Notifications
Clear all

Research strikes a blow against ESP  


ptoner
(@ptoner)
The plants talk to me....
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 2124
Topic starter  

Research strikes a blow against ESP

Oh shit... we are on borrowed time... ESP has been declared a hoax....

Ouija board salesmen, tarot card readers and aspiring oracles, your time may be up.

Aleister Crowley devotees, students of Professor Charles Xavier and fans of John Edwards – you are all on borrowed time, too.

But then, practising clairvoyants and devout telepathists probably already knew that.

In the long battle between the mystics and sceptics – the horoscopes and the microscopes – a blow has been struck for science after research by Piers Howe of the Melbourne school of psychological sciences at the University of Melbourne.

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life/research-strikes-a-blow-against-esp-20140114-30sck.html


Quote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4119
 

Not a ghost of a chance.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
 

There is a sort of humour involved in

In the long battle between the mystics and sceptics – the horoscopes and the microscopes – a blow has been struck for science after research by Piers Howe of the Melbourne school of psychological sciences at the University of Melbourne.

- On Lashtal, this could maybe sort-of apply to the war between the ookie-spookie-kookie enthusiasts and their sworn enemies, the anti-supernaturalists!

Also of some minor amusement was the quip about:

Ouija board salesmen, tarot card readers and aspiring oracles, your time may be up.
Aleister Crowley devotees, students of Professor Charles Xavier and fans of John Edwards – you are all on borrowed time, too.
But then, practising clairvoyants and devout telepathists probably already knew that.

although it wasn’t really that funny & more like a new riff played on a very old joke…

But to get down to the meat of the matter -

[...] "They could spot that there was a change but couldn't identify the change. This is why they believed they had a sixth sense, which was nonsense,” said Dr Howe, whose findings were published in the scientific journal PLOS One.

So, the sixth sense is now the 'non' sense?  As in, not one of the conventional five?  (But what's that you say...?)

It wasn't a sixth sense. What happened was they took in more information than they could verbalise."

And... So?  Yes, they probably did!  But the point here is what precisely, then?!  (Pray, continue further!)

"It all came down to 'visual statistics'”, he said, and the amount of information the brain was perceiving and processing. The data was so immense that these “implicit realisations” were often mistaken for an extrasensory “feeling”.

[...] Dr Howe does not feel like a big spoilsport. “You have this ability. It's real. But it's not magical,” he said. “And isn't that actually better, that it's showing how amazing the human mind is?  We've got all this stuff going on in the background at this subconscious level. To me that's actually far cooler than having a sixth sense.”

There appears to be no reason why Dr Howe (no relation, I suppose??) should feel like a big spoilsport.  It would perhaps help if he refined his terms a bit more and stated exactly what he perceived Magic to be, as according to his actual comments it seems to be a para- or “occult” (=hidden) form of science & therefore not that far removed from the axioms of Scientific Illuminism.  Furthermore, from the evidence shown ESP has definitely not been declared “a hoax” and is not “on borrowed time”…

But, like I’ve told you before pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!
Norma N Joy Conquest


ReplyQuote
ptoner
(@ptoner)
The plants talk to me....
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 2124
Topic starter  

Another example of a nonsense article.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5601
 

It was decades ago that the "clairvoyant" Jack Schwarz said that there was no such thing as a Sixth Sense, and that ESP did not mean "Extra Sensory Perception," but that it meant "Extended Sensory Perception."

That is, the so-called mystical perceptions are merely received via the traditional five senses, but the range of those senses has (somehow) been extended. He even submitted to scientific experiments (at the Menninger Foundation), where they determined that his visual range extended much further into the ultraviolet range than the "normal" person. He was renowned for his ability to "see" the human energy field.

"Purple beyond purple: it is the light higher than eyesight." - AL II-51


ReplyQuote
James
(@james)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 251
 

"SO CALLED OBJECTIVE REALITY DECLARED A HOAX!"

New research from the University of Shangri-la has de-bunked the myth of objective existence. In a shock press conference Prof. Vasubandhu from the Mind-Only Department revealed that as no one has ever experienced objective reality directly Occam's razor has declared it non-existent.

"It seems strange to cling to a strange fantasy world where all subjective perception must have an objective counterpart in order to explain shared experiences? Surely in this post-Matrix world people are not still falling for that old superstition?"

Prof. Vasubandu admitted somewhat wearily that the persistent meme of objectivity and the dependency of too many careers will probably mean this pernicious thought virus will be with us for some time to come.

REUTERS


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
 

The way I ‘look’ at it is that, like with Both/And rather than Either/Or, ESP can refer to both Extended and Extra Sensory Perception.

There is definitely a case to be found in transcending the norms – as in extending the boundaries of the senses - so that, for example, one can see what is normally regarded as invisible light (ultra-violet or infra-red).  This could even venture further into the territory of e.g., synaesthesia, where perceptions of the various independent senses are intermingled together so that one can ‘smell colours’ or see music, and so on, and of the multiple varieties of this there are many documented cases.  But even though this may (in itself) account for some paranormal phenomena otherwise explained away as being supernatural, I believe there is also an “Extra” (from the Latin meaning from outside) factor regarding the “traditional five senses”.

Sheldrake goes into these (ESP) matters in some detail, e.g. Seven Experiments That Could Change The World (where he studies “A pet's ability to anticipate its owner's return home” and “Sensations felt in phantom limbs after amputation” , but the most basic manifestation of it which he mentions - and I am sure everyone will be familiar with this to some extent – is where somebody has the ‘perception’ that somebody else is focussing on or thinking about them, even at outside the distance of visual range – or as Sheldrake himself puts it, “Our own tendency to know when we are being stared at from behind”.)  As this feeling cannot be attributed to sight, hearing, touch, taste or smell – how are such perceptions realised under these criteria?

The simple answer is that they cannot, and therefore a ‘sixth’ sense has been summoned in order to account for all those perceived phenomena that aren’t accounted for by the other five.  It would not be inaccurate to describe the sixth sense as “intuition” in its widest sense of gut feeling.  From here, it could be argued that it forms a link to the direction of the true will of the individual concerned & can (usually) be relied upon as an accurate compass bearing.

How otherwise can the anti-supernaturalists explain this?

"James" wrote:
"SO CALLED OBJECTIVE REALITY DECLARED A HOAX!"

New research from the University of Shangri-la has de-bunked the myth of objective existence.

Another “lost horizon” for academic research!?

"James" wrote:
In a shock press conference Prof. Vasubandhu from the Mind-Only Department revealed that as no one has ever experienced objective reality directly Occam's razor has declared it non-existent.

Is this for real?  it seems like a bunch of made up names to me!  I liked the

"James" wrote:
Prof. Vasubandu admitted somewhat wearily that the persistent meme of objectivity and the dependency of too many careers will probably mean this pernicious thought virus will be with us for some time to come.

touch.  I guess it’s something he has to repeat over and over again often, day after day, ‘til the poor guy must get close to tearing his hair out with frustration.

"James" wrote:
"It seems strange to cling to a strange fantasy world where all subjective perception must have an objective counterpart in order to explain shared experiences? Surely in this post-Matrix world people are not still falling for that old superstition?"

Yes, where would we all be without the productivity of the paradigm of the parable of The Matrix to widen our perceptions of the parameters of our programming?

Now you see it (all), now you don’t?  Prestidigitatiously yours,
N Joy


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"James" wrote:
"SO CALLED OBJECTIVE REALITY DECLARED A HOAX!"

But is it objectively a hoax?


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4119
 

Good point, Los, as the actress said to the bishop. I was wondering when someone else would spot that.

To put our minds at rest, James, could we have a link to the article you're quoting from please?

Vasubandu - that name seems oddly familiar. I think there was a girl of that name in my class at primary school. I wonder if they are by any chance related?


ReplyQuote
James
(@james)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 251
 

Vasubandhu = author of the Abidharma kosa and co founder of the Yogacara school of Mahayana Buddhism.
Mind Only = a school of Buddhist Idealism.

They will have Wikipedia pages

Regards

Even David Hume doubted his own existence dontcha know!


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"James" wrote:
Vasubandhu = author of the Abidharma kosa and co founder of the Yogacara school of Mahayana Buddhism.
Mind Only = a school of Buddhist Idealism.

Yeah, but are these things objectively the case?


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"James" wrote:
Vasubandhu = author of the Abidharma kosa and co founder of the Yogacara school of Mahayana Buddhism.

He seems to have lost an ‘h’ on the way home?

"James" wrote:
Mind Only = a school of Buddhist Idealism.

I have never come across a university which has a department or ‘school’ of this name.  Psychology, philosophy, medicine even, yes: but this one seems a most unconventional title.  And what is the direct connection which links it in with Buddhist Idealism? (in itself a contradiction in terms or so it seems to me, since everything is sorrow and suffering & the “ideal” is to become non existent.)

"James" wrote:
They will have Wikipedia pages

Ergo, they must be real then (subject to objectively looking at them?) 😀

"James" wrote:
Even David Hume doubted his own existence dontcha know!

What the phuck does he know about it? 😀 Who is this person, anyway?  I’ve never ‘seen’ him…

"MichaelStaley" wrote:
Good point, Los, as the actress said to the bishop. I was wondering when someone else would spot that.

Me, too!

"MichaelStaley" wrote:
To put our minds at rest, James, could we have a link to the article you're quoting from please?

I still think there is an outside probability that James has composed the whole thing.  Ha, ha, ha!

"MichaelStaley" wrote:
Vasubandu - that name seems oddly familiar. I think there was a girl of that name in my class at primary school. I wonder if they are by any chance related?

Ha ha! (snort! gurgle!) Ha, ha, ha! 😀

Going back to the OP,

[...] "They could spot that there was a change but couldn't identify the change. This is why they believed they had a sixth sense, which was nonsense,” said Dr Howe, whose findings were published in the scientific journal PLOS One.

A change having taken place is therefore acknowledged, and just because this change can’t be readily identified beyond a certain point, it doesn’t alter the fact that is quite compatible with magick being the art and science of causing change to occur in conformity with will.

Yours subjectively,
N Joy


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 2964
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
A change having taken place is therefore acknowledged, and just because this change can’t be readily identified beyond a certain point, it doesn’t alter the fact that is quite compatible with magick being the art and science of causing change to occur in conformity with will.

Crowley's definition of "magick" is hogwash, ya know.


ReplyQuote
James
(@james)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 251
 

"But is it objectively a hoax?"

Of course not it's an idea.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"Azidonis" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
A change having taken place is therefore acknowledged, and just because this change can’t be readily identified beyond a certain point, it doesn’t alter the fact that is quite compatible with magick being the art and science of causing change to occur in conformity with will.

Crowley's definition of "magick" is hogwash, ya know.

But that’s IT then?  Not a word further in explanation of the “reasoning” involved behind this – you may disagree with it but don’t you think it’d be interesting, entertaining, god help us maybe even revelatory to provide something a tad more substantial in the way of critique

… Ya know? (?!)!
N Joy


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
"Azidonis" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
A change having taken place is therefore acknowledged, and just because this change can’t be readily identified beyond a certain point, it doesn’t alter the fact that is quite compatible with magick being the art and science of causing change to occur in conformity with will.

Crowley's definition of "magick" is hogwash, ya know.

But that’s IT then?  Not a word further in explanation of the “reasoning” involved behind this – you may disagree with it but don’t you think it’d be interesting, entertaining, god help us maybe even revelatory to provide something a tad more substantial in the way of critique

… Ya know? (?!)!
N Joy

I agree, and whilst not wishing to be rude I make the observation that this is just one of many recent un-explained statements. I say this because I would genuinely be interested in your point of view Azidonis. And none of that fuzzy waffle, a straight answer would be nice! Please, pretty please.

🙂
93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 2964
 

On what level do you (general you) think you can cause change to occur? How deep do you think that rabbit hole really goes?

Please, keep in mind that the Exempt Adept gives all he has and all he is upon entering the Abyss, the Magister Templi is affectionately known as Nemo (No-Man), and the Word of Chokmah is CHAOS.


ReplyQuote
Share: