.

Alex, what do you make of the idea that intelligent people are actually more easily fooled by cold-reading? People who study belief in the paranormal say that intelligent people put connections together faster, see patterns more quickly and believe that they can't be fooled, which makes the trick of cold-reading work better on them. A trick that depends on asking you who so-and-so from such-and-such was and letting you fill in the blanks works much better on someone who can quickly come up with something.

When seances were popular in the Western world in the 19th century, some noted European and American academics who had decided to test them were taken in by an illiterate Italian peasant who had been performing them in her home. Their notes constantly refer to her as "illiterate woman", "uneducated peasant" and "simple farmer's wife"; they fell for her because they didn't think an uneducated woman could have the brains to think up a con that could fool men of learning. James Randi tells this story in a special on psychics and comments "She was no dumb Italian peasant! She was one very smart Italian peasant!"

[Akhenaten]

Further backs up the point, that people who follow Sylvia, truly aren't the smartest people on the planet.

Alex.


Yes it does. No they aren't. I can't believe the flack you copped for pointing it out.

Apparently "not the smartest" = "stupid, idiotic, unintellegent, dimwitted, brainless" etcetera in certain parts of the world.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Even though psychics and psychic detectives happen to be my area of expertise and my pet peeve, I wouldn't say that it's the most unbelievable or transparently false woo. Like astrology, it's pretty transparent once you start to think about it but I wouldn't say that either of them are a "wow, anyone who believes in this just doesn't have a head on their shoulders" belief.

Like astrology, I'd actually rank it somewhere in the middle as a belief. Not too crazy, not too believable. Even though they are all pretty hard to believe.

It's not a bizarre belief for very weird people that practically doesn't need to be debunked like magnet therapy, dolphins being able to cure autism, Sedona vortices or that bending spoons is done by telepathy or ESP.

And even those aren't woos that would make me say "You're just not smart".

[Legend]

Yes it does. No they aren't. I can't believe the flack you copped for pointing it out.

Apparently "not the smartest" = "stupid, idiotic, unintellegent, dimwitted, brainless" etcetera in certain parts of the world.

Well there you go. Made my day! :D

Alex, what do you make of the idea that intelligent people are actually more easily fooled by cold-reading?

I honestly don't think intelligence plays a part. Some doctors believe in ghosts, God and psychics, some don't. I don't think that intelligence can really come into play. As you've pointed out, these intelligent men thought that this unintelligent woman couldn't fool them so therefore they are less suspicious, but by the same token, some intelligent men would be forever skeptical of whatever that person said because of her lack of intelligence and "illiterate" nature.

Like astrology, I'd actually rank it somewhere in the middle as a belief. Not too crazy, not too believable.

If psychic ability is a middle belief I wonder what you'd class as a top belief, in this context.

We're talking about human beings dying, but remaining in some, unknown way. Remaining in such a way that they can interact with the willing living. Sometimes you can see them and they actually, somehow, wear clothes. They talk cryptically through someone who will only offer their assistance if they are paid by the dead person's relatives. They apparently have absolutely nothing at all to do except exist in some crazy and different world and have a chat with some people who like to talk with dead people. Some can, through methods that are completely without evidence, predict the future yet never has one been able to successfully predict lotto numbers, a terrorist attack, warn against natural disasters or even help the economy in any way shape or form.

It blows my mind that people have the actual capacity to believe in psychic ability. If you believe in psychic abilities, you have to believe in ghosts, this can open the door to many more whacky beliefs also.

Amazing innit? :D

Alex.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Hmm, what's a belief that blows my mind? Besides the aforementioned New Age nuttery like "dolphins help autistic children" and the idea of vortices, Scientology.

The ridiculous, ridiculous nature of it. It's astonishing. Absolutely unbelievable. It makes other woos look plausible by comparison.

There's a top belief.

[Legend]

That's something I should look into. I don't know too much about Scientology. If anything, I'll look into in for a good fictional read I suppose.

Alex.