JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Reply
Old 22nd November 2012, 03:35 PM   #1
Soapy Sam
NLH
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 27,841
Anyone see Derren Brown tonight?

I just watched Mr.B supposedly psych a lady sceptic and stem cell researcher named Natalie into having a Damascene moment of numinous tranendence in a church.

They had a 15 minute chat.

During the bulk of the chat, one camera angle was maintained (IIRC) most of the time. It was not clear if Natalie knew she was on camera.

Having "psyched her up", DB excused himself for a few minutes, during which she supposedly had a profoundly emotional experience.

During this, she was filmed from the side, from the front and from the back.
In no shot did another camera appear.

A candelabra screen affair about ten feet in front of her was also not in shot when she was filmed from ahead.

I'm saying Natalie was an actor and the scene was faked.

Anyone have any comments?
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2012, 03:45 PM   #2
Last of the Fraggles
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,757
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
I just watched Mr.B supposedly psych a lady sceptic and stem cell researcher named Natalie into having a Damascene moment of numinous tranendence in a church.

They had a 15 minute chat.

During the bulk of the chat, one camera angle was maintained (IIRC) most of the time. It was not clear if Natalie knew she was on camera.

Having "psyched her up", DB excused himself for a few minutes, during which she supposedly had a profoundly emotional experience.

During this, she was filmed from the side, from the front and from the back.
In no shot did another camera appear.

A candelabra screen affair about ten feet in front of her was also not in shot when she was filmed from ahead.

I'm saying Natalie was an actor and the scene was faked.

Anyone have any comments?
Well I have to admit that since the lottery thing I tend to assume cheap fake now. Previously I assumed clever fake.
Last of the Fraggles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2012, 06:00 PM   #3
Sonny2
Muse
 
Sonny2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Dust on the Wind
Posts: 669
I watched one of his shows and was convinced it's all faked.

What lottery thing? - Never mind, I googled it.

Last edited by Sonny2; 22nd November 2012 at 06:37 PM.
Sonny2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2012, 06:45 PM   #4
AdMan
Philosopher
 
AdMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 9,397
I haven't seen this scene, but Derren Brown often employs what is known in mentalism as "dual reality"--what the audience thinks they are seeing is not actually the same as what the on-screen participants are experiencing, even if they aren't actual stooges (don't want to discuss this too much, so as not to reveal conjurors' secrets). I'm guessing that was at least partly what was the case here, just based on the description.
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
- Carl Sagan

Last edited by AdMan; 22nd November 2012 at 06:56 PM.
AdMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd November 2012, 01:02 AM   #5
Squeegee Beckenheim
Philosopher
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,470
Originally Posted by AdMan View Post
I haven't seen this scene, but Derren Brown often employs what is known in mentalism as "dual reality"--what the audience thinks they are seeing is not actually the same as what the on-screen participants are experiencing, even if they aren't actual stooges (don't want to discuss this too much, so as not to reveal conjurors' secrets). I'm guessing that was at least partly what was the case here, just based on the description.
Given the talk they had in the studio afterwards, I don't think that dual reality is a good fit.

It wasn't a bad programme on the whole, but the instant conversion was something I definitely found rather questionable.
Squeegee Beckenheim is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd November 2012, 03:30 PM   #6
Azrael 5
Philosopher
 
Azrael 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Yorkshire,Uk
Posts: 5,346
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
I just watched Mr.B supposedly psych a lady sceptic and stem cell researcher named Natalie into having a Damascene moment of numinous tranendence in a church.

They had a 15 minute chat.

During the bulk of the chat, one camera angle was maintained (IIRC) most of the time. It was not clear if Natalie knew she was on camera.

Having "psyched her up", DB excused himself for a few minutes, during which she supposedly had a profoundly emotional experience.

During this, she was filmed from the side, from the front and from the back.
In no shot did another camera appear.

A candelabra screen affair about ten feet in front of her was also not in shot when she was filmed from ahead.

I'm saying Natalie was an actor and the scene was faked.

Anyone have any comments?
Yes my comment is Derren doesnt use actors,and I dont think the camera angles were evidence of anything.
Next?
__________________
"I achieve these results through a mixture of magic,misdirection,suggestion and showmanship"-Derren Brown
Azrael 5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2012, 02:42 AM   #7
Beaver Hateman
Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 176
Originally Posted by Azrael 5 View Post
Yes my comment is Derren doesnt use actors,and I dont think the camera angles were evidence of anything.
Next?
If he does't use actors, why has he got himself into the position where so many people see him as a 'cheating' magician compared to other magicians?

Personally I don't know anything about what he does, but I do't watch him because I believe his tricks too often don't demand any skill. Filming yourself going up to 1000 people and saying "Think of a number between 1 and 1000 - is it 653?" until one says yes, and then only showing the one requires no skill and ingenuity, so that's 'cheating'.

I used to think he was doing clever things I couldn't work out but now I think he's doing simple things I have worked out but have dismissed as too obvious and easy. It's his own fault I think that, and that's why I don't watch him any more.
Beaver Hateman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2012, 02:45 AM   #8
Sledge
Grammaton Cleric
 
Sledge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Swingin' on a star
Posts: 7,121
So it should be easy for you to support your belief. Go on then.
__________________
"The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline

"Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.
Sledge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2012, 03:01 AM   #9
Squeegee Beckenheim
Philosopher
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,470
Originally Posted by Beaver Hateman View Post
Personally I don't know anything about what he does, but I do't watch him because I believe his tricks too often don't demand any skill. Filming yourself going up to 1000 people and saying "Think of a number between 1 and 1000 - is it 653?" until one says yes, and then only showing the one requires no skill and ingenuity, so that's 'cheating'.
That's pretty much all televised magic.

Quote:
I used to think he was doing clever things I couldn't work out but now I think he's doing simple things I have worked out but have dismissed as too obvious and easy.
That's pretty much all magic.
Squeegee Beckenheim is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2012, 04:19 AM   #10
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Moderator
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 28,339
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
Quote:
I used to think he was doing clever things I couldn't work out but now I think he's doing simple things I have worked out but have dismissed as too obvious and easy.
That's pretty much all magic.
Oh, not quite. Sometimes it's something so difficult and time-consuming that you dismiss it as not worth the effort, as Teller describes:
Quote:
You will be fooled by a trick if it involves more time, money and practice than you (or any other sane onlooker) would be willing to invest. My partner, Penn, and I once produced 500 live cockroaches from a top hat on the desk of talk-show host David Letterman. To prepare this took weeks. We hired an entomologist who provided slow-moving, camera-friendly cockroaches (the kind from under your stove donít hang around for close-ups) and taught us to pick the bugs up without screaming like preadolescent girls. Then we built a secret compartment out of foam-core (one of the few materials cockroaches canít cling to) and worked out a devious routine for sneaking the compartment into the hat. More trouble than the trick was worth? To you, probably. But not to magicians.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th November 2012, 02:30 PM   #11
Azrael 5
Philosopher
 
Azrael 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Yorkshire,Uk
Posts: 5,346
Originally Posted by Beaver Hateman View Post
If he does't use actors, why has he got himself into the position where so many people see him as a 'cheating' magician compared to other magicians?
Its modern equivalent of "camera tricks". People can think of no other way it can be achieved.

Quote:
Personally I don't know anything about what he does, but I do't watch him because I believe his tricks too often don't demand any skill. Filming yourself going up to 1000 people and saying "Think of a number between 1 and 1000 - is it 653?" until one says yes, and then only showing the one requires no skill and ingenuity, so that's 'cheating'


I used to think he was doing clever things I couldn't work out but now I think he's doing simple things I have worked out but have dismissed as too obvious and easy. It's his own fault I think that, and that's why I don't watch him any more.
So you dont watch him dont know anything about him but believe he doesnt use skill.Figures.
__________________
"I achieve these results through a mixture of magic,misdirection,suggestion and showmanship"-Derren Brown

Last edited by Azrael 5; 24th November 2012 at 02:31 PM.
Azrael 5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2012, 09:42 AM   #12
Soapy Sam
NLH
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 27,841
I also saw the previous weeks programme, in which he took considerable trouble to "create" a drug research company, to whose labs volunteers were invited to witness tests of a drug supposed to boost confidence.
This was all to strengthen any placebo effect.
The results were impressive, if we take the process as being true.

At the end of the program, he revealed that other groups of volunteers had been given quite different stories about what the drug did.

If true, this is all interesting, but given the knowledge that there were numerous groups, how can we know that he did not cherry-pick the one with the best result?

We don't. Nor should we need to. This is tv entertainment, not science.
But I am surprised by the tendency of viewers of such "reality" programmes to take what is shown as literal truth, forgetting that editing can produce hugely different apparent outcomes, even if all participants are genuine throughout.

I like Brown as an entertainer, but I do not trust him as a researcher. He has never suggested that we should.
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2012, 10:20 PM   #13
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
 
Tomtomkent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Kent, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,563
Why do people get so mind meltingly infuriated at the suggestion that Derren might use actors?

If I was a magician and I wanted to fool an audience into thinking that a man who thought he was a murderer had walked into a fake interview room in a fake police station sitting next to a paper wall behind which a party was being prepared I would think an actor would be a neat way to pull it off.


It is not a slanderous accusation to suggest the guy trying to fool us for entertainment might be dishonest about his methods.
__________________
@tomhodden

Never look up an E-book because this signature line told you. Especially not Dead Lament (ASIN: B00JEN1MWY). Or A Little Trouble (ASIN: B00GQFZZQW).
Tomtomkent is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2012, 02:21 AM   #14
P.J. Denyer
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,336
Originally Posted by Beaver Hateman View Post
If he does't use actors, why has he got himself into the position where so many people see him as a 'cheating' magician compared to other magicians?
I put it down to two factors, 1) He's sufficiently well known and 2) his act is sufficiently non traditional that some people don't get that it is an act.
P.J. Denyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2012, 02:34 AM   #15
richardm
Philosopher
 
richardm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 9,270
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
given the knowledge that there were numerous groups, how can we know that he did not cherry-pick the one with the best result?
We can know that he did, since he conceded in the programme that he showed us the best results, and even showed us some participants for whom it didn't work at all
__________________
Rimmer: Look at her! Magnificent woman! Very prim, very proper, almost austere. Some people took her for cold, thought she was aloof. Not a bit of it. She just despised fools. Quite tragic, really, because otherwise I think we'd have got on famously.
richardm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2012, 02:38 AM   #16
Sledge
Grammaton Cleric
 
Sledge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Swingin' on a star
Posts: 7,121
Originally Posted by Tomtomkent View Post
Why do people get so mind meltingly infuriated at the suggestion that Derren might use actors?
I haven't seen anyone get "mind meltingly infuriated." What I have seen is people ask for some reason to think the suggestion is true. I realise that supporting what you say is a radical notion for a skeptics' forum, but I think we should give it a try.
__________________
"The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline

"Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.
Sledge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2012, 05:18 AM   #17
Azrael 5
Philosopher
 
Azrael 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Yorkshire,Uk
Posts: 5,346
Soapy Sam getitng his knickers in a twist over an entertainment show. If he used actors we would know it about it by now after 10 years.
__________________
"I achieve these results through a mixture of magic,misdirection,suggestion and showmanship"-Derren Brown
Azrael 5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2012, 07:20 AM   #18
Hungry81
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 387
Originally Posted by Azrael 5 View Post
Soapy Sam getitng his knickers in a twist over an entertainment show. If he used actors we would know it about it by now after 10 years.
No! He uses a Nikola Bowie teleportation/Cloning/mindreading machine. Its all legitimate SCIENCE! No magician ever has used doubles or Shills. and therefore that is not the most logical explination. I want to believe so its true.
Hungry81 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2012, 10:26 AM   #19
Sonny2
Muse
 
Sonny2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Dust on the Wind
Posts: 669
Brown's shows always portray someone(s) from the audience as being manipulated into revealing something or doing something out of character, but the joke is really on the audience, though many never get that. The audience is the one being manipulated. He makes no bones that it's for entertainment, but I would suggest that few really see who's being entertained the best - Derren Brown himself.
Sonny2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2012, 11:17 AM   #20
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Third in line
Posts: 18,048
Originally Posted by AdMan View Post
I haven't seen this scene, but Derren Brown often employs what is known in mentalism as "dual reality"--what the audience thinks they are seeing is not actually the same as what the on-screen participants are experiencing, even if they aren't actual stooges (don't want to discuss this too much, so as not to reveal conjurors' secrets). I'm guessing that was at least partly what was the case here, just based on the description.
Originally Posted by Sonny2 View Post
Brown's shows always portray someone(s) from the audience as being manipulated into revealing something or doing something out of character, but the joke is really on the audience, though many never get that. The audience is the one being manipulated. He makes no bones that it's for entertainment, but I would suggest that few really see who's being entertained the best - Derren Brown himself.
I see this defense of Brown repeatedly invoked; but it never seems to me to be much of a defense, because what it implies really isn't any better than actually just using "honest" stooges.

It's not that I don't understand the idea of "audience manipulation"; I understand that I could take a video of a person running down the street because he does every day for exercise, but swear up and down in voice-over that I hypnotized the guy into believing ghosts were chasing him. I could even later film a conversation with the guy about ghosts and swear in voice-over that I had the conversation with him first, and it's what prompted him to start running. What I don't get is how this is supposed to demonstrate any kind of skill or cleverness on the part of the magician, or the "manipulability" of the television viewing audience. It's not like they can resist the misdirection and look at "what your other hand is doing"; all they can see is what Brown puts on the screen. And since most of the audience in fact doesn't seem to believe what Brown is telling them is happening (to tell from the comments I usually hear), it would seem he's not even particularly successful at that.


The whole "dual reality" notion seems disingenuous as a term. Brown isn't "manipulating" or "misdirecting" the audience's attention or perceptions; he's simply telling lies and that's as far as it ever goes - you either believe the lies or you don't, but there's no "Aha!" reveal at the end where Brown says "Look! I tricked you!" to the ones who choose to suspend disbelief. Presumably they're just supposed to keep believing forever.

Last edited by Checkmite; 26th November 2012 at 11:20 AM.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2012, 11:38 AM   #21
Sonny2
Muse
 
Sonny2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Dust on the Wind
Posts: 669
Checkmite, exactly. There's never the reveal. That's why I said he's the one best entertained.
Sonny2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2012, 11:57 AM   #22
Soapy Sam
NLH
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 27,841
Originally Posted by Azrael 5 View Post
Soapy Sam getitng his knickers in a twist over an entertainment show. If he used actors we would know it about it by now after 10 years.

I'm Scottish. I dinna wear knickers.

You confuse me. You say he does not use actors, yet describe it as entertainment. So do you think the people who appear on it are genuine volunteers, members of the public?

If so, I can't help wondering why none of them- all young adults with (I expect ) smartphones and internet skills- bothered to google "Cicero Pharmaceuticals". Thirty seconds research would have shown it doesn't exist.

Look, as entertainment, I'm happy to watch DB's shows. He's entertaining.
What I'm less happy about is the pseudoscience he throws out as "explanations" for what look like (actually not very good) magic tricks.

If his programme on the placebo effect was actual real research, then it is of considerable value as a tool to educate the public about that issue.
If it was faked, it was faked. I for one don't believe the results he claimed, because I think he lies a lot. Which is fine, in a stage magician. Not in a researcher.

I don't see any "This programme is for entertainment only " advisory. DB makes strenuous attempts to portray all events on the progammes as "real".
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th November 2012, 12:00 PM   #23
Squeegee Beckenheim
Philosopher
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,470
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
The whole "dual reality" notion seems disingenuous as a term. Brown isn't "manipulating" or "misdirecting" the audience's attention or perceptions; he's simply telling lies and that's as far as it ever goes - you either believe the lies or you don't, but there's no "Aha!" reveal at the end where Brown says "Look! I tricked you!" to the ones who choose to suspend disbelief. Presumably they're just supposed to keep believing forever.
This is standard operating procedure for a magician, isn't it?
Squeegee Beckenheim is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2012, 09:50 AM   #24
Soapy Sam
NLH
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 27,841
Yes. And it's perfectly fine, for a magician. All part of the fun.
But DB is claiming that it's all real and that's not so fine. (IMO).
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2012, 10:15 AM   #25
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Third in line
Posts: 18,048
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
This is standard operating procedure for a magician, isn't it?
No. A magician saws a person in half and puts them back together, and the audience leaves saying "How did he do THAT?"

Darren Brown shows a video of somebody being sawn in half, cuts out the part where the person is put back together, and then throws out a few claims about having "hypnotized the person in the video into thinking he was sawing someone in half", and the audience leaves saying "what the heck just happened?". All these claims about "dual reality" are the equivalent of his supporters saying "he TRICKED the audience into thinking somebody was tricked into sawing a person in half! That was the point!"; except that nobody in the audience was actually "tricked" into thinking that at all; they either simply believed his explanation or simply didn't.

Last edited by Checkmite; 27th November 2012 at 10:23 AM.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2012, 10:27 AM   #26
Squeegee Beckenheim
Philosopher
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,470
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
Yes. And it's perfectly fine, for a magician. All part of the fun.
But DB is claiming that it's all real and that's not so fine. (IMO).
Derren Brown is a magician.

Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Darren Brown shows a video of somebody being sawn in half, cuts out the part where the person is put back together, and then throws out a few claims about having "hypnotized the person in the video into thinking he was sawing someone in half", and the audience leaves saying "what the heck just happened?".
I must have missed that episode.
Squeegee Beckenheim is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2012, 11:14 AM   #27
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Third in line
Posts: 18,048
It's called an analogy; it's a rhetorical device whereby a situation which is currently in question is compared to a different and sometimes hypothetical situation in which the answer is considered more self-evident or to have already been settled to some degree of reasonable certainty.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2012, 11:16 AM   #28
AdMan
Philosopher
 
AdMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 9,397
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
All these claims about "dual reality" are the equivalent of his supporters saying "he TRICKED the audience into thinking somebody was tricked into sawing a person in half! That was the point!"; except that nobody in the audience was actually "tricked" into thinking that at all; they either simply believed his explanation or simply didn't.

I'm not sure you understand what dual reality is (or I don't understand your scenario). DR is a method in mentalism that simply means that the subject is actually experiencing something different than what the audience thinks he or she is experiencing. They both may end up amazed at the results, but the mentalism effect is different for each.

Anyway, surely this thread is in the wrong subforum. Brown is just a performer.
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
- Carl Sagan

Last edited by AdMan; 27th November 2012 at 11:17 AM.
AdMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2012, 11:46 AM   #29
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Third in line
Posts: 18,048
Let me see if I can create a less complicated analogy.

Imagine me as a magician (it could happen!). I show you two coins - a nickel and a dime, and then take your hand and presumably place the two coins directly from my (closed) hand into yours such that you can't see them, but definitely feel them fall into your hand. I tell you to place your hands behind your back, and separate the two coins, one in each hand. Then I tell you to show me the dime. You hold out your hand that you think has the dime in it, and it's actual the nickel - whaaa? Your other hand holds a quarter!

That was a trick. I showed you two different-sized coins, appeared to place them into your hand, and not being able to see them, you believed you could still tell which was which because you knew one was bigger than the other. You didn't know that I placed a quarter and a nickel instead of a nickel and a dime in your hand. That's where the trick part came in - I gave you misleading information, and you made a reasonable but incorrect judgment based upon it. Once I ask you for the dime and you give me the nickel instead you realize something's not right, and once you open your other hand and see that there's a quarter in it, you understand right away that you were fooled and more or less how.


Darren Brown's shows aren't anything like that. He starts the show out saying he hypnotized someone into doing something, and then shows them doing it, and that's literally all there is. To turn it into a coin analogy, it's as if Brown shows you his closed fist, tells you there's a quarter in it, then puts it into his pocket and just walks away. If it's true that the "mark" in Darren Brown shows is the audience rather than the person who was allegedly hypnotized, then there's no actual tricks happening: the audience either believes that Brown hypnotized the person, or they don't; perhaps during the course of the show, they change their mind or they don't. But there's no pay-off; the audience never gets to open its hand and say "WTF did this nickel come from, it's suppose to be a...heeeeey, you pulled a fast one on me!" They receive the misleading information, but are never told or given the opportunity to do anything with it, nor presented with the fact at the end that the information was misleading: they aren't "tricked". Even the ones who believe the misinformation can't really be said to have been "fooled" - if Brown continues to walk around repeatedly saying "there's a quarter in my right pocket, there's a quarter in my right pocket", and then at some points asks you "which pocket is the quarter in?" and you say "the right one", that's not you having been fooled into thinking there's a quarter in his pocket, that's just you directly repeating the information he gave you back to him. There was no judgment involved on your part, no actual interaction.

Last edited by Checkmite; 27th November 2012 at 11:48 AM.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2012, 12:34 PM   #30
AdMan
Philosopher
 
AdMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 9,397
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Let me see if I can create a less complicated analogy.

Imagine me as a magician (it could happen!). I show you two coins - a nickel and a dime, and then take your hand and presumably place the two coins directly from my (closed) hand into yours such that you can't see them, but definitely feel them fall into your hand. I tell you to place your hands behind your back, and separate the two coins, one in each hand. Then I tell you to show me the dime. You hold out your hand that you think has the dime in it, and it's actual the nickel - whaaa? Your other hand holds a quarter!

That was a trick. I showed you two different-sized coins, appeared to place them into your hand, and not being able to see them, you believed you could still tell which was which because you knew one was bigger than the other. You didn't know that I placed a quarter and a nickel instead of a nickel and a dime in your hand. That's where the trick part came in - I gave you misleading information, and you made a reasonable but incorrect judgment based upon it. Once I ask you for the dime and you give me the nickel instead you realize something's not right, and once you open your other hand and see that there's a quarter in it, you understand right away that you were fooled and more or less how.


Darren Brown's shows aren't anything like that. He starts the show out saying he hypnotized someone into doing something, and then shows them doing it, and that's literally all there is. To turn it into a coin analogy, it's as if Brown shows you his closed fist, tells you there's a quarter in it, then puts it into his pocket and just walks away. If it's true that the "mark" in Darren Brown shows is the audience rather than the person who was allegedly hypnotized, then there's no actual tricks happening: the audience either believes that Brown hypnotized the person, or they don't; perhaps during the course of the show, they change their mind or they don't. But there's no pay-off; the audience never gets to open its hand and say "WTF did this nickel come from, it's suppose to be a...heeeeey, you pulled a fast one on me!" They receive the misleading information, but are never told or given the opportunity to do anything with it, nor presented with the fact at the end that the information was misleading: they aren't "tricked". Even the ones who believe the misinformation can't really be said to have been "fooled" - if Brown continues to walk around repeatedly saying "there's a quarter in my right pocket, there's a quarter in my right pocket", and then at some points asks you "which pocket is the quarter in?" and you say "the right one", that's not you having been fooled into thinking there's a quarter in his pocket, that's just you directly repeating the information he gave you back to him. There was no judgment involved on your part, no actual interaction.

I think in his hypnotism shows (as with any other stage hypnotist), the effect--using that term as it's used in magic and mentalism--is that DB actually has the power to hypnotize people and make them believe and do all kinds of crazy stuff. If part of the audience thinks the person is just playing along or is a stooge or there is other trickery involved, the show doesn't work for them, of course. But a sizable part of the audience does believe everything is as presented, and they are amazed, which is what Brown is intending. IMO, you really can't compare what he does to sleight of hand with coins, for example, but rather to what other mentalists do when they demonstrate their supposed mental powers.
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
- Carl Sagan

Last edited by AdMan; 27th November 2012 at 12:35 PM.
AdMan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2012, 12:46 PM   #31
Squeegee Beckenheim
Philosopher
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,470
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
It's called an analogy; it's a rhetorical device whereby a situation which is currently in question is compared to a different and sometimes hypothetical situation in which the answer is considered more self-evident or to have already been settled to some degree of reasonable certainty.
I thought it was called talking bollocks.
Squeegee Beckenheim is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2012, 02:40 AM   #32
malicus
Graduate Poster
 
malicus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,522
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
Yes. And it's perfectly fine, for a magician. All part of the fun.
But DB is claiming that it's all real and that's not so fine. (IMO).
What about his stage shows Soapy? Do you think some are plants?

I saw him in Edinburgh several years ago and left thinking he needed to be burned at the stake. Plants or not, I was thoroughly entertained and spooked.

His stage tricks obviously waaaay less convoluted than tv stuff, and could be explained by many of our resident performers, I even went home and replicated one of his tricks, but he is top notch at what he does and how he entertains / annoys us all.
malicus is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2012, 02:54 AM   #33
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Moderator
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 28,339
Originally Posted by malicus View Post
What about his stage shows Soapy? Do you think some are plants?

I saw him in Edinburgh several years ago and left thinking he needed to be burned at the stake. Plants or not, I was thoroughly entertained and spooked.
Clearly we need to get someone we know is not a plant up on stage to see what happens. I know just the fellow...
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2012, 05:45 AM   #34
banquetbear
Muse
 
banquetbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 622
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
Yes. And it's perfectly fine, for a magician. All part of the fun.
But DB is claiming that it's all real and that's not so fine. (IMO).
...what part of "using a combination of "magic, suggestion, psychology, misdirection and showmanship" leads you to believe that Derren Brown claims that everything he does is "real?"
banquetbear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2012, 11:02 AM   #35
Max_mang
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 144
Originally Posted by banquetbear View Post
...what part of "using a combination of "magic, suggestion, psychology, misdirection and showmanship" leads you to believe that Derren Brown claims that everything he does is "real?"
I'm curious about this as well. Brown says this at the beginning of every show of his that I've ever seen. Where has he claimed that he does 'real' stuff?
Max_mang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2012, 02:08 PM   #36
Azrael 5
Philosopher
 
Azrael 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Yorkshire,Uk
Posts: 5,346
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
I'm Scottish. I dinna wear knickers.

You confuse me. You say he does not use actors, yet describe it as entertainment. So do you think the people who appear on it are genuine volunteers, members of the public?
Yes. Do you have proof they aren't?
Quote:
If so, I can't help wondering why none of them- all young adults with (I expect ) smartphones and internet skills- bothered to google "Cicero Pharmaceuticals". Thirty seconds research would have shown it doesn't exist.
It had a fake webste but do you google every drug prescribed to you? Maybe they belived it to be so new it didnt have any google results.
Quote:

Look, as entertainment, I'm happy to watch DB's shows. He's entertaining.
What I'm less happy about is the pseudoscience he throws out as "explanations" for what look like (actually not very good) magic tricks.
Youll get over it, magicians have been citing woo expalantions for tricks and stunts forever.
Quote:
If his programme on the placebo effect was actual real research, then it is of considerable value as a tool to educate the public about that issue.
If it was faked, it was faked. I for one don't believe the results he claimed, because I think he lies a lot. Which is fine, in a stage magician. Not in a researcher.
It wasnt suppsoed to be research as such-not hard science anyway,merely a demonstartation.

Quote:
I don't see any "This programme is for entertainment only " advisory. DB makes strenuous attempts to portray all events on the progammes as "real".
What part wasnt real? Placebo effect isnt real?
__________________
"I achieve these results through a mixture of magic,misdirection,suggestion and showmanship"-Derren Brown
Azrael 5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2012, 03:53 PM   #37
Beaver Hateman
Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 176
Originally Posted by Azrael 5 View Post
Its modern equivalent of "camera tricks". People can think of no other way it can be achieved.


So you dont watch him dont know anything about him but believe he doesnt use skill.Figures.

Note that "I don't watch him any more" does not equate to "i don't watch him and don't know anything about him".
Beaver Hateman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2012, 03:54 PM   #38
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Third in line
Posts: 18,048
Originally Posted by AdMan View Post
I think in his hypnotism shows (as with any other stage hypnotist), the effect--using that term as it's used in magic and mentalism--is that DB actually has the power to hypnotize people and make them believe and do all kinds of crazy stuff. If part of the audience thinks the person is just playing along or is a stooge or there is other trickery involved, the show doesn't work for them, of course. But a sizable part of the audience does believe everything is as presented, and they are amazed, which is what Brown is intending.
But again, that's just the thing - is this really a "mentalism effect", the audience merely believing what he says and that's it?

Going back to my first analogy - if I show somebody (an "audience") a video I made of a person running who runs every day for exercise, but tell them that the person in the video is actually running because I convinced him a ghost is chasing him; if my "audience" person decides to believe me, did I just play a "mentalism trick" on him?

Because it seems to me that all I did was tell a lie. The simplest kind; the kind kids make up to get out of trouble when they're caught doing something wrong. It doesn't strike me as evidence of some kind of "skill at mentalism". Even the silly math-based touch-your-television guess-what-you're-pointing-at "tricks" that David Copperfield used for his national TV specials in the 80s seemed more accurately called "mentalism effects" by comparison, since they require the audience to do more than merely sit there and accept or not accept what they're told. I do that much every day just watching the news.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2012, 03:56 PM   #39
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Third in line
Posts: 18,048
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
I thought it was called talking bollocks.
No that's what Brown's doing whenever he brings up "hypnosis".
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2012, 04:02 PM   #40
Beaver Hateman
Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 176
Originally Posted by banquetbear View Post
...what part of "using a combination of "magic, suggestion, psychology, misdirection and showmanship" leads you to believe that Derren Brown claims that everything he does is "real?"
It leads me to believe that nothing he does is a result of "magic, suggestion, psychology or misdirection" and to believe that everything he does is a result of 'showmanship'. Which includes paying stooges and lying about whether you do or not. And camera tricks.

Of course I don't KNOW this. But when he says point blank he's prepared to use these methods, then why not use them all the time? It's way easier.
Beaver Hateman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

JREF Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:50 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.