|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 | ||||||||||
Knil Gnissim New user 21 Posts |
'Gospel magician' may not be the correct term - I refer to magicians who use magic to either preach, or illustrate, a Christian message.
My point is this: those who are atheists will consider Christian theology to be no more valid, or rational, as the belief in that people are able to posess other supernatural powers (communicating with the dead etc.). So, when a person is using magic to promote Christianity - or any other religion - they are necessarily promoting what atheists would consider to be supernatural beliefs (the idea of god as a human being, virgin birth, resurrection, heaven etc.). Now, there is a section in the Magic Café for discussion of gospel magic. So why not have a place where the combination of magic and other pretend supernatural powers can be discussed? Knil |
|||||||||
Bambaladam Special user 636 Posts |
Martin,
Mentalism, in its "classical" sense, is an art entirely devoted to the supernatural. As was straight magic before it was destroyed by defenders of the "truth". The trend of offering advice is DIMINISHING, not growing, not due to some realisation of improved ethics, but because of the legal paranoia modern society has engendered. Even shut-eye divination manuals consistently offer the advice to stay out of trouble. Medical advice should not be offered, is the general conclusion. No one in this discussion has suggested any of the practices you are opposing. And meanwhile, many are those whose lives have been destroyed because they listened to the wrong counsellor, the wrong financial advisor or the wrong political leader. Your sceptical outlook will benefit you in life. Look for reasons to believe that which is offered you as truth before accepting it as such. And keep your mind truly open, accept the possibility that those whose idea of reality is similar to your own may have insidious motives. They may be trying to salvage a downward spiral in their careers by adopting the role of "defender of truth," for instance. Your sceptical outlook is of no use to the readers of this thread however. We are discussing what is a good way to give a reading, how to learn how and what to do with it. The problem here is you are confusing technique and intent. You believe reading systems are bad because bad people have used them. By that reasoning we would have to destroy all paintings because Hitler enjoyed painting. I would urge you to adopt a more tolerant outlook. If you earnestly feel that readers who give bad advice are a bigger problem than anything else... GET BUSY handing them over to the law. Don't clutter this board with your intolerant and counterproductive propaganda. Please. /bamba |
|||||||||
Martin Pulman Inner circle London 3399 Posts |
bamba
I will continue to express my opinion wether you like it or not. Your post seems pretty intolerant to me.I 'm sure you would prefer to pat each other on the back for how wonderfully gifted you all are. Now I've seen the light. I've wasted 20 years of my life and several thousand pounds learning techniques to achieve magical and mental illusions, when all the time I should just have used psychic power. (Oh, don't tell me - my negativity would destroy the psychic vibes). Readings of any kind should be approached with great caution (if at all) and should be prefaced with the assurance that what you are doing is in no way psychic. That way people are not led into the clutches of those whose motives are less than pure. But in general I would say if you are not professionally qualified to offer people advice you should not be doing it. PS Are you insinuating that James Randi's work on exposing charlatans is motivated by a declining career? Not very charitable for someone portraying themselves as tolerant. |
|||||||||
Nir Dahan Inner circle Munich, Germany 1390 Posts |
It always amazes me how magicians/mentalists "discover" the "power" of reading with a system. Did you guys ever try to do exactly the OPPOSITE of what your system says? Try it, with the same confidence you do a regular reading, and you will discover the results will not differ.
Nir |
|||||||||
Bill Cushman Inner circle Florida 2876 Posts |
Interesting observation Nir. I'd be curious to have some experienced readers give your suggestion a try and report back.
As for Martin; he apologized for his use of the word "loony." I agree this was rude and over the top and guaranteed to push buttons and lower the odds of constructive communication. At the same time, there seems something incongruous in telling Martin, often in rather rude terms, that he needs to be more tolerant of others beliefs. What about being tolerant of Martin's beliefs? The same logic applies in my opinion. Bill |
|||||||||
Leeo New user Manchester, UK 99 Posts |
[quote]On 2003-06-08 16:35, Martin Pulman wrote:
"But in general I would say if you are not professionally qualified to offer people advice you should not be doing it." Sound advice, Martin. By the way, what was your professional qualification again? Just kidding. Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I think that it is important that every member should give their opinions, regardless of whether those opinions are liked or not. |
|||||||||
Bambaladam Special user 636 Posts |
Martin,
I am not insinuating that anyone's work is motivated by anything. I am just pointing out the possibility, and mentioning ways in which a sceptical outlook can benefit people. I am sorry if my post came across poorly. I just felt we should stick to the issue at hand, which is using reading systems. In fact, this thread is not about whether or not reading systems are "legitimate", it is about how they can be used to give good readings. I also don't recall saying anything about anyone's psychic powers or wanting anyone to pat my back. This is what I meant to say: Reading systems are tools. Tools can be useful or not useful, but it is hard for me to imagine a tool being good or evil, or even honest or decietful. The fact that some people who you disapprove of may or may not have used reading systems is not really interesting to me. I agree with you that readings should be approached respectfully and from a vantage point of great knowledge. I would in fact extend this notion to include anyone who offers advice or counsel of any kind. Or makes claims as to the nature of the world. I do not agree calling yourself psychic is bad. But this is a topic for another thread. And I welcome you stating your opinions. It is the repetition of them and the lack of contributory value that bothers me. Basically, in a thread where people are discussing the merits of reading systems, saying that readings are bad is not useful. And getting mixed up about what you mean and stating things with great verve and supposed certainty gets in the way of the content of more useful posts. It is something akin to me hypothetically going into the cards forum and repeatedly yelling that card tricks have no place in a mental act and that people who perform with playing cards are somehow morally flawed. I would be both wrong and annoying, and painfully out of context, however entitled I would be to my opinion. /bamba |
|||||||||
teejay Inner circle Liverpool, UK 1831 Posts |
Quote:
On 2003-06-04 16:14, Martin Pulman wrote: Martin Sorry about suggesting that you were trogging. What I should have said was 'trolling'. 1)Who are the people recommending 'conning' on this thread? Just tell me one. 2) Don't you know that the Agony Aunts (Evening Standard) make up the letters themselves before they 'answer' them? You would be better reading the news section where you would learn what the professional people you recommend, such as clergy, counselors and social workers do to the people who trust them. 3)Who are the Faith Healers on this thread? I'd be interested to know just who it is that you are attacking? |
|||||||||
Ignore me... Loyal user 230 Posts |
[Engage humor mode]
Actually, Martin, I enjoy discussions wherein someone suddenly appears and derails the flow by dismissing it. Many times I stand in admiration when someone interrupts a discussion of a particular technique, telling the others that it is a waste of time, and that the group should be using a gaff instead of a difficult sleight, or that magic is a waste of time altogether, misleading the impressionable, and that everyone should instead be active in community service. I find it extremely effective to dismiss discussions, especially if I disagree with the basis of it, by inserting myself into it and making disparaging remarks about those engaged in it. Don't you? [Disengage humor mode] Martin, I understand how you feel, especially your frustration that others might be contributing towards fostering a belief in the supernatural. I've engaged in the conversation within this thread numerous times in the real world, with folks telling me of their experiences in giving readings, or even in doing a reading for themselves. Ironically, though, your own magic performances make you the target of your own criticisms. I've never seen a magician express strong disclaimers regarding their own lack of real powers, because it is assumed that the audiences are sophisticated enough to be able to distinguish false powers from hypothetical "real" powers. For some, though, including children and the believing, magic really can, and does, exist, and any act you perform to foster such beliefs means that you are targeting the most vulnerable individuals, who don't have the facilities to judge your effects as fictions. Funny, isn't it? Going further still, there are some who say that dedicating one's time to self-aggrandizement is an unworthy pursuit, and that such time is much better spent in helping others. (This is assuming that one is not performing as a way of increasing a sense of wonder in the world, which would also foster a belief in supernatural nonsense, with which it is clear you disagree, and thus would not do.) If that is the case, wouldn't it be wonderful if, whenever a thread occurred regarding ANY kind of magic here at the Café, someone appeared to tell folks to stop doing magic and instead work for a soup kitchen? ++++ For the record, I don't believe in the supernatural, but I do believe that the human brain is a superb filter wrought by evolution for discerning patterns, and that, on occasion, it discerns false patterns from the noise. I think that use of ANY system will cause the brain to search for the patterns/correlations, and will usually generate a correspondence with something in a person's life. I have no problem with anyone doing readings, even though I am against exploitation of the gullible. I imagine that, if I felt strongly about it, I would probably work more against religious revivals, as these are more numerous, operate in the open, and generate huge amounts of cash for their operators. When you want to take the good fight to those who specifically bilk the desperate of their cash, I'll be at your side. Fortunately, I didn't read anything like that in this thread. T. |
|||||||||
Jester New user 4 Posts |
I believe the intent of the original post was to point out how much more effective a System is than using CR. That's probably true, given the fact that many in the lay public are already conversant with what a cold reading sounds like.
There is no such thing as true psychic reading. The reason a System works is because the spectator wants it to work, so he or she adapts the statements given by the performer to the individual experience of their lives.(Subjective validation.) Having said that, there is no reason not to perform psychic readings in order to entertain a group of people. (Note the operative words.)Most people realize that psychic readings are not genuine, but they still enjoy them. This is what I gather this board is about...entertaining people and having them enjoy themselves, and discussions on how best to achieve that. I think, though, that if your intent is to have people pay you to give them advice on how to lead their lives based on what it says on a bunch of pieces of cardboard, you probably belong on another board. |
|||||||||
Stuart Cumberland Loyal user 289 Posts |
Hi Y'all,
I'm loving this thread. I'm one of those guys that does readings for money and advises people. I don't do cold readings and I don't apologize for it. I've experience miracles, as written by others. Randi won't touch miracles because they aren't "scientifically measurable" and usually written off with lame excuses. (Hey, it's okay for them go give lame excuses, just don't give THEM lame ones back... got it? Those are the rules). For example, Ed talked about a sick kids mother who "knew" when to bring the kid in. Well, I can JUST imagine Randi saying that the mother *knew* she was sick, body language, logical explanations etc... Anyone got the guts to take me on for my beliefs? Don't tell me I'm scamming anyone. That's a cop-out. I don't "rip people off". I charge a fee for my service, the same as my lawyer and my accountant. Houdini. There's a laugh. I *always* laugh when his name comes up in the context of "exposing" charlatans. Houdini was single-handedly the biggest con-artist in magic. Most don't realize that he exposed nothing. Come on, do you really think spiritualists had fake shoes and toeless socks to ring bells under tables with their feet? Do you? He isn't rolling over in his grave. Guaranteed. He's either laughing at the fools who go on television and expose real tricks or just laughing that guys like Randi are just carrying the torch. Houdini did everything for publicity and his own self-gain. His career was dwindling, so he perked it up with an angle. Randi's appearance on Happy Days was a death blow, and he went on to stand in Gellers spotlight... "look at me, look at me". Geez. Psychics using coffee cups to glimpse info. Who's screwing who? Quote:
Interesting to see that no one has taken the time to respond to my examples of the extremely harmful use of readings on the lives of ordinary people. I believe this is a very serious issue with real world consequences. I didn't see your examples, unfortunately. Give me some if you like. I'll give you examples of dangerous religious leaders, politicians, doctors, lawyers, CEO's, etc. who have had harmful effects on the lives of ordinary people. Tit for tat, I'll win. No contest. Having said all that, I'm sure there are charlatans out there. No question. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, if you *truly believe* that there are charlatans out there, stop wasting your time here--or worst, at the JREF--and get out there and do you civil duty and get them thrown in jail! No, I'm NOT trying to be funny. Do it. You'll be a *hero* at JREF for doing so, your community will LOVE you for being the big magician for catching the "gypsy switching con-artist"... and best of all, we'll all have more fun here talking business. TTFN! Blair Stage Hypnosis Secrets Revealed:www.Mental-List.com/masterhypnosis.htm |
|||||||||
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts |
Whew! I can't believe what I stumbled into here! Very messy. But I do think this is all quite fascinating. I guess I am fairly shocked at the number of people on this board that have such deep belief in the non-material; I guess my image of magicians as a group was that, like Houdini, the percentage of non-materialists among magicians would be lower than that among the population at large. But clearly I was wrong.
This is a loaded and charged subject so let me do my best to try and express my views without too much bombast or rhetoric. I don't believe in telekenesis, finger reading, or spirit writing. I do believe in the power of the human brain and that there are many ways of knowing about the world, some of them unconscious. Thus I am willing to believe in telepathy, precognition, and those "powers" that depend on having access to some information--because how we process information about the world is not ultimately completely knowable. That said, I must say I respect what Randi does. Yes, the "psychics" who Houdini investigated did have bells on their feet. There are unfortunately a lot of charlatans out there, who use magicians' techniques to make it appear as if something is happening, when they know it is really not. Unlike magicians and mentalists they do not admit to trickery. I'm not talking about giving Tarot readings--but a current example would be John Edwards claiming that he can contact the dead. In my opinion, this is a sad sad case, and nothing like what Max Maven or even Kreskin claim to do. I really don't see how the magic community could support such a man. So am I against magicians or mentalists giving readings. No, not at all. One earlier poster said it best when he said: Quote:
I don't believe in the supernatural, but I do believe that the human brain is a superb filter wrought by evolution for discerning patterns, and that, on occasion, it discerns false patterns from the noise. I think that use of ANY system will cause the brain to search for the patterns/correlations, and will usually generate a correspondence with something in a person's life. I have no problem with anyone doing readings, even though I am against exploitation of the gullible. A good tried and true system will allow a person to experience an alternate perspective on his/her life that might not have occurred to them. So with this in mind, may I suggest the study of the I Ching? The I Ching really consists of 64 different approaches to life. When a subject asks it a specific question about a problem in life, the I Ching answers with an approach, talking about what kinds of action are auspicious or inauspicious to take at this point in time. It can help the subject to view his problem in a new light. It is kind of a brainstorming tool in that sense. I think many people will find it useful. Okay, that's my take on things. I'll stand back while the bricks start flying in at me. But I knew that I was taking a risk as soon as I entered this thread. Peace, landmark
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Legitimate Readings ! & The “21 card trick”. An experience. (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.07 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |