Home Forums Thelema Magick Was Crowley too harsh on psychic-mediums?

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 30 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #110639

    dom
    Participant

    Hey ignant666 typing that mediums name along with the word “fraud” in a Google search engine, that’s called confirmation bias.

    Bad stats.

    #110640

    ignant666
    Participant

    Um, no, david, that is not an example of “confirmation bias”, you very silly person.

    It was a rapid search strategy for finding the evidence i knew would be there that he is a scam-artist and huckster. How did i know this? Because he is a “psychic medium” who appears on TV. Presumably, i might have come up empty if if he hadn’t been exposed as a fraud, but of course he has been, several times.

    It would be an example of “confirmation bias” if you were retain your belief he is not a fraud in the face of the ample evidence that he is just that.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

    Again, stay away from carnivals, fairs, and people who have just found a diamond ring in the street.

    #110642

    dom
    Participant

    @ignant666

    That guy isn’t “my hero” i’ve never heard of him. Maybe you identified him as a fraud who makes successful wild guesses now and again. (As Jamie Barter said) how do we determine between fraudsters and non-fraudsters in that field? I take it that you’re not possessed by Los? You’re not saying that it’s all baloney, right?

    #110644

    ignant666
    Participant

    All “psychics” are frauds, delusional, or possessed. It is all baloney with nothing whatever to do with the Great Work.

    The ones who go on TV are engaged in showbiz, so of course they are all frauds. All non-morons over the age of 12 or so know this. There are plenty of morons to fill up the TV audiences and buy their books etc.

    #110645

    Shiva
    Participant

    D (quoting JB): how do we determine between fraudsters and non-fraudsters in that field?

    It’s called trial-and-error. We keep notes on predictions made, then check them out for validity after an appropriate waiting period (depending on the context of the message).

    For example, the prediction, “You are going to die,” will not qualify because that’s true of everyone.

    But, “You will have unexpected money in less than 6 days,” is verifiable.

    What about AC’s prediction that the 4th publication of AL would destroy civilization? I’d say it’s going fast, but the timespan might require a few generations of medium-observers.

    Ig: The ones who go on TV are engaged in showbiz …

    And if they have any sort of reliable predictive ability, then they’re exercising their lesser siddhis, which is counterproductive to the Great Work.

    #110649

    Jamie J Barter
    Participant

    @dom :

    That guy isn’t “my hero” i’ve never heard of him.
    Please clarify though: isn’t this guy (not your hero) the same guy as John Edward, whom you’ve already included a videoclip of despite never having heard of him?

    (As [I] said) how do we determine between fraudsters and non-fraudsters in that field?
    Yes, you’ve already somehow determined a basic division, as I’ve demonstrated twice now (i.e., you’ve drawn a line twixt the “wacky” channellers and “genuine” communicators with the dead) but regarding which, you are continuing to dodge giving a proper answer as to how you arrived at that. Have you ever thought of becoming a politician, dom? Wouldn’t it be easier and perhaps save some time if you were to just put your hand up and say “I don’t really know what I’m talking about”? 🙂

    @ignant666 :

    All “psychics” are frauds, delusional, or possessed.
    But are we (i.e. Thelemites & others) meant to include e.g. Rose (aka Ouarda the Seer) in this blanket condemnation, who told Crowley that “they are waiting for you”, about the preliminaries for the reception of AL, and also channelled corrections to it e.g. the missing parts to I:26 and I:60 (etc)?

    @shiva :

    What about AC’s prediction that the 4th publication of AL would destroy civilization
    This might have been metaphorical though, as in the sense of “the world was destroyed by fire” at the Equinox of the Gods that occurred immediately prior to the reception of AL.

    And if they have any sort of reliable predictive ability, then they’re exercising their lesser siddhis, which is counterproductive to the Great Work.
    This is probably the case. But it can’t be totally ruled out that such manifestations may also be part of the individual’s True Will. Also siddhis, both lesser and greater ones, tend to come and go according to the exercise of their own individual proclivities I’ve always found (and much to the intense disappointment of my lower self)

    N Joy

    #110651

    ignant666
    Participant

    By “psychic”, i meant folks like david’s non-hero, who purport to communicate with people’s dead relatives.

    I should have used david’s formulation “psychic-mediums”, or just said “Anyone who claims to communicate with the dead is a fraud, delusional, or possessed.”

    Dead people do not exist anymore, and do not talk to anyone.

    #110652

    dom
    Participant

    Shakespeare nailed it with Hamlet;

    “siddhi or not siddhi?”.

    @Jbarter

    Didn’t Crolwey “test” these disembodied beings using stats and somehow with cabballah i.e. gematria?

    @ignant666

    “all tv psychics are frauds”? Behold the open mind.

    • This reply was modified 1 week ago by  dom.
    • This reply was modified 1 week ago by  dom.
    #110655

    ignant666
    Participant

    david: “Some TV psychics must be real, surely!” Behold the mark, ripe for the plucking.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_reading

    #110656

    dom
    Participant

    david: “Some TV psychics must be real, surely!” Behold the mark, ripe for the plucking.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_reading

    I see what you’re saying and to ally this with JBarter’s question about legitimacy e.g. Rose Kelly had no desire to be a showbiz stage-medium, it was a very private affair with no gain.

    #110657

    Jamie J Barter
    Participant

    @dom :

    Shakespeare nailed it with Hamlet;
    “siddhi or not siddhi?”

    Oh, “Boom tish” there!

    Didn’t Crolwey “test” these disembodied beings using stats and with cabballah i.e. gematria?
    Yes he did. The Method of Science, Aim of Religion & all that. And this goes to show… what, in your reasoning?

    Meanwhile, of course, for the third time now we’re all still waiting for your explanation re. how dead men talking is OK in your book but discarnate intelligences are outer wacksville.

    Observe ignant’s last reply, if you will, for a model answer to a request for clarification — clear, concise & complete, with no need for ancillary requests for further information or elaboration. Viddy well, little brother, viddy well: look & learn!

    With you, however, we have now reached the oh so familiar stage where you decide to answer a repeatedly offered question with another question of your own, of dubious tangential relevance to, whilst still managing to avoid, the central issue. Next time I predict your gambit will be the one where you declare you suddenly don’t quite understand what I’m asking & will I tell you what I meant on some largely irrelevant sub-point from 2 or 3 posts back. And throughout, all the while everyone still waiting, waiting, with unbated breath.

    Can I “read” you or can I read you here, dom?! Am I not so incredibly… psychic!?
    N Joy

    #110658

    Tiger
    Participant

    A dead Zen master my communicated to me
    that chasing after Siddhi’s takes time away from the Great Work
    but some times they just arise
    but give it no mind
    because if you do
    it gets crowded, everyone dead and alive are in your head
    and you really get to hear what they really think of you .

    Well I thanked my dead cat zen master and off he went to where he doesn’t exist and talk; and left me in my delusional space .

    #110660

    Tiger
    Participant

    oh and he also told me hat the dead that dream their alive are beings too .

    #110662

    Shiva
    Participant

    JB: Also siddhis, both lesser and greater ones, tend to come and go …

    Yes, it’s strange isn’t it?

    Meanwhile, of course, for the third time now we’re all still waiting for your explanation re. how dead men talking is OK in your book but discarnate intelligences are outer wacksville.

    See Los’s Blog.

    #110696

    Jamie J Barter
    Participant

    @shiva :

    See Los’s Blog.
    Groan! Do I have to? If I want a quick laugh, there’s got to be better places to go to…
    Would you know at least which bit of it?

    Dom — still waiting & unabated…

    oyN J

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 30 total)
  • You must be logged-in to reply to this topic.