I have an interesting opinion on this. If someone displays “supernatural powers”, then those powers are not supernatural–just unknown. Therefore, it is an impossible prize to claim.
If you read the article, the rules were only that both parties have to agree on a test and if someone passed the test they won the prize. There wasn’t a “gotcha” clause like “Oh since you did it it’s clearly allowed by physics and we don’t have to pay up!” So like if someone showed they had psychic powers sufficient to pass an agreed upon test it doesn’t matter if there’s a natural explanation for it, they would have still won the prize.
I remember seeing piece of some TV show that invited both Randi and some “psychic”. The psychic showed his power of bending spoons, then Randi asked to do the trick again, only using one of his spoons. The fraud failed.
Well, in seriousness, and more interestingly, I’m not really willing to call supernatural powers real or fake, currently. There exist some stories I’ve come across, which are likely real, which contain absolutely unexplainable phenomenon. Just this morning, someone in a Discord I’m in (who wouldn’t just fake stories) was explaining how someone they knew had a psychotic break on psychedelics, and, in the ambulance, narrated the paramedics’ childhoods with disturbing accuracy. A trusted moderator of that space responded to my skepticism with “psychics absolutely exist, but the vast majority are just grifters”.
Note: Without getting into all the context, this moderator is not the kind of person to simply believe in conspiracy theories.
I used to be a Reddit atheist (ew), and I’ve gone from thinking I know everything, to being very serious about accepting different views–no matter how absurd. We’re unaware of so many more things than we’re aware of.
I’m of the opinion that if psychic abilities exist, they can not be on command. They might. They might not. I would rather be honest than claim to be factual–I don’t know.
Just this morning, someone in a Discord I’m in (who wouldn’t just fake stories) was explaining how someone they knew had a psychotic break on psychedelics, and, in the ambulance, narrated the paramedics’ childhoods with disturbing accuracy
I think it’s entirely possible this person is being honest while also just not having a firm grasp over what actually happened, due to having a psychotic break from psychedelics. The paramedic simply agreeing to whatever they said (if the conversation did happen—I’ve been unsure whether a conversation I thought I had was real or not just from smoking too much weed) could have been interpreted as much deeper and more profound than it was.
None of this requires ill intent. The mind is just incredibly bad at making and retrieving memories in the way we want (infallible, like a video) even when you aren’t on drugs.
It could also just be cold reading. People who haven’t been exposed to that can find it eerily accurate, even though it’s just a combination of random guessing with reinforcing the guesses that got reactions. It’s the kind of thing that both parties could participate in without either being explicitly familiar with the technique.
This is the probable explanation. However, all I have is the surface of the story. If it truly was an accurate reading (as in, the paramedics adding to what was being said), I’m unaware of it. I don’t really like pressing for details in others’ potentially traumatic events, though.
Most of that is just mentalism, which is effective and useful but works off a psychological and stochastic approach but is absolutely explainable and not supernatural despite its applications in manipulating people. See: Jacob Wysocki in the one year later episode of game changer
There’s a term for this idea, “preternatural”. It means a phenomenon that is the result of the natural world, not magic or divine, but still unexplainable with our current understanding.
James Randi’s prize didn’t require proof of the supernatural, it was open to preternatural phenomena as well. Someone just had to prove it was a REAL phenomenon and not a hoax or random chance.
There’s a term for this idea, “preternatural”. It means a phenomenon that is the result of the natural world, not magic or divine, but still unexplainable with our current understanding.
So anything actually proven to exist would be “preternatural” then. Even it turned out to be the result of magic or the devine, it’s still something that exists in the natural world that we just don’t understand yet.
Sort of, assuming you don’t believe that God or magic are real. If I had premonitions of the future, and could demonstrate through testing that they come true, I’d be proving a phenomenon exists but not necessarily anything about the origins. They could be visions from God, making me a prophet. They could be something with a natural origin, like an energy or invisible spirits.
It’s a term used by occultists, ghost hunters, and other people who want to discuss / legitimize spooky shit without the religious baggage of the word “supernatural”.
I have an interesting opinion on this. If someone displays “supernatural powers”, then those powers are not supernatural–just unknown. Therefore, it is an impossible prize to claim.
If you read the article, the rules were only that both parties have to agree on a test and if someone passed the test they won the prize. There wasn’t a “gotcha” clause like “Oh since you did it it’s clearly allowed by physics and we don’t have to pay up!” So like if someone showed they had psychic powers sufficient to pass an agreed upon test it doesn’t matter if there’s a natural explanation for it, they would have still won the prize.
I remember seeing piece of some TV show that invited both Randi and some “psychic”. The psychic showed his power of bending spoons, then Randi asked to do the trick again, only using one of his spoons. The fraud failed.
Well, in seriousness, and more interestingly, I’m not really willing to call supernatural powers real or fake, currently. There exist some stories I’ve come across, which are likely real, which contain absolutely unexplainable phenomenon. Just this morning, someone in a Discord I’m in (who wouldn’t just fake stories) was explaining how someone they knew had a psychotic break on psychedelics, and, in the ambulance, narrated the paramedics’ childhoods with disturbing accuracy. A trusted moderator of that space responded to my skepticism with “psychics absolutely exist, but the vast majority are just grifters”.
Note: Without getting into all the context, this moderator is not the kind of person to simply believe in conspiracy theories.
I used to be a Reddit atheist (ew), and I’ve gone from thinking I know everything, to being very serious about accepting different views–no matter how absurd. We’re unaware of so many more things than we’re aware of.
I’m of the opinion that if psychic abilities exist, they can not be on command. They might. They might not. I would rather be honest than claim to be factual–I don’t know.
Removed by mod
Rude.
I think it’s entirely possible this person is being honest while also just not having a firm grasp over what actually happened, due to having a psychotic break from psychedelics. The paramedic simply agreeing to whatever they said (if the conversation did happen—I’ve been unsure whether a conversation I thought I had was real or not just from smoking too much weed) could have been interpreted as much deeper and more profound than it was.
None of this requires ill intent. The mind is just incredibly bad at making and retrieving memories in the way we want (infallible, like a video) even when you aren’t on drugs.
It could also just be cold reading. People who haven’t been exposed to that can find it eerily accurate, even though it’s just a combination of random guessing with reinforcing the guesses that got reactions. It’s the kind of thing that both parties could participate in without either being explicitly familiar with the technique.
This is the probable explanation. However, all I have is the surface of the story. If it truly was an accurate reading (as in, the paramedics adding to what was being said), I’m unaware of it. I don’t really like pressing for details in others’ potentially traumatic events, though.
Most of that is just mentalism, which is effective and useful but works off a psychological and stochastic approach but is absolutely explainable and not supernatural despite its applications in manipulating people. See: Jacob Wysocki in the one year later episode of game changer
I probably will watch that. Thanks!
There’s a term for this idea, “preternatural”. It means a phenomenon that is the result of the natural world, not magic or divine, but still unexplainable with our current understanding.
James Randi’s prize didn’t require proof of the supernatural, it was open to preternatural phenomena as well. Someone just had to prove it was a REAL phenomenon and not a hoax or random chance.
So anything actually proven to exist would be “preternatural” then. Even it turned out to be the result of magic or the devine, it’s still something that exists in the natural world that we just don’t understand yet.
Sort of, assuming you don’t believe that God or magic are real. If I had premonitions of the future, and could demonstrate through testing that they come true, I’d be proving a phenomenon exists but not necessarily anything about the origins. They could be visions from God, making me a prophet. They could be something with a natural origin, like an energy or invisible spirits.
It’s a term used by occultists, ghost hunters, and other people who want to discuss / legitimize spooky shit without the religious baggage of the word “supernatural”.
I mean no one even managed to display “unknown” powers either.
They were all explainable
Removed by mod
This is a warning for rule 5