Osiris:

Thanks for your response. I'm very interested in learning more about psychics from their perspective. You said that being psychic has little or nothing to do with the supernatural. How would you define psychic powers then? Or what does being a psychic mean to you?

You said: "To the Skeptic's perspective because the logical techniques used by Psychics (and clinical psychologist, lawyers, salesmen, etc.) are "Known" anyone that uses them is a fake, a charlatan, and a cheat."

I disagree. I've read lots of skeptic stuff, and I've never heard anyone criticized because their techniques are known. The criticism against skeptics that I've read is that they claim to have powers that they don't actually have.

"I hope this clears some things up... this is a very deep and "tricky" subject but in my experience 80% of it is based on observation and 12% stems from intuition with the balance coming from book learning and common sense."

If psychics are utilizing observation, intuition, book learning, and common sense, what is unique about psychic readings? Is there nothing occult or paranormal or supernatural going on? What's the difference between a psychic reading and psychotherapy?

Also: I'm still curious about the role of cold reading--why would a legitimate psychic use it?

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

-Jim

Jimtron says:

"The criticism against skeptics that I've read is that they claim to have powers that they don't actually have."

Couldn't of said it better myself.

Socrates

"The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible" - Oscar Wilde

PK:

Do you have any specific sources that you can cite for this:

"They take the view that anyone knowingly using cold reading techniques is a vile scumbag etc etc - you know the sort and the accusations they make"

Let's refrain from painting both psychics and skeptics with broad strokes.

thanks,

jim

Check out the link to http://www.badpsychics.co.uk

It contains some of the worst sceptism/cynicism I have seen.

The owner of the site describes spiritualism as 'memory rape'. That should give you an idea about their level of thinking.

PK

PK:

I'm sure there are skeptics out there who are rude and insulting. There are also some psychics who are blatant con artists (psychic surgery, charging thousands of dollars to "remove curses" etc.). But as Mysticz said, let's not paint psychics with broad brushes, and let's not let a few over-the-top skeptics represent all of skepticism. (Today's column at badpsychics.co.uk said: "The majority of mediums out there are good honest people who are sincerely trying to help others." So it's not all mean ranting there.)

The most famous skeptic that I can think of, Carl Sagan, was quite fair in my opinion. As is the two skeptic magazines I know of, "Skeptic" and "Skeptical Inquirer." I assure you there are no articles in these magazines making blanket statements about people and using words like "vile" and "scumbag." I'm not saying no one does that, but that's certainly not in the mainstream of skepticism.

http://www.skeptic.com/
http://www.skeptic.org.uk/
http://www.csicop.org/si/

Jimtron is on the mark in his observations. In fact, his perspective kind of reminds me of that bumper sticker "JESUS SAVE ME... from your followers!" I, and most of the other professional Readers/Psychics out there have no qualms with the skeptics...it's the dang cynics that misrepresent the skeptic's point of view that we have major issues with. Those, as I've read here and elsewhere far too many times, that want to tar and feather any and all that so much as touch a tarot card for the sake of turning a buck.

Upon more than one occassion I've stated that anyone that "believes" MUST have a skeptic's heart. The reason is very simple; the difference that distinguishes "Faith" from "Knowledge".

Faith is a belief and beliefs can be modified and changed.

Knowledge on the other hand, like a Scientific Law, simply IS... it cannot be changed or modified, it is FACT... at least in the mind and experience of the individual/observer. Trust me, no one is going to endure the hardship of the Rack or being slowly roasted for days on end "in the name of God" without some kind of solid confirmation. The majority of the tortured will recant in order to put an end to the pain and suffering... believe me, you shove a hot poker up my bum and I'm going to deny whatever God you tell me to deny or confess to whatever crime you're trying to frame me for... that's the way it is for most. But, if I'm on the Rack for something I cannot deny, that I know for a fact to be true, there is NOTHING you can do to shake that testimony... NOTHING! It's simply not a "belief"

This is the cornerstone to my "Belief" in what I've seen, experienced, et al. No one can tell me otherwise. That does not mean that such things do not host a "Scientific" explanation. Part of my personal spiritual belief is that Science can and in time, will explain such things. Sorry, but I'm not one of those that believe in the invisible all-seeing, all-knowing white-haired dude sitting on a throne and tossing lightning boltz at all who don't kiss his glowing hinny... I believe that whatever it is that humankind has deemed as "Divinity" has a bit more substance and logic enveloping it's being... we've just not reached that level technologically speaking, to "prove it". On the other hand, according to author Migene Gonzalez-Wippler (A Kabala for Modern Times) Science has proven the existence of God... at least, from the Kabalistic point of view. That however is another issue altogether.

Jim asks about the idea of "Psychic Powers" and I believe I have to put on my theologian's cap in order to point out the fact that much of this is conjecture or fantasy that stems from lore and myth and in some instances, the "creative liscense" used by the compilers of certain prophetic/sacred tales and texts. Too, if you look at how society is presently, you'd have to be nearly blind, deaf and mute to not recognize the fact that we have a heck of a lot of chaos and thus, many individuals who are delusional. They aren't so much Mentally Deranged as they are consciously (voluntarily) existing in a state that allows them to more readily deal with the rest of the world and their environment. This area gets very confusing as well as disturbing, but it is a very real malady and if you look through history, you'll see how the "trend" tends to cycle. You'll also notice that it tends to do so when the economy, politics, and other such "controls" aren't in balance. During these times, regardless of the civilization you live in, anything that promotes a sense of "hope" and/or "escape" goes on the increase. This includes gambling, religious revivals (of all forms), study and practice of the esoteric/occult, drug & alcohol use and much more.

History is rife with examples of such things which is one of the reasons I feel that men and women like Edgar Cayce and Jean Dixon attempted to define things and put out warnings in some of their work, about the rarty of actual "Prophecy" and the difference between "Prophecy" and "Divination" (a major contrast by the way... though few realize such.)

The "Occult" powers that you are speaking of are, in the New Testament, credited to the Holy Spirit. Then again, depending upon which of the million-and-one denominations you belong to, only that particular one knows the truth and has the blessed power... how this differs from the power found in Vodoon/Santeria, Ritual Magick, Prayer, Reiki, etc I couldn't tell you. IN my experience energy is neutral, its humankind that decides whether it will be used for good or naught. Look at Nuclear Energy as an example, or Guns...

Yes, I do believe that "Magick" happens. That does not mean that a green candle with some cinimon oil on it is going to let me win the lottery next week. On the other hand, I believe that those who are adept in the occult mysteries can make some rather phenomenal things happen. Here again, I believe 99% of has to do with science, not boogiemen or disenchanted spirits.

I've rambled on significantly and covered seveal areas. I'd suggest you check out P.I. Bonewits book REAL MAGIC if you want to take a look at some of the more "analytical" perspectives to such things.

Best of luck in your journey. Sounds to me like you're approaching this in the "right" way.

Fact? By this do you mean direct experience?

Ultimately what you know depends upon what you believe.

Science provides a "best guess at the most elegant theory" for stuff.

Law is a social construct that exists only in a society and even then, only when enforced. As in our society, a law may be on the books, yet not enforced.

How do you know that (or... what in your model of the world brings you to believe that) some time with a green candle and some oils and the right mental focus won't bring you the winning lottery numbers?

Osiris:

Thanks for your reply. I appreciate having the opportunity to exchange views with others here. You said:

"...and quite literally "stealing" from them (e.g. take up their time and don't pay them). He tells the reader of his tome to deliberately exploit these situations and get the media involved and so forth.

This is classic run-of-the-mill BIGOTRY in motion..."

In my copy of Rowland's Cold Reading book, I can't find the part where he suggests not paying for a reading. Are you sure that he encourages stealing? Also, I would not call Rowland a bigot, much as I wouldn't call critics of the Catholic sex abuse scandal bigots or anti-Catholic or intolerant. I respect that you disagree with Rowland, but I believe his point is that *some* are using cold reading to deceive people into believing they are getting the information via psychic power, when in fact they are using cold reading. Do you believe that there can be any legitimate criticism of psychics?

Let's say someone who charges money for readings claims to have psychic power, when actually they don't posess any supernatural power, but instead use cold reading, deduction, etc. Is that not fraudulent? If a pharmaceutical company claims that a drug cures an ailment that it does not in fact cure, isn't that fraudulent?

Also: I'm still curious to hear why a legit psychic would use cold readings.

Jonathon said: "How do you know that ( or... what in your model of the world brings you to believe that )some time with a green candle and some oils and the right mental focus won't bring you the winning lottery numbers?" We don't know that for sure. As it's often been said, it's difficult if not impossible to prove a negative. But we can use our intuitions and intellects and common sense and experience to make choices. If I take my life savings to a casino with a rabbit's foot, and bet all my money on the roulette wheel, how do I know I won't become a millionaire? It could happen, but I'll stick with a more proven, prudent investment approach (although so far no broker wants to help me with my $23 dollars).

Thanks again for your time and patience.

-Jim

As I've said, I don't have my copy of Ian's book on hand and I'm running on memory... I know that he has a section in the book about tripping up Readers and in so many words, he encourages the very childish act of visiting them and playing this and that game with them, in order to get them to snap. The way I understood and recall this section, is that it heavily endorses the idea of harassment and indirectly suggests that you take up the Reader's time, given them a hard time, and not pay them for the time you spent with them in anything other than loud accusations of being a fraud, et al. Sorry, but that's just plain wrong, immoral, unethical and very much uncalled for. Unfortunately this has been a "mentality" many in the skeptic's realm (admittedly, not the more "cool" and learned of said community)have taken to. It's caused some major heart aches, loss, and in at least one instance I've been made aware of, a suicide (do not ask for details).

As to your question about "legit psychic's using cold readings..." WE DON'T!

Anyone that does Reading work will tell you it is NOT the same as the psycho-babble BS certain "experts" keep telling everyone it is. There's a few dozen of us here at the Café' and being a Reader is a very old and honored aspect of the Mentalist's craft... that is, up until recent times when everyone seems to be trying to sweep the marketing antics of Robert Nelson and Burling Hull under the rug and ignore the fact that William Larsen also dabbled in Mail Order Readings along with some of their other heroes. The "Company Line" when it comes to this issue within the magic fraternity seems to pierce the ethers far more than historic facts and general tradition --Rhetoric is Rhetoric and as some cults have proven... tell the same story long enough, loud enough and to enough people and it becomes fact... at least to those that yeild to said precepts.

In this instance we are dealing with a rhetoric that seems to host plausibility, logic, and even a hint of intellect to it and thus, it appeals to the ego. Only fools believe in this superstitious mumbo-jumbo after all... This idea of superiority held by so many in the skeptic's camp is what blinds them and prevents them from actually allowing for that 2% I spoke of previously. They're looking so hard for the "trick" that they completely miss the miracles. Kind of like not seeing the forest because of the trees getting in the way of your view... at least that's how I tend to view it.

I've tried very hard to be flattering and supportive to you Jim, but you seem to be playing one of the favorite games of the skeptic i.e. get a convesation rolling that sounds like you hold an honest interest, gain ammunition and turn the believer's words around on him/her.

Hmmm... I really should consider writing that book -- The Games Played by Skeptics & Debunkers: The Truth Behind the Expose's

The many tricks, routines and nasty habits I've become privy to from inside the skeptic's world forces me to ponder all too much as to who the more dangerous con artists are; the psychics everyone screams about or the one's doing the screaming?

Kindof makes you think...

I'm trying to learn more about your perspective. If you'd rather not discuss it, that's fine. If you think I've turned your words around on you already, please let me know--that's not my intention. Otherwise, perhaps we could continue a dialog, and if at any point you think I'm being unfair, please call me on it.

It's strange...There's lots of books and CD's available on cold reading. I can't figure why Ian Rowland would be singled out for exposing this particular skill. Probably because he is something of a skeptic himself and it's hard to debunk people without creating a negative atmosphere.

Houdini and Randi both seem petty in their pursuit of their psychic targets. Rowland manages pretty well to be entertaining and positive.

Toonomads, you are very correct. Seems that a serious bias toward Ian exist here in the States, presumably due to some of the things he did on Tv. Then again, I've been chewed out by magicians because I helped write a children's magic book in which I tip the Center Tear... I find it amazing Mark Wilson and Harlan Tarbell were never burnt at the stake if such actions are so wrong...

Fact is, many an American have such boring lives they feel they must create some form of drama... at least that's my take on. Maybe I'm just angry because I didn't get to see Ian lecture due to the bad attitudes of certain magicians here in the states. I personally feel it is a major loss for all of us but then petty people don't care, so long as they get their way.

Yes! I'm defending the man I was being critical of earlier. Ian is mature and professional enough to agree to disagree and leave it at that. I find it most interesting (as I've said before) that I, as one of the more outspoken proponents of Psychic work and "Faith" has less trouble discussing the issue with people like Ian, Banachek and Rick Maue... each of whom are die-hard skeptics and consumer advocates.. yet, I get pounced on left and right by those that have done little more than read a book or two on what is supposedly going on.

As to Jimtron's last post... I do apologise if I've misread what you were doing. It just felt very familiar and I loathe being suckered into that game (it typically results in my Irish temper going off and the forum Admin telling me to get lost for a while).

In regards to your questions Jim, I'm in the process of pulling together some articles that will probably appear in TOP HAT and in an alternate form @ VISIONS, so you may want to keep you eye on those two eZines (and go through the archieves, they have info that may prove handy).

No hard feelings... let's move onward!

Great!

I think I understand the skeptic's view of psychics, and now I'm trying to understand the legitimate psychic's viewpoint. If psychics have been unfairly maligned, perhaps we could try to set the record straight here. Here are some questions I have for legit psychic readers:

1- Osiris pointed out that legit psychics don't use cold reading. Would you agree with Rowland and others that cold reading is used by *some* to fake psychic revelations?

2- What is unique about psychic readings, compared to talk therapy?

3- Is it correct that there are "real" psychics, who can really read people's minds and/or predict the future, and "fake" psychics that pretend to do that using cold reading and other techniques?

4- If there are "real" and "fake" psychics, isn't it beneficial to the legit ones to reveal the frauds in the industry?

Thanks,

Jim

You may as well say everyone selling magic books, dvd's and tricks is exposing magic cos that is exactly what they are doing..depends who is buying!

Howard.

Greetings Jim!

You say:


You seem to be coming to some kind of an understanding regarding skeptics and their views of Psychics and that's great news.

In order to help us all out I'd like to ask you a few questions too.

1) What is your purpose for wanting to understand psychics?
2) Will you find this information useful and if so how?
3) Can you please define the terms cold-reading, Skeptic and Psychic?

Thank you, I look forward to hearing your answers.

Socrates

"Every child is born a genius" - Albert Einstein

Osiris,

How old is the book you wrote. I saw a book from the 60's which was written for kids using a figure head celebrity (can't remember now if it was a cartoon figure head or human) but I was shocked to find the CT exposed there... and it hadn't been ruined by this in the 40 years which have passed.

If any of you feel compelled to have Ian lecture out on the right coast, you should take matters into your own hands. I do know that the tour was called off because some put pressure on those who make their living in the commercial comoditization of magic. It is much easier to threaten a person's living than it is to threaten a private magic club, or group of same, over whom they have lecture for them. I will note that Mr. Rowland has lectured here on the left coast which hasn't seemed to have any change in the psychic readers and how they do business.

Lastly, doesn't bringing the matter of Full Facts of Cold Reading up on this open forum only add fuel to the interest for this book. Complainers are a funny lot we are. I've done it too.

Cheers,

Tom

Seems that things (here in the states at least) are getting nearly that rediculous... that is, unless you're own of the "chosen sons" of the industry... then it's perfectly fine to do as you will... or so it seems.

Rick Maue pointed out some time ago who some of the greatest lay-oriented exposures were of all times... see if any of these names ring a bell... Harry Kellar, Howard Thurston, Harry Houdini, Theo Hardin, Harry Blackstone (Sr. & Jr.), Mark Wilson, Dante, Dunninger, Harry Lorane, David Copperfield, Lance Burton... nearly every single star of magic has in some way contributed to junk food Magic Trick give-aways as well as theme park and birthday party premiums. Some even contributed to resources like Boys & Girls Life Magazines, the Scouting manuals et al.

Don't get me going on the petty C*R*A*P it really irritates my last two good nerves...

Back to Jimton's Inquisition...
1- Osiris pointed out that legit psychics don't use cold reading. Would you agree with Rowland and others that cold reading is used by *some* to fake psychic revelations?

Yes & No... I believe I pointed out that being a Reader is far different than doing Cold Readings. Herb Dewy, Ron Martin and many others have pointed out the value in "niche" reading materials and even Cold Reading formulas for those Readers putting in full days @ the Psychic Fairs, etc. I don't care how good you are in doing traditional divination work, you get crisp come about the 5th or 6th hour into an event and your mind starts going numb. You need certain "psychological" cheats in order to continue in some instances (not all).

I realize this sounds like a contradiction to what's been said by others and I previously, in truth it is not but that is something that's very difficult to explain without putting you into the hot seat and allowing you to experience it all on your own.

2- What is unique about psychic readings, compared to talk therapy?

Do your homework... Talk Therapy (Human Mental Health Studies) ALL came out of the Gypsy's Craft... look at the materials studied and focused on by Freud & Jung and how Metaphore plays a key role in certain aspects of psychological treatment.

I'd say that at least 70% of the people that come to see a Reader do so out of the need to talk, not because they need a Reading. They do not want to go to a clinician or priest or other such professional so they go to their barber/hair stylist, bar tender, favorite hack/cabby, or the local psychic... something that don't have the stigma that going to a professional has. Interestingly, I've had numerous health care professional refer their clients to me, with the realization that my not being some kind of "stiff shirt" with a wall of fancy parchment might help them open up. Is some instances I've used aspects of Kenton's SAR to help these people see for themselves, where they need to make changes in their lives in order to "heal" themselves. They then go back to the counselor and seem to do great... all because of an altered perspective that I, as a Reader can deliver and the pros cannot!

3- Is it correct that there are "real" psychics, who can really read people's minds and/or predict the future, and "fake" psychics that pretend to do that using cold reading and other techniques?

It depends on whether or not you're trying to apply the cover-all fantasiful idea of what it means to be "Psychic" (which it sounds like), or the more down to earth and realistic definition that most of the more learned tend to embrace and agree with. There are no boogiemen, no "disembodied" souls that I've noticed -- there is intuition, empathy, and knowledge that can be coupled with wisdom that one garners over the years via this or that experience.

"Reading Minds" or, more accurately "discerning thought" is readily done IF you invest yourself into studying the human animal and some of the more subtle tricks of the trade, which are related to ideomotor reflex. This is a lifetimes study but yes, it will allow you to make some very solid assumptions that are typically on the mark when it comes to a person's unspoken thoughts. What you are confusing here however, is the Act that magicians do that creates teh illusion of mind reading vs. what real psychics do... they ask what the question or issue is or have you write it down... no slight of hand, no secret moves or impression systems. MIND READING is a Magic Trick... Telepathy is Psychic Phenomena and it is not one in the same (though you will get those that claim otherwise.)

As to the "Fake Psychic" thingy... well, it depends on who you talk to as to what that is exactly. YES, there are "Hustlers" out there that will use every low level, cunning trick in the book to get your dollar. There are side show vendors who are about as psychic as my pet rock and yet, they can give you one of the best, most amazing Readings you've probably ever witnessed... I promise you, THEY CHEAT!

I think what you are looking for is an understanding as to who the "Charlatans" are... the predators that hide behind the crystal ball and smelly incense. That my friend is a very in-depth issue that I am covering (starting next issue) in TOP HAT @ the Magic Bunny Forum... I think it best that you take a gander at said series for better understanding on that one.

4- If there are "real" and "fake" psychics, isn't it beneficial to the legit ones to reveal the frauds in the industry?

Over the past ten years or so many shut-eye Readers and public speakers as well as shop owners have come out at public levels not just complaining about the Pedatory style of Reader & supposed Spiritualists, they've been agressively exposing these people, their questionable business practices, etc. Teh complaint is simple as well as logical... these shysters are ruining their business and credibility and hurting many people in the communities the pros (who are on the up and up) work and live in. So yes! The "real" Psychics are making a stand and without teh aid of anyone in the magic or skeptic's communities.

So, did I trip up on things?

1) What is your purpose for wanting to understand psychics?

I'm curious by nature, and I'm very interested in mentalism, the paranormal, psychology, and religion. I'm not out to prove that psychics are fakes. I think it would be very cool if psychic or other paranormal phenomena were proved to be real. I don't have an agenda; I'm interested in getting as close to the truth about this stuff as possible.

2) Will you find this information useful and if so how?
I'm not sure if it will be useful or not.

3) Can you please define the terms cold-reading, Skeptic and Psychic?
I'm no expert on any of these. From what I've read so far (Corinda and Rowlands mainly), my understanding s that cold reading is a technique for getting information from a person you are "reading" by basically fishing, and making it appear that you already knew the information that the readee gave you.

To me a skeptic is someone who is reltuctant to believe things merely based on a leap of faith, someone who uses critical thinking to try to understand nature and the world around him. I am not in favor of a skeptic who has knee-jerk reactions to things, automatically not believing things that are strange or new or mysterious. I am also not in favor of believing that things are true just because you want them to be true. I am in favor of the kind of skepticism that Carl Sagan talks about in his book, "The Demon Haunted World."

I'm not sure what psychic means. That's one reason I'm asking a lot of questions here.

Osiris: "Back to Jimton's Inquisition... "

Inquisition? Have I been rude or disrespectful here? If so, please point it out to me. I am trying hard to be calm and polite. I hope it's ok to ask questions.

Rowland's work has been called vile on this thread, and in my opinion skeptics have been painted with a broad brush. Have I done the same regarding psychics? If so, please point it out.

Jmtron,

strangely enough I have just ordered and am waiting to receive Carl Sagans 2Demon Haunted World"...is it any good?
Like you I am interested n Psychic and paranormal phenomena but have yet to see any psychic that is convincing enough to make me think they are other than fake.

Howard

I think it's a must read. Sagan debunked many UFO sightings, yet he would have been more excited than anyone if aircraft from outside earth actually landed here. In other words, he didn't just believe what he wanted to believe, it was important for him to distinguish between actual extraterrestrial life vs. bogus reports.

Being a skeptic doesn't mean being anti-paranormal. To me it's important to distinguish between a magic trick and actual supernatural activity. If Uri Geller is not using a mentalist "trick" method to bend spoons, that would be extremely cool--I'd love that to be true. I don't get off on being negative. But since we know there are so many ways to bend spoons with trickery, I'm going to be skeptical when I watch him bend spoons. I would be very excited to know of real paranormal phenomena happening.