I've never attempted to bend spoons, sporks, what have you. It's weird though, every Christian I come across actually says to me: "I see the gift of prophecy in you...", which is weird in the sense that I do have some talent for being able to see future events, just by thinking about certain things and then like one hour later, BAM it's happened. I also do tarot card readings as well.

"hypnosis" was FAKE and to point me in the area of which books to read to expose the truth. I

Well, he has a blind spot, there. The medical community has gotten quite enough evidence, by now that hypnosis is real, though not quite as miraculous as some would let you believe.

Lightice wrote:

"hypnosis" was FAKE and to point me in the area of which books to read to expose the truth. I

Well, he has a blind spot, there. The medical community has gotten quite enough evidence, by now that hypnosis is real, though not quite as miraculous as some would let you believe.

Hypnosis as diabolical mind control, is specifically what I quizzed him about. Unfortunately, doesn't work that way!!!

Randi wrote:

hypnotism/hypnosis One of the most controversial subjects or phenomena in psychology is hypnotism. It is said to be an altered state of mind a subject enters into at the instruction of the operator, a trance condition in which the subject is amenable to suggestions made by the operator. Stage demonstrations of the phenomenon may or may not be genuine.
      Since there are no adequate definitions of trance and no means whereby one can test for that state, it appears more likely that hypnotism is a mutual agreement of the operator and the subject that the subject will cooperate in following suggestions and in acting out various suggested scenarios. As such, hypnotism may be a valuable tool in psychology.
      Certainly the picture of the hypnotist (operator) as a figure of power with control over the unwilling victim is the product of ignorance and superstition.

Alexandra wrote:

I guess they reject people and not let them try out.

No, no. Anyone is free to fill out the application, if I could peg God down into answering one of my prayers on cue, I'd fill one out myself!!! The thing is, no one has gotten to the Actual test, because no one passes the preliminary tests. Like say, dowsers, who are supposed to be able to find water, or oil, or whatever the particular claim is, underground, using a rod; before the Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal wastes its resources on a full scale test, they do a "pre-test". Like for the dowser, once they put the type of material he claimed he could find, underneath a cup...there were maybe 50 cups in the room. Well, he had a 1 in 50 chance of getting it right if he really didn't have any supernatural power. He didn't get it right.

In keeping up with these articles over the years, it's clear to Randi that some people actually believe they do have the power they claim to, or do believe in the faith they claim to (like myself), but he swears that before anyone can swallow that, we must prove ourselves. Those people don't really piss Randi off, he just boggles at the claims he considers unscientific and a block to truth...what pisses him off, is when -it's mostly psychics and magicians- claim that instead of providing illusion (magicians) and entertainment (psychics) they claim to have true supernatural powers, knowingly deceiving their audience (like Jonathan Edwards tricking people into believing they've spoken with their dead relatives) which is misleading, cruel, just to gain a fatter wallet. In any case, I want to believe in the supernatural. Want to! Love haunted houses, love the idea that other possibilities could exist, but I have to wait until someone passes the challenge.

Randi is very science only. Reminds me of...what is that school of thought, "Materialism" - In philosophy, materialism is that form of physicalism which holds that the only thing that can truly be said to exist is matter; that fundamentally, all things are composed of material and all phenomena are the result of material interactions; that matter is the only substance. (from Wiki)

So Randi is comforting, because he is seeking the truth…and I want the truth about the world we live in. But also, his brand of skepticism contrasts heavily with my idealism and faith, so I always take his articles with a grain of salt. I mean, yes, he is finding the scientific facts about what's going on behind some of the shady doors of those FAKES who are tricking people intentionally to gain money, and mislead the poor gullible people into paying large amounts of cash for false information, deceitful lies that lead them astray. But the regular, average person, no, I don't think he cares to meddle in their affairs, only thinks that people who believe things, go on faith, are destined to be mislead and fall into the traps of those who would prey on the believers.

I think, individuals should be free to believe what they like, if it helps them, and isn’t harming others. It’s the money-making scam artist I have a problem with, and the magicians who attribute mere "illusion" to supernatural powers, which is a gross misrepresentation of the truth to the gullible public to gain unnatural fame and fortune.

Speaking of John Edwards, he's one of the mediums I have kept a Close Eye on, believing he is one of the Most Harmful of the bunch, with deceiving people about their speaking with dead relatives. My grandmother passed away, my father passed away, my closest male relative (like a brother) passed away, and I'd love nothing more than to believe I could communicate with these people who were my special ones who would love me forever, no matter what. BUT, they are gone, I can't speak to them, and I am adamantly against this particular trickster because of the level of deceit he uses to defraud people concerning the Most Sensitive Subject of all time.

One of James Randi’s many articles concerning John Edwards:
http://www.randi.org/jr/02-23-2001.html

James Randi wrote:

Reader Jonathan Fox, in South Africa, carried on a long correspondence with SABC3, a television outlet there, concerning their use of the "Crossing Over" show with John Edward. Jonathan offered to establish that Edward is doing the "cold reading" trick. He had many exchanges with a PR person named Van Tonder, offering them to "bring any recorded episode of  'Crossing Over with John Edward' and have access to a monitor, a VCR, and a remote control" so that he could prove his point. Ms. Van Tonder squirmed and alibied, then finally stated that she could "not commit the channel to that kind of use of their staff time and resources" and advised him to contact the station general manager. He did, and finally received this:

Dear Mr. Fox,
Thank you for your e-mail.

I have just received a copy of your correspondence with the SABC and would like to advise as follows:

SABC3 does not, nor has it, proclaimed that John Edwards [sic] is a "genuine spirit medium."

Mr. Edwards [sic] provides an entertainment option which is currently well received.

We offer many forms of entertainment which are all open to subjective scrutiny.

Whilst we thank you for your interest in the show, we unfortunately will not be able to entertain an individual scrutiny of it.

Yours sincerely

Trevor Smit
General Manager SABC3

Folks, I looked up the dictionary definition of "namby-pamby" before using it here. It means, "lacking decisiveness, irresolute, insipid." Not good enough, but okay to describe SABC3's waffling about the matter. But it's typical. They don't give a damn about the damage the program's doing to listeners; it's entertainment, right? Russian roulette, anyone? Just for fun, of course. Here's another idea: do an "entertainment" show on manufacturing methamphetamines at home! Mr. Smit would like that, because it would be "well received." That's enough, it seems.

Houdini made the famous claim that if there WERE ANY WAY possible to make a life-after-death contact, he would be in touch with his wife. They had a secret code and everything. Although she searched and searched through hordes of spiritual mediums after he died, she did NOT find him. If Houdini couldn't do it, John Edwards hasn't a chance in hell. Oh, and by the way, if you search Randi's website, you can find actual skeptics who attended tapings of the Edwards shows...they reported seeing such things as crew members, in line with the audience, asking them questions (pretending they were audience too), like "Who are you hoping to hear from today?"

Should be noted, Sylvia Brown, John Edwards, and Uri Geller have ALL been invited by James Randi himself to take the million dollar challenge to prove their powers. When cornered on the air, Sylvia Brown accepted, it happened maybe twice that a skeptic call got through and hammered her with why she hasn't yet taken the test. She claims she's never heard back from Randi. Lie. You can see the certified mail slip he sent to her home, several times, on his website. Also, there's a hilarious clock on the website which counts down how many days it's been since Sylvia has accepted the challenge and refused to take it. FUN STUFF!!!

Trench Kamen wrote:

Very Alakazam of you.

I read Tarot cards and runes, and my philosophy is such--if there is absolutely nothing to the validity of divination, it is a good mediation exercise to see problems from a new angle, and if there is something to it (some quantum physical cognizant aspect to the universe or symbols tapping into current vectors of energy or whatever the hell), that's nifty. Though damn do I get accurate readings.

Every time the skeptic researcher comes up, I think of the very first scene of the first Ghostbusters movie. Classic.

Reading tarot cards is a bit like dream analysis, with a much more limited data set.  I mean, there are only, what, 78 cards?  Versus how many dream images?  But the idea is the same, you take more or less random images and create a narrative out of them.  Not likely to predict the future, but it might tell you something about your self and feelings.

Trench Kamen wrote:

As Jung himself knew.

Jung > Freud

HAY

If it wasn't for Freud, psychology would be a very, very different prospect. Jung built from Freud's base ideas, and while Freud himself was a gigantic raving loony at times, the man did more for psychology than any other single psychologist out there. You gotta give him credit for that.

Besides, raving loonies are fantastically amusing. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar indeed.

Edit: I suddenly have a craving to read Freud/Jung slashfic.

Last edited by Yasha (05-14-2007 10:32:47 PM)

Yasha wrote:

Edit: I suddenly have a craving to read Freud/Jung slashfic.

Whoa, wait, there's someone out there writing a fic about ACTUAL historical figures?
I'm BEHIND!!

Trench Kamen wrote:

Oh, I know Freud was there first. Jung was his protoge before they had a huge falling out.

Teacher/student slash plz.

Actually, Neitzsche was there first, and before him Dostoevsky.  Nietzsche>...well, anybody...

Yasha wrote:

Stormcrow wrote:

Actually, Neitzsche was there first, and before him Dostoevsky.  Nietzsche>...well, anybody...

I bet Socrates could him.

Also, we're getting rather far off topic now. More on the topic of the occult, I used to read tarot cards and runes, and found them to be absolutely sadistic. As in, I had a pregnancy scare once, and they kept on giving me 'new growth' and 'family' in my future when I tried to calm myself down with them. Assholes.

I know what you mean. I just did a couple of Tarot readings, and they told me that my good friends will leave me, my works will flop, and I would have horrible relationships in the future
Ironically, it says that I will have a happy, healthy life, wtf!? How am I supposed to have a happy, healthy life if I'm gonna lose my friends and flunk out?

Last edited by Hiraku (05-14-2007 11:13:17 PM)

Frosty wrote:

I think, individuals should be free to believe what they like, if it helps them, and isn’t harming others. emot-smile It’s the money-making scam artist I have a problem with, and the magicians who attribute mere "illusion" to supernatural powers, which is a gross misrepresentation of the truth to the gullible public to gain unnatural fame and fortune.

I have mixed feelings about James Randi.  On one hand, he does the world a very important public service by debunking the worst Jonathan Edwards of the world -- and I feel the same way you do about exploitation of people's gullibility for profit.  On the other hand, I often feel that Randi strays too far in the other direction.  The essence of skepticism is "I'll believe it when I see it," not "I'll never believe it;" Randi seems to have made up his mind in advance that psychic phenomena aren't real, when in fact it's impossible to prove that particular kind of negative.  Needs a refresher course on philosophy of science, limitations of reason, etc.  And he can be an asshole about it, which I guess is what my problem really is.

Trench Kamen wrote:

I read Tarot cards and runes, and my philosophy is such--if there is absolutely nothing to the validity of divination, it is a good mediation exercise to see problems from a new angle, and if there is something to it (some quantum physical cognizant aspect to the universe or symbols tapping into current vectors of energy or whatever the hell), that's nifty. Though damn do I get accurate readings.

My feelings exactly.  I think it's unlikely that anything divine or spiritual is guiding where the cards fall, but that doesn't mean that there's no insight to be gained by using the cards as an inspirational jumping-off point.  The way the querent interprets the spread is often more revealing than the way the reader does.  (At least, that's true when I'm the reader; I'm not a very good reader, mostly for lack of practice, though I have studied the cards in some depth.)

SleepDebtFairy wrote:

I use a Faerie Oracle deck myself, very similar to a tarot deck. The art is by Brian Froud. I love his art.

How do they work for you? I use two different oracle sets -- one Angel, one dolphin/mermaid -- and find the angel cards always work better for me, although I do use them simultaneously on occasion. I think the water cards are too intuitive for me, because I need to be TOLD things as I am too muddled up to instinctively reach for the meaning myself. It's why I like Oracle cards better; because of my naturally pessimistic nature I am too biased to read the Tarot objectively.

Clarice wrote:

SleepDebtFairy wrote:

I use a Faerie Oracle deck myself, very similar to a tarot deck. The art is by Brian Froud. I love his art.

How do they work for you? I use two different oracle sets -- one Angel, one dolphin/mermaid -- and find the angel cards always work better for me, although I do use them simultaneously on occasion. I think the water cards are too intuitive for me, because I need to be TOLD things as I am too muddled up to instinctively reach for the meaning myself. It's why I like Oracle cards better; because of my naturally pessimistic nature I am too biased to read the Tarot objectively.

It's my first and only deck so far.. I thought of getting another deck because there are so many pretty ones, but then I thought I'd rather just stick to one deck for now, since I'm so used to it and it's worked really well for me.. I don't know, I guess I don't want to complicate it too much yet.

But it's been working fine for me. The only thing is, after experimenting with some spreads, such as the celtic cross, now readings without spreads don't make much sense to me anymore. Spreads give you a nice organization and what card is about what, etc.

I'm really partial to faeries, and I love the art on this deck. As for the meanings and interpreting.. the deck came with a small book with some meanings and a littly story or information about each faerie on each card, so I've become accustomed to the faeries' different personalities. I think when interpreting tarot or oracle cards, the initial meaning made for the card is important, but also your intuition. Sometimes a card might mean something a little different in a different situation. I usually stick to the traditional meanings, but I try to see how it fits with the situation, and since the cards can have multiple meaning, try to find out which one feels right.

As for an explanation about how the cards can work... I liked the one explained in my faerie oracle card book.

The cards are just paper with art on them, printed in a factory. The real magic is within yourself. Each card has different meanings you can use and interpret, and you use your intuition to guide you. As for how the card order pops out, that's a good question.. It might be other forces, but perhaps it is your own intuition working without you knowing. I know I've gotten too many eerie card combinations that made perfect sense for me to call it a coincidence. Of course, sometimes the cards haven't made sense to me, but those were always during the times when I felt muddled in my intuition, or distracted. I always try to get into a small meditative state as I shuffle the cards and think about my question.

Whoops, that was long.

Last edited by SleepDebtFairy (05-15-2007 12:19:02 PM)