The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » J ack right about Randi from the get go. (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7 [Next]
entity
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
5060 Posts

Profile of entity
I'd prefer that you not step away from it.

Your statement was that exposure won't hurt the working pros that much, and I'd completely agree with you.

Will it hurt amateur performers? Should the rest of us care about that, or should they be left to fend for themselves?

- entity
lumberjohn
View Profile
Special user
Memphis, TN
622 Posts

Profile of lumberjohn
To say "exposure is wrong" is overly simplistic. It is certainly wrong in many situations, but there are surely others in which the limited nature and effect of the exposure is outweighed by the public good. If, for instance, a person started a religion by claiming magical powers, performing one or two simple effects repeatedly to demonstrate his powers, and then used his influence to cause his followers to commit crimes or to kill themselves, I doubt that any of you would have a serious problem with someone revealing to his followers how he performs his effects to show that he does not have magical powers. It is ridiculous to say that the "exposure" in such a case would be unequivocably "wrong." Likewise, I don't think you can make the unequivocal statement that Randi's exposure is "wrong." The correct argument, as I see it, is whether the overall benefits would outweigh the overall negative consequences, keeping in mind that the benefits and costs will fall upon different groups disproportionally.

As for amateur performers, I don't see how the exposure of one or two effects, out of thousands available for study and purchase, would have any negative consequence. If anything, I would think Randi's efforts would lead more people towards the study of magic and mentalism by drawing attention to it. If people see Uri's show and believe that all the effects are performed through psychic powers, they are likely to say "That's cool, but I don't have psychic powers." If they believe, through Randi's efforts, that the effects are performed through magic techniques that can be studied and learned, well, I think the rest is obvious.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20523 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On 2007-02-15 12:41, entity wrote:
I'd prefer that you not step away from it.

Your statement was that exposure won't hurt the working pros that much, and I'd completely agree with you.

Will it hurt amateur performers? Should the rest of us care about that, or should they be left to fend for themselves?

- entity


entity I meant I would step away as really it is a hot button issue. I hate to cause offence believe it or not.

BUT with the allowace that I take NO POSITION on one being better than the other, amateur or pro, I will say one thing.

I am not certain they have as much at stake in the first place. Certainly they don't have to worry aobut eating for working. So in that respect, they are not hurt.

As for guys who only show tricks to others for fun, I am not sure they are hurt either. Left to fend for themselvs? Well that is not really true. This will blow over pretty quick, people will not retain the information. Heck how many people who have seen a 3 card monte demo, still fall for the con? I don't think exposure is right, but I don't see it really hurting ANY serious magician, pro or not.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
DJM
View Profile
Inner circle
Israel
1681 Posts

Profile of DJM
Well, it looks like Randi didn't mention any new exposres in this week's commentary, so hopefully it means he's not going to it again on the site.
entity
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
5060 Posts

Profile of entity
Time will tell.

- entity
John Nesbit
View Profile
Inner circle
United States
1418 Posts

Profile of John Nesbit
Quote:
On 2007-02-15 13:01, lumberjohn wrote:
To say "exposure is wrong" is overly simplistic. It is certainly wrong in many situations, but there are surely others in which the limited nature and effect of the exposure is outweighed by the public good. If, for instance, a person started a religion by claiming magical powers, performing one or two simple effects repeatedly to demonstrate his powers, and then used his influence to cause his followers to commit crimes or to kill themselves, I doubt that any of you would have a serious problem with someone revealing to his followers how he performs his effects to show that he does not have magical powers. It is ridiculous to say that the "exposure" in such a case would be unequivocably "wrong." Likewise, I don't think you can make the unequivocal statement that Randi's exposure is "wrong." The correct argument, as I see it, is whether the overall benefits would outweigh the overall negative consequences, keeping in mind that the benefits and costs will fall upon different groups disproportionally.

As for amateur performers, I don't see how the exposure of one or two effects, out of thousands available for study and purchase, would have any negative consequence. If anything, I would think Randi's efforts would lead more people towards the study of magic and mentalism by drawing attention to it. If people see Uri's show and believe that all the effects are performed through psychic powers, they are likely to say "That's cool, but I don't have psychic powers." If they believe, through Randi's efforts, that the effects are performed through magic techniques that can be studied and learned, well, I think the rest is obvious.


All is not as it appears to be.
Bambaladam
View Profile
Special user
636 Posts

Profile of Bambaladam
There is nothing more conceited than ascribing gullibility to those who believe otherwise than oneself. In a bitter twist of irony, it is also extremely unscientific.

/Bamba
Bambaladam
View Profile
Special user
636 Posts

Profile of Bambaladam
Quote:
On 2007-02-15 13:01, lumberjohn wrote:
...If, for instance, a person started a religion by claiming magical powers, performing one or two simple effects repeatedly to demonstrate his powers, and then used his influence to cause his followers to commit crimes or to kill themselves, I doubt that any of you would have a serious problem with someone revealing to his followers how he performs his effects to show that he does not have magical powers...


I will eagerly await Randi's exposure of the miracles of Jesus of Nazareth.

/Bamba
entity
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
5060 Posts

Profile of entity
Silly argument.

- entity
Top Hat
View Profile
Inner circle
We peed on you!
1077 Posts

Profile of Top Hat
How would he do that?
TH Smile Smile Smile Smile Smile
Bambaladam
View Profile
Special user
636 Posts

Profile of Bambaladam
Well it seems he believes reproducing a miracle equals proving it was done the way it was reproduced
entity
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
5060 Posts

Profile of entity
Are you comparing Uri Geller to Jesus Christ?

Randi is saying that if he can do Geller's feats through a stage magician's techniques, perhaps people should consider that Geller might be doing it the same way.

- entity
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20523 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Entity, seems as if my gracefull stepping away happened at exactly the right time.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Bambaladam
View Profile
Special user
636 Posts

Profile of Bambaladam
Quote:
On 2007-02-17 10:54, entity wrote:
Are you comparing Uri Geller to Jesus Christ?

Randi is saying that if he can do Geller's feats through a stage magician's techniques, perhaps people should consider that Geller might be doing it the same way.

- entity


I am not comparing anyone with anyone. I just thought lumberjohn's description suited a lot of people.

/Bamba
Jerome Finley
View Profile
V.I.P.
SLC
3419 Posts

Profile of Jerome Finley
It didn't suit me.

Lumberjohn proposes that it may not be "wrong" to expose one or two things (out of the many thousands) that are out there, if for a greater good.

The issue I have with this thinking, is "Who is to decide what the greater good is?" Randi has placed himself in a position wherein he feels and believes that he has the authority to say what gets exposed, why, when, etc.

One or two routines may not hurt you, but what about someone who uses the material to create a living for themselves, support a family, etc? Who can say that Randi's exposures really serve anyone other than himself?

His decisions may have a negative impact on many people (including performers), and this does not seem to be an issue with Randi. I hate to say it, but Geller won.

Look at Randi's life, he is obsessed with Geller. Do you think Uri thinks twice about James Randi, on any given day? Nope! As long as James believes he is the worlds "Knight in Shining Armor" (in his own mind), he will keep doing this.

I've come to grips with the fact that exposure doesn't affect me. Still, exposure in this art might be looked upon as morally questionable at any level. Randi can expose it all, and the fake psychics will still win.

J.
"Join my update list here!" http://eepurl.com/uE3Jf
John Nesbit
View Profile
Inner circle
United States
1418 Posts

Profile of John Nesbit
Quote:
On 2007-02-17 04:02, Bambaladam wrote:
There is nothing more conceited than ascribing gullibility to those who believe otherwise than oneself. In a bitter twist of irony, it is also extremely unscientific.

/Bamba


That is a very lucid thought, well stated. Ironically, it seems to occur too often on this forum.

TT2, Randi seems to have enough peolple on the Café who keep his "armor" shined for him. Uri Geller was targetd for having a potential cult following back then. Now it is "the knight" who seems to have the market cornered with a different kind of a following.
Jim-Callahan
View Profile
V.I.P.
5018 Posts

Profile of Jim-Callahan
Exposing the methodology behind a mentalism premise ruins the possible effect upon an audience.
(It will be seen as some sort of trick)

It has nothing to do with fooling the audience with a different method.

People may not remember how they were told it works.
But they do remember it was shown to be some kind of trick.

I think this is a fairly easy concept to grasp.

Exposure destroys the underpinning of some of these presentations.

John, good to see others noticing the cult.

-Jim

H.O.A-X
“I can make Satan’s devils dance like fine gentlemen across the stage of reality”.
Jerome Finley
View Profile
V.I.P.
SLC
3419 Posts

Profile of Jerome Finley
John,
Agreed. I see them as well.

J.
"Join my update list here!" http://eepurl.com/uE3Jf
bitterman
View Profile
Inner circle
1189 Posts

Profile of bitterman
I see dead people.
If you are not cheating, you are only cheating yourself.

Dutchco is about to put out some new Ebook: DUTCHCO. Get 'em while you can.
John Nesbit
View Profile
Inner circle
United States
1418 Posts

Profile of John Nesbit
Quote:
On 2007-02-17 13:42, bitterman wrote:
I see dead people.


"You're a "bitterman" than I am, Gunga Din!" -Rudyard Kipling
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » J ack right about Randi from the get go. (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.16 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL