|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next] | ||||||||||
Synesthesia Regular user 115 Posts 
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-27 11:26, dmkraig wrote: Ooh, what glorious sarcasm! So, are you too stupid to know what I meant, or just too high on your own cleverness to resist making a dumb reply? |
|||||||||
bremen79 Regular user Boston 116 Posts
|
Oh, it is again time for another show "believers vs scientists"?
Wait, don't start just yet, let me take the popcorn! 
Francesco
"I'm not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance" Jon Stewart |
|||||||||
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5931 Posts
|
Quote: ACTUALLY, the original post brought up attending an event purporting to have a spoon bending party. What I DID was tell him that there was a lot to learn there if he didn't close it off as just a stupid trick being used to con people. As far as arguing the validity of metal bending at such events, THAT was brought about by others including YOU; though certainly you have been the most boisterous champion of that closemindedness.
On 2013-10-27 13:26, Synesthesia wrote: |
|||||||||
|
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5931 Posts
|
Quote: Who are the believers here?
On 2013-10-27 13:48, bremen79 wrote: |
|||||||||
|
Synesthesia Regular user 115 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-27 13:59, Tom Cutts wrote: Yes, I am oh-so-boisterous with my few short comments and my almost immediate acknowledgement that the debate was unproductive and this was not the forum for it. Interesting that you now seem to be trying to extricate yourself from this, even though my very first post was an attempt to clarify what you meant, and you replied by stating in no uncertain terms that you believe in real metal bending. In any case, as I said, believe what you wish -- and that includes believing what you wish about me. I have the security of living in a cohesive, objective reality, so it doesn't bother me much. |
|||||||||
|
Pakar Ilusi Inner circle 5777 Posts
|
And still spoon bending is a trick.
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
|
|||||||||
|
bremen79 Regular user Boston 116 Posts
|
Don't know man, the match just started and as usual the believers are hiding behind their fingers.
But I am sure in a while it will be better, somebody already mentioned the studies of Daryl Bem (of course without citing the name because they probably never read it), and as usual nobody will mention that fact that nobody else successfully replicated that experiments. Then, I think there will be the solid schema of the "prove me that mental powers are not real", forgetting the principle of "ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non que negat". The openmindness argument is also nice, but usually rather weak, they always use it only at the beginning of the match. Let's see who wins this time! 
Francesco
"I'm not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance" Jon Stewart |
|||||||||
|
Synesthesia Regular user 115 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-27 14:51, bremen79 wrote: I have used my powers of precognition to determine that the scientists will win
|
|||||||||
|
bremen79 Regular user Boston 116 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-27 14:56, Synesthesia wrote: I would not be so sure, for one simple reason: the scientists are clearly the evil ones, that wants all the pacific and good believers to die. And it is known that evil cannot win, especially on a forum.
Francesco
"I'm not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance" Jon Stewart |
|||||||||
Steve_Mollett Inner circle Eh, so I've made 3006 Posts
|
Nobody wins, though everyone THINKS they do.
"Heads I win, tails you lose." :spinningcoin:
Author of: GARROTE ESCAPES
The absurd is the essential concept and the first truth. - Albert Camus |
|||||||||
|
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5931 Posts
|
Quote: Im not extricating myself from anything. I think you want the escape artist section of The Café. What I'm doing is pointing out how you have taken the common pseudo skeptic approach of assuming you know what I think based on your close minded interpretation of the use of certain phrases. Terribly unscientific to do so rather than ask and study the communication.
On 2013-10-27 14:45, Synesthesia wrote: Quote: Where in this thread have I made that claim? And by that I mean "made the claim"... "Wrote those words".
even though my very first post was an attempt to clarify what you meant, and you replied by stating in no uncertain terms that you believe in real metal bending. :pop: |
|||||||||
|
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5931 Posts
|
Quote: I love the commentary, but who are the believers?
On 2013-10-27 14:51, bremen79 wrote: |
|||||||||
|
Synesthesia Regular user 115 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-27 17:17, Tom Cutts wrote: As you can clearly see, Tom, I'm not the only person who read your posts as being a pretty clear assertion of your belief in metal bending. If that was a misunderstanding, thanks for clearing it up. |
|||||||||
|
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5931 Posts
|
Correct, you aren't the only one who misinterpreted the use of certain phrases.
|
|||||||||
|
Bard Loyal user 223 Posts
|
Earlier in this thread we had comments like "but Spoon Bending is just a Trick" and "in the end the scientist always win", etc. both of which are examples of extremely closed minded processing based on a magician's bias vs. real world interaction. . . actually stepping into the middle of the shut-eye world and learning to understand it from within vs. the critical attitudes so many of us apply to the topic. We likewise ignore the fact that though the followers of certain shaman in the more remote parts of the world, know that certain demonstrations are trickery, the auspices of slight-of-hand magic, chemical magic, etc. are an accepted part of their faith/religious practice. In fact, it's only the Westernized culture that ripped magic from its philosophic and cultural guts and for much of the past 1,500 or so years, attempted to force the rest of the world to bow to its whims. . . especially after the writing of certain "investigative"tomes.
Fact is, true psychic/spiritual abilities are not some kind of on and off switch that can be "replicated" the way the talking heads want it to be. It happens in the moment as it is required. . . and yes, that means that the clowns that go out on tours doing bending, etc. are most likely con-men but not always. No one has ever explained how the late Sybil Leek could conjure a windstorm in the middle of an auditorium at will, or cause the flames of a camp fire to rise, lower and move about as she directed. In fact, the learned heads of academia can't explain a lot of things which is why they love to attack and belittle all the smaller situations. . . they can't stand it when something as "low" as a primitive religion can defy their strict parameters on given issues. . . just as magicians can't stand seeing something done they can't steal. . . I mean, replicate and put into their own shows. . . not that magicians would do such things. Metal Manipulation or the movement of objects (PK/TK) in the shut-eye world is nothing close to what we do as entertainers. If any kind of manifestation happens it is usually very slight, Banachek even points this out in his lectures. Too, within this same shut eye world there are those that ask a critical question; "Why is it so important, the ability to move things with your mind?" In fact the Lord Buddha spoke extensively on this very issue; why does one need to see into the past or future when all we have is NOW? Who does it serve when we can create the miraculous? The truth being that in 99.99% of all such cases Miracles of this kind only serve the guru that relies upon them. That doesn't mean that all such "adepts" are frauds and con-artists even though some really are. From Buddhas' perspective however, such teachers are void of the greater truths -- knowledge of what real magick is vs. the outward expression of magick. I post this kind of overview not to create debate but to hopefully neuter the arrogance of those that would *** another's beliefs and perspectives. Such actions are arrogant and serve no just purpose in the long run. Especially if we believe that each individual progresses in life at their own pace and too, not everyone in the world functions from the left side of their brain; most of society being of a right brain orientation and that is a scientific reality and as such, sustains the fact that arguing the point is senseless and little other than a bullying action. Until we, believer and non-believer alike, learn to see things from the mid-point -- the famed Middle Way or Middle Pillar, we walk blindly and out of balance -- we are not capable of understanding the greater whole of life and it's "hidden" mysteries. |
|||||||||
|
Synesthesia Regular user 115 Posts
|
I see where you're coming from Bard, but a few points on that:
- Not believing that there is any compelling evidence for the supernatural does not by necessity mean believing that everyone who practices such things is a con artist. I fully recognize that sometimes they are faking it in good faith for the best of reasons; other times they are not even aware that they are faking it. It can serve a purpose and it is not without validity as an element of culture, just as a play or a novel -- but I still have seen nothing that convinces me it is real - It is tremendously easy to cherry pick an anecdote here and an occurrence there as examples of things that are unexplained, but that is hardly a convincing argument for supernatural phenomenon. There's a long list of questions that need answers and the vast majority of scientists dedicate their time to pursuing the true and beautiful mysteries of the natural universe, not the falsified ones. All "supernatural" occurrences yield to rational explanations eventually. - You make the rational-minded sound very childish and petty, which I think is unfair. It's not about a desire to "attack and belittle" -- nor is it about not being able to "stand" when something "defies strict parameters". A rational investigator LOVES something that defies known parameters -- that's called a discovery. However, they also know (through having spent years or decades of their life carefully observing and cataloguing things -- the true, difficult, uphill path to gaining real knowledge) that things which truly defy what we know about reality are very rare, so they do not rush into believing them. But yes, they do seek cohesiveness in the picture they build -- part of the rational approach is not believing in conflicting ideas or succumbing to cognitive dissonance. - I'm not out to neuter anyone's beliefs, but when they make assertions about objectively observable reality, that's a different story. When scientists go on crusades to disprove beliefs that exist truly within the metaphysical realm -- e.g. when they attempt bizarre ontological arguments against even the most high-level notion of God, or of the soul, or of the afterlife, and apply nonsensical physical standards and ask disingenuous questions like "well how much does the soul weigh?" -- I think it's very pathetic. That's a direct attack on the beliefs of others (beliefs which do not even conflict with science as they are non-material). But there's a flipside to that: when a believer steps outside the metaphysical, and claims true powers or true miracles exist within the observable physical realm, they are the ones who have gone on the attack. Indeed their first course of action is usually either to show off how their claim "defies science" or to co-opt scientific principles they only partially understand to explain their claim (e.g. the all-popular quantum explanations for various supernatural ideas) while resisting any additional education on those principles from the very people who discovered and developed them. In those cases, I do not feel that I am attacking anyone -- rather defending what I see as the pursuit of "the greater whole of life" (humankind coming together and applying principles of reason and logic to our observations in order to surmount the in-built fallibility and limitations of our senses and achieve a greater understanding of the objective universe in which we live) from either an overt attack, insidious corruption, or both. |
|||||||||
|
R.S. Regular user CT one day I'll have 188 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-28 08:22, Bard wrote: Quote:
No one has ever explained how the late Sybil Leek could conjure a windstorm in the middle of an auditorium at will, or cause the flames of a camp fire to rise, lower and move about as she directed. Seems to be a contradiction here, no? Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||
|
R.S. Regular user CT one day I'll have 188 Posts
|
Just curious - is there one person that the believers all agree can genuinely and truly bend spoons/metal just by wishing it? Who in the world is the single BEST example of someone who has real spoon bending ability?
Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||
dmoses Inner circle 2261 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-27 11:39, Pakar Ilusi wrote: Pakar... I know you know better! 
It's only a trick for those make it one. d
"You're a comedian. You wanna do mankind a service, tell funnier jokes."
TPR by Dave Moses and Iain Dunford T-shirts for Magicians and Mentalists |
|||||||||
|
dmkraig Inner circle 1949 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-27 13:28, Synesthesia wrote: Not at all. I was just pointing out that either you weren't telling the truth or you were lying. Which do you think it was? |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » "Real" psychics - spoon bending? (1 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: Oct 27, 2013 05:28 pm 
| [ 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 < 
|