The time now is Fri Mar 29, 2024 3:03 pm | Log in to check your private messages
View unanswered posts  Ghost forum archive
World of Ghosts - Paranormal Forums Forum IndexWorld of Ghosts - Paranormal Forums Forum Index
World of Ghosts Worldofghosts 24 hour chat room
                          Register


Life After Death and Sceptics
Post new topic   Reply to topic    World of Ghosts - Paranormal Forums Forum Index » General chat
View previous topic | View next topic  
Author Message
thecactus



Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 3196
Location: Northern Ireland

PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:26 am    Post subject: Life After Death and Sceptics Reply with quote

We all should be reasonably open-minded skeptics and for psychic phenomena indicative of life after death, only accept the theory that there is survival of consciousness after physical death when theories along normal lines and/or ESP (psi) fail to account for all of the evidence.

There is no doubt that in a relatively short period of time, science has made great strides in understanding the physical world. Because of this, many people believe that if presently there is not a scientific explanation for something, it is not a question of if it will be explained by science but a matter of when. Applying this to the various paranormal phenomena, these people believe science will either have a complete explanation in the future or it is just a deception of some sort. Generally speaking, there is strong evidence for some of the psychic phenomena but not to the point where it can be accepted as fact.

The extreme skeptics of the paranormal have a tendency to refute the least credible of paranormal examples; they seldom try to take on the best evidence and if they do they do not give very credible alternative explanations. To do the former, is easy, the latter, generally quite difficult. They also unfairly (and unscientifically I might add) tend to group all of the paranormal together and reject it all. Its not all or nothing and the same applies to the various evidence types for life after death. For instance, mediums communicating with the dead could be true but this has no relation with astrology being true or not - the two are independent of one another but this gets lost on some of the extreme skeptics in their overall outlook.

In fact, with the paranormal as it relates to life after death, there clearly are many cases of both deliberate deception (as we would expect due to the nature of the subject) and where there are alternative explanations. But these are not the cases we need to be scrutinizing to determine if they constitute evidence for life after death - although this is unfortunately what some skeptics do to present their conclusions against the paranormal. The cases that have no other plausible conventional explanation are the ones that need to be held to the test.

We also have to be careful with paranormal phenomena in that, even if the particular phenomena or, more commonly the case, elements of it can be induced, it does not necessarily mean or follow that this is the cause of the paranormal phenomena and the explanation for it. A non-paranormal analogy being, for example, certain drugs can induce euphoria in a person but when one normally is experiencing euphoria, it is real and occurs naturally without the effect of any drugs. Therefore, drug intake is not the explanation for euphoria normally experienced even though drugs can induce it.

It should be noted that the various aspects to the best paranormal phenomena cases have thus far been very difficult to account for collectively using natural scientific models.



Some people will believe paranormal activity at face value with even the weakest of evidence. On the other hand, there are skeptics who are very closed-minded and biased and will not even allow for the possibility, no matter how convincing the evidence (and thus, maybe to an extent, possess irrational mindsets). A good example showing the mindset of a certain group of ultra-skeptical individuals who refuse to accept any paranormal explanation is the following quote from an August 27, 2001 article in the online magazine Salon.com interview with Michael Shermer editor-in-chief of Skeptic Magazine:

"If we asked, what would it take for me to believe in ESP? Would it take a single experiment? How about 10 statistically significant experiments in which the guy picked the right playing card? That still wouldn't quite do it because there's no way to understand how this could possibly happen in the brain. We understand how neurons and brain centers work but we don't know how something would transmit through space out of your skull into somebody else's skull. So those guys need to come up with some mechanism to explain it."

So even if the best explanation is a paranormal one, ultra-skeptics will not accept it because they do not understand the underlying mechanism for it.



Most psychic occurrences are spontaneous and therefore hard to test under laboratory conditions. Ultra-skeptical scientists start with the assumption that something which contravenes the laws of science (as they are currently understood), cannot occur. They are not open to the possibility of non-material mechanisms explaining the data. Their lack of belief is a form of belief in itself.

In science, a new scientific statement is only accepted if it either agrees with established scientific laws or replaces rival statements with superior evidence and theory. Psychic phenomena clearly don't fit the first and haven't succeeded so far in the second. Not to make excuses for it, but due to it's nature, what is needed is a new framework to examine the claims for the various psychic phenomena rather than the existing limiting experimental science we have. Of course, ultra-skeptical scientists would rather not do anything that might accommodate anything to do with the paranormal and would therefore reject any such suggestions.

The logic of scientific inquiry must always allow for the possibility that the existing scientific laws are incomplete or even wrong.

Science is what we always need to use as the basis to start with, and if it fails to explain the phenomena, only then should we go outside of mainstream science and look at the possibility of paranormal explanations.



William James was interested in the possibility of psychic phenomena. He believed it is sufficient to find one indisputable example of psychic occurrence to demonstrate that violations of natural law as we understand it is possible. He summed it up with the well known quotation from his book: "In order to disprove the law that all crows are black, it is enough to find one white crow." Thus, psychic researchers are always trying to find a "white crow".



Much of the paranormal evidence types for survival of consciousness can be explained by normal means, some of it is not possible to determine, and some is very likely to be evidence for survival. It is as if, on the surface at least, one can interpret however one wants - almost as if it is supposed to be this way.
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
D B Sweeney



Joined: 27 Aug 2010
Posts: 2842
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

But these are not the cases we need to be scrutinizing to determine if they constitute evidence for life after death
The author does not suggest which cases provide the compelling evidence whose scrutinization would possibly 'convince' the sceptics.
The cases that have no other plausible conventional explanation are the ones that need to be held to the test.
'No conventional explanation' - in his opinion. This is not a fact this is just his conclusion.

It should be noted that the various aspects to the best paranormal phenomena cases have thus far been very difficult to account for collectively using natural scientific models.
That is so wrong.

what is needed is a new framework to examine the claims for the various psychic phenomena rather than the existing limiting experimental science we have.
OK, we're waiting - suggest one?.

Of course, ultra-skeptical scientists would rather not do anything that might accommodate anything to do with the paranormal and would therefore reject any such suggestions.
He's really got it in for 'ultra-sceptical scientists' hasn't he?. Are they the opposite of 'ultra-believing non scientific believers'?.

Science is what we always need to use as the basis to start with, and if it fails to explain the phenomena, only then should we go outside of mainstream science and look at the possibility of paranormal explanations.

What he's basically saying is that if it can't be explained (by who? he doesn't say) it's paranormal - wrong again.

and some is very likely to be evidence for survival.
What evidence?.

It's all very well to criticise science and pay lip service to 'evidence' but this author doesn't back up his opinions with references to cases that he believes are credible examples of the paranormal.

DB
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
thecactus



Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 3196
Location: Northern Ireland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 2:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well IMO he made a lot of very good points and I agree with a lot of what he said. You have to think 'outside the box' sometimes - nothing is black and white. Being ultra sceptical is not the most constructive way to approach these subjects.
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
D B Sweeney



Joined: 27 Aug 2010
Posts: 2842
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 2:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thecactus wrote:
Well IMO he made a lot of very good points and I agree with a lot of what he said. You have to think 'outside the box' sometimes - nothing is black and white. Being ultra sceptical is not the most constructive way to approach these subjects.


Give us an example of 'thinking out of the box' then?.

Chessboard - that's black & white Wink

I agree, being too sceptical is almost as bad as being too believing.

DB
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
thecactus



Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 3196
Location: Northern Ireland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 2:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thinking outside of the rigid rules and laws of science. I believe an authentic medium is the best way to prove life after death.
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
thecactus



Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 3196
Location: Northern Ireland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 2:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Communications with the Dead

Psychic mediums like John Edward (TV show "Crossing Over" which is no longer on the air) and James Van Praagh (TV show "Beyond" which is no longer on the air) claim to receive messages for people from the departed souls of their deceased relatives and friends. There are 7 possible explanations other than actual communication with deceased souls as follows:

(1) Cold reading. The medium is only giving messages of a little better quality than most people could with some practice. The medium asks leading questions, gives only general information applicable to most people, and other 'trickery' to give the appearance that information is being passed on. If you have watched one of these shows closely, then you would have to conclude this is not the sole method of deceit (if such is taking place) because the quality of correct information that is communicated is too specific.

(2) Warm (eg. information obtained prior by internet search) or Hot (eg. questioning people who know information about the person to be read beforehand) reading. The medium (or resources at his disposal such as staff researchers or investigators) collects information about the person to be read beforehand.

An example of this might be that if show tickets are mailed out, then the show could readily find out information on the audience participants since they know their addresses along with the name of at least one person who will be attending associated with it. However, hot readings are much less likely and harder to obtain for general audience participants than for pre-booked or celebrity readings.

This cannot be the sole explanation because specific information that is only known to the person being read is often given during readings. Also, if hot readings are common practice it is easy to be found out in the process eventually and reported to the media; the fact this has not happened suggests it is unlikely that is is being used to any large extent. (1) and/or (2) is what most skeptics who do not wish to give any credence to any psychic phenomena whatsoever choose to believe as their explanation.

(3) The mediums could be in collusion with the people they are reading. If this were the case, then over the years thousands of people have been given 'successful' readings by some well known mediums. Because so many people would be involved over a long period of time, then we would expect that someone would have 'blown the whistle' by now if this were in fact happening. In addition, this would also mean that people like Larry King and Montel Williams (talk show hosts who regularly bring on mediums to do these type of readings) would have to be 'in on it' - considering how little they would stand to gain and how much they have to lose, we could say this would be very unlikely.

Nevertheless, we cannot rule out that it could possibly explain some (not as well known) mediums but not all mediums and their readings.

(4) Mind reading (telepathy). Mediums are reading the minds or 'picking up' the thoughts of the people who they are 'connecting' with their loved ones. If this were the case, the medium would most likely just be reading what is on the person's mind at the time but this is not often the case. In addition, the medium relays information which the person could not and does not know at the time and later finds out to be true.

A possible test to see if mediums are reading minds is to have them read subjects who do not speak any language the medium knows or understands. This would not completely rule out mind reading since it might even be possible that mediums can read pure thoughts which transcend any language.

We can effectively rule out mind reading as the sole explanation because of the research done by Dr. Gary Schwartz (presented in his book "The Afterlife Experiments"). He tested mediums and found them to give information about the subjects being read not known to the subjects and later found to be true.

(5) Demons (negative entities). The mediums may unknowingly be communicating with demons or evil spirits who for whatever reason(s) are posing as the departed souls.

(6) Aliens. A very far-fetched possibility is that the whole process is being manipulated by alien beings who may or may not have created us.

(7) Pool of consciousness (super ESP or super psi). Another highly improbable, but worth considering, possibility is that mediums are somehow 'tapping into' the collective pool of consciousness that may exist in the universe (or even just picking up thoughts 'floating' around connected to the person being read). But how would super ESP account for relaying information of events in the future? Of course, the afterlife could also be part of this pool and therefore exists anyway even if the medium is reading into this pool and not directly connecting with the dead.


If mediums are tapping into such a pool, then they would be consciously engaging in deceit since the information would be coming to them in a different form than what they are leading us to believe (thoughts instead of messages in the form of conversation). If the mediums are just tapping into this pool, then they would somehow need to sort out what information needs to be extracted (which deceased person's life). A reason they may not be doing this is that the departed souls give us information in readings that is from both before and after their passing. This would only make sense if there is a survival of consciousness; otherwise by what mechanism would thoughts associated with a person when they were alive be combined with that since their death?

If the mediums are able to both engage in mind reading or finding out information about the person being read beforehand (warm/hot reading), and then tap into this pool of consciousness, they might fool us.

From my observations of Mr. Edwards and Mr. Van Praagh's TV shows, two or more of (2), (4), and (6) (warm/hot reading, mind reading, and tapping into a pool of consciousness) have to be occurring for a reading to give an explanation other than what the mediums are claiming to be happening. Of course a better test for Mr. Edwards and Mr. Van Praagh is when they appear as guests on "Larry King Live" (as they regularly do) where they do readings for viewers who phone in. Here they are not in a position to find out information about the people to be read beforehand (these people call in to the show just prior to its airing and/or while it is live). Nor is there editing of it as it is a live show (unlike with their own shows where the final production for broadcast will likely only show the best readings and edit out or not show at all the less successful ones). I have not viewed and analyzed a sufficient number of such appearances on Larry King to make good deductions, although I cannot definitively rule out mind reading by itself from those appearances.

Some (but not all) of the mediums need to be more honest and forthcoming and admit they are not 100% accurate and the communications channels are not fully clear. Being more humble would make them more credible. Of course, some are outright frauds and some are self-delusional.

If these mediums can accurately tell people about specific events the departed souls say will happen to them in the future (as they sometimes communicate in readings), then we could rationally rule out all alternate explanations (and their combinations) and accept what these mediums tell us as true (though ruling out demonic and/or alien manipulation is not completely possible). This type of data is lacking (is not communicated that often) and to the best of my knowledge, has not been studied using scientific protocols.



Dr. Gary Schwartz, a professor of psychology at the University of Arizona, has conducted a series of experiments on communications with the dead (Link: http://veritas.arizona.edu). His results thus far are that mediums are in fact communicating with departed souls and further experiments are to be done in the future.

Of course there are many other mediums who either do not possess this gift to the same degree (probably only a handful do in North America) or not at all. And some we can be reasonably sure are being fraudulent. But we should be careful not to group the best mediums with the mediocre ones or scam artists.

The ultra-skeptics will argue that there is no evidence to support communication with the dead and all information received can be accounted for by (1), (2), and (3). The ultra-skeptics are atheists (though some will claim to be agnostic) and follow a very orthodox approach to science who instead of saying the evidence is not strong enough to support the claims the mediums are making, just dismiss it all as fraud. This is despite the fact they have not been able to make the case for fraud. Alternative explanations such as telepathy are not even considered since these people are too close-minded to even contemplate telepathy might possibly exist. It is good to be a skeptic (I consider myself one) and all should be encouraged to engage in healthy skepticism but to be so stubborn and narrow-minded so that you dismiss anything which does not fit your particular view of the world as simply being fraud is ignorant and self-defeating.



Psychic mediums in the west who are claiming to be able to communicate with the dead are in conflict with the predominant Judeo-Christian beliefs of the societies they are in (for example, no belief in reincarnation in the dominant religions in the west). Further, they generally tell us there is a lag time typically of several decades where people connected to one another 'reunite' in the spirit world prior to their next incarnation which is not necessarily even taught in the major eastern religions. Because they are not just trying to go along with what most people already want or expect to hear, I think it gives them a bit more credibility. Unless, they are being forced to 'tow the line' laid down by psychic mediums historically so as not to be in disagreement with it.



Psychiatrists (like Dr. Brian Weiss and others of high academic credentials) and psychotherapists, who do and have learned from past life regressions of their patients, have findings that are completely in agreement with and fully collaborate what the psychic mediums have been telling us about the nature of the afterlife and spiritual order. Though there is the small possibility of some other explanations to account for this, for example, conspiracy to perpetuate such a fraud, manipulation by alien beings or other entities for whatever reason(s), etc., I think we could pretty much rule out that the past life regression academics are engaging in fraud. So unless mediums knew of the results of past life regression going back in history and have thus tailored their 'messages' from the other side to be in accordance with this all along, knowing this, some might reason this could be taken to validate an afterlife.

An excellent and very thorough overview (especially historical) and analysis for mediumship in the scientific literature (as well as much of the other life after death evidence) is given in Dr. David Fontana’s book, "Is There An Afterlife?".
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
D B Sweeney



Joined: 27 Aug 2010
Posts: 2842
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I believe an authentic medium

There's no such thing Cactus.

DB
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
thecactus



Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 3196
Location: Northern Ireland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I will have to visit a good one myself to know for sure.

So what methods do you believe mediums use? Let me guess the author of the above article was spot on? Laughing
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
D B Sweeney



Joined: 27 Aug 2010
Posts: 2842
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thecactus wrote:
I will have to visit a good one myself to know for sure.

So what methods do you believe mediums use? Let me guess the author of the above article was spot on? Laughing


You guessed correct Laughing

No psychic or medium who has undergone testing in controlled conditions has demonstrated any ability to contact the dead or predict anything better than chance.

Mediums are either self delusional or outright knowing frauds IMO.

DB
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
thecactus



Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 3196
Location: Northern Ireland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 4:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You could be right, but if I went to see one, they would have to know very personal specific things that no-one could possibly know for me to believe. If I went to one, and he/she didn't convince me, I still wouldn't write it off, I think I would have to see at least 5-10 to come to my conclusion.

For me, it is an area of the paranormal which can be researched very quickly and with little expense (not travelling around the world/interviewing etc...) and I do believe in ghosts, and the spirit/soul.

Have you ever visited a medium?
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
D B Sweeney



Joined: 27 Aug 2010
Posts: 2842
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Have you ever visited a medium?

Not on a one to one basis but I've seen a few 'perform' at Spiritualist churches and obviously I've seen the usual suspects on TV. I've not seen anything that Derren Brown couldn't replicate twice as well with more panache and professionalism.

DB
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
thecactus



Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 3196
Location: Northern Ireland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes Derren Brown is a master of cold reading and many other things. But I can't believe you've written all mediums off and you have never even visited one on a one to one basis.

Would you not consider it proof if you did visit one and he/she told you something(s) that just couldn't be guessed or a 1/billion guess?
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
D B Sweeney



Joined: 27 Aug 2010
Posts: 2842
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thecactus wrote:
Yes Derren Brown is a master of cold reading and many other things. But I can't believe you've written all mediums off and you have never even visited one on a one to one basis.

Would you not consider it proof if you did visit one and he/she told you something(s) that just couldn't be guessed or a 1/billion guess?


I've not written off all mediums, just the ones I know about. There may be someone out in the world with genuine mediumistic powers who can talk to the dead.
If I visited a medium who relayed various 'facts' that only I knew then I'd seek independent verification of his or her powers - I wouldn't just accept that they were genuine because they got certain things about me correct.

DB
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
thecactus



Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 3196
Location: Northern Ireland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why not? Confused
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
D B Sweeney



Joined: 27 Aug 2010
Posts: 2842
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thecactus wrote:
Why not? Confused


One Swallow does not make a Summer Wink

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/one_swallow_doesn't_make_a_summer

DB
...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Back to top
Post new topic   Reply to topic    World of Ghosts - Paranormal Forums Forum Index » General chat
Display posts from previous:   
 
 
All times are GMT
Jump to:  
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum