|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9 [Next] | ||||||||||
Martin Pulman Inner circle London 3399 Posts |
We're still waiting for the evidence that the term 'Mentalist" was used by mediums, faith healers or psychic readers before the recorded use by illusionists.
We have 1782 for an unverified claim that 'Mentalist' was used as a term relating to artistic taste? 1874 for a reference in print to Mentalism (as opposed to materialism) as a term in Philosophy, the late 19th century for its use in Psychology by William James (later adopted in 1902 by Segno in his "Law of Mentalism" scam), and Mr. Wm. Broderson, advertising as an illusionist and mentalist in 1906 -the earliest mention (found so far) in print of the entertainment variety. The "real mentalists" will have to come up with an earlier verifiable reference in print of the term "Mentalist" being applied to people working outside of an entertainment context for their arguments not to turn out to be a load of old "ballyhoo"! |
|||||||||
Last Laugh Inner circle Grass Valley, California 3498 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 10, 2017, MentalistCreationLab wrote: No, I was not aware that Abbott's book was disputed. Can you point me in the direction of those who doubted it? Quote:
On Oct 10, 2017, Tony Iacoviello wrote: Yeah, see these start to be more in the direction of the kinds of questions I find interesting. Still entertainment, but moving slightly into the grey in some cases. I don't necessarily think that using mentalism to sell things automatically qualifies as 'outside of an entertainment', but it could be.... Tony, I'm curious, where is the line for you personally? Is there a situation where you feel it's unethical to use deception? Bill - how about you?
My Mentalism Podcast:
The Mystery Arts Podcast Check out my products! Direct from me (PW: cassidy) On Penguin Magic |
|||||||||
RCP Inner circle Two Minnie's in The Hell's Half Acre, The Republic of Texas 2183 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 10, 2017, Last Laugh wrote: After shooting your mouth off about a dvd you knew nothing about you then asked about ethics in mentalism which is like asking about virginity in prostitutes. I could care less what mindpro thinks about anything, being a successful performer/booker has no baring on what we are discussing. He may very well know, he should, but that's his agenda. I won't speak ill of the dead but look up cassidy's history....there are the really dark things to be found. |
|||||||||
Tony Iacoviello Eternal Order 13151 Posts |
My line is Primum non nocere, both literally and figuratively.
Then again, I am a trained both secular and nonsecular as a counselor. I feel it isn't my place to push my ethics or beliefs on anyone, but I will question what I find questionable, and will act in some fashion when I perceive harm being done. Tony |
|||||||||
tomd Special user 747 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 10, 2017, RCP wrote: What's the point in this statement? just because you omit the details, doesn't mean you aren't speaking ill of the dead by making that statement in the first place. Unless these "dark things" are related to him actually labelling himself secretly as a magician and the whole "I'm a mentalist" thing was just a ruse to fool everyone else, I don't understand the relevancy in the slightest... if these "dark things" refer to anything other then the topic at hand, then your simply trying to damage credibility with an Ad-hominem, and process making the rest of us research what the ad-hominem is. Statements like these really do stifle debate.. a debate I was thoroughly enjoying until that statement was made. |
|||||||||
RCP Inner circle Two Minnie's in The Hell's Half Acre, The Republic of Texas 2183 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 10, 2017, tomd wrote: The point is the dark history of mentalism/mentalist.....not the penguin mental magicians. Bob was a saint in the grand scheme. |
|||||||||
RCP Inner circle Two Minnie's in The Hell's Half Acre, The Republic of Texas 2183 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 10, 2017, Martin Pulman wrote: Martin, I realize your English so you lack even an elementary education in basic American history. If your interested you can do the research or just trade penguin videos and call it a day. |
|||||||||
Last Laugh Inner circle Grass Valley, California 3498 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 10, 2017, RCP wrote: C'mon, that's is absolutely ridiculous. You have a bit of a dark and cynical view of mentalism, I get that. But if you think your view is the only way to think about it, you are as naive as you are accusing me of being. Anyway - I didn't ask for advice about ethics in mentalism, I asked where everyone else's line was. I get that you don't like that concept at all, I hear you. But there are other people here with different views and they also have a right to their opinion. I don't get the feeling that you are willing to accept that people see things differently than you. I feel like I need to say this yet again - definitions (as in what defines a 'mentalist') are arrived at by consensus. Just because historically it was one thing, just because one person thinks it is another thing, that really doesn't make it true today for everybody. It's what the majority of people use the term for. You are free to dislike that, but that's life. But hey if it makes you feel better, me, Bob Cassidy, Canasta, Brown et all can be mental magicians. And you can save the term 'mentalist' for the ballyhoo and ambiguous morals. Also, just out of curiosity, RCP - are you an entertainer?
My Mentalism Podcast:
The Mystery Arts Podcast Check out my products! Direct from me (PW: cassidy) On Penguin Magic |
|||||||||
MentalistCreationLab Inner circle 1528 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 10, 2017, Last Laugh wrote: So you did not ask about ethics in mentalism? What you just implied it. Let see what you did say: Quote:
On Oct 7, 2017, Last Laugh wrote: Like that statement not going to stir the pot. Now let's examine definitions (as in what defines a 'mentalist') are arrived at by consensus. First off mentalist cannot agree on what swami gimmick to use let alone what most of the terminology or the etymology of our secret language. Plus when looking at the origins of any term that may be updated we must be clear on how that term was defined in the past and during different decades as well. What this thread has shown is that there is no consensus. It has shown that there is more than one school of thought when it comes to the terminology, Some view the terms set forth by the early self help movement of the late 19th century in to the early 20th century, Others look at the term in terms of its psychicial research meaning, other its pertains to psychology or para psychology while others look at this terminology form within the secret language previously recorded in the literature of mentalism. It should be clear by now that these terms have more than one meaning. The meaning of which depends on what school of mentalism you are raised in. There is also regional differences a well example would be the context of the terminology from a American or European perspective. It would also seem that I am in part from the view point of RCP who I think hit the nail on the head. To some up. What swami should be used by a moral or unethical mentalist? |
|||||||||
Last Laugh Inner circle Grass Valley, California 3498 Posts |
To be clear I said I wasn't asking for advice about ethics in mentalism. I was/am obviously asking about other's feelings and thoughts on it.
I am completely content with each having their own personal definition, my point was that nobody here can give an absolute definition for everyone else, especially when that opinion is in the minority. As long as we all respect each other's right to our own opinion (if not the opinion itself) then we are doing just fine and the thread is doing just fine.
My Mentalism Podcast:
The Mystery Arts Podcast Check out my products! Direct from me (PW: cassidy) On Penguin Magic |
|||||||||
Yuan Moons Veteran user 348 Posts |
I'm going with Alan Partridges definition. Seems apt.
|
|||||||||
Martin Pulman Inner circle London 3399 Posts |
Until someone offers proof that the term "Mentalist" was used by non-entertainers doing fake psychic readings, fake talking to the dead or fake faith healing BEFORE it was used by entertainers, then the question is actually redundant (although I understand why Last Laugh asked it).
If mentalism established itself as a separate and distinct term referring to a form of entertainment, then one cannot reasonably ask about "performing entertainment outside of entertainment'. One may as well ask what's North of the North Pole. So, until they offer such proof, the supporters of/apologists for the scam artists and snake oil salesmen should really stop trying to denigrate a fine performance art and, even if such proof is forthcoming, they should have the common decency not to try and smear the name of Bob Cassidy who contributed more to this art (and to the Café) than they can ever dream of doing. |
|||||||||
Last Laugh Inner circle Grass Valley, California 3498 Posts |
Agreed that Bob needs not be involved here.
However, I think resorting to arguments about the providence and definition of mentalism, is in some ways side stepping the issue. The point was using 'tricks' outside of a situation where there is an implicit (or explicit) agreement of entertainment. My question was 'Where do you draw the line'... not 'Where has the line been drawn historically'. But I think we've pretty much covered the range... from Martin's very clear ethical delineation to RCP's apparent suggestion that doing any type of mentalism requires you to forfeit any claim on ethics whatsoever. There have also been, among the louder voices, some very nice and balanced positions.
My Mentalism Podcast:
The Mystery Arts Podcast Check out my products! Direct from me (PW: cassidy) On Penguin Magic |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
Shifting gears a bit, but cutting though "on theme" as a demonstration of "paranormal acuity" that can be offered either as entertainment or not.
It is but one of several "innate abilities" that all people have that can be demonstrated in a dramatic way - thus, it does not derive from any "historic" roots in "fake stuff" mentioned above. CLOSE-CALL is a demonstration of any persons awareness to changes in the electrical field around them. A blindfolded person can detect a sharp metal object near their head. A PTF document is availabe for the asking and commitment to feedback from ken@eversway.com. Yes, it can be used for entertainment. The description reads: "a demonstration of psychic or paranormal acuity utilizing a single volunteer while engaging the entire audience. It is ideal as an introduction to any mentalism act in which spectator participation and rapt attention is critical, but can also work as a stand-alone presentation or a transition from conjury to mentalism. You leave the audience in a state of stunned silence, trust and respect. There are no tricks – nothing to learn – no practice (not possible, actually). It does, however, require a high degree of confidence and self-control. It is real!" As noted previously, Bob Cassidy claimed such a demonstration was NOT mentalism unless presented as entertainment. Regardless, there is no "special ability" on the part of the performer. There is no 'trick' involved, though one might consider the knowledge involved is a "secret"and therefor magic. I have no doubt this principle has been known for thousands of years and used by unscrupulous sorts in some way - but that does not make it anything but a little known scientific principle, or the property of any discipline. I offer this to suggest that an effect that might be perceived as 'paranormal' by observers is not "mentalism" just because of claimed mentalist might perform it; nor does the fact hta an observer might be "entertained" by such a demonstration make it "for entertainment." Additionally, if I chose to present this as part of a "self-awareness" lecture, it would not make me a guru, psychic, shaman, fraud, charlatan, magician, priest, wizard or any other projected label. I can find buried metal with two bent coat hangers. That does not make me a mentalist or psychic either.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
Martin Pulman Inner circle London 3399 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 11, 2017, Last Laugh wrote: Ignoring your insult that my position is not balanced, the question of whether psychic reading, faith healing, talking to the dead etc qualifies as mentalism AT ALL cuts right to the heart of the issue. If such people are not performing mentalism, then this discussion has no place on the mentalism section of the magic Café and should be conducted on the appropriate forums for psychic readers, mediums etc, of which there are hundreds (I'm not sure how many forums there are for Gurus). They are free to discuss how to cheat grieving people and emotionally disturbed people out of money on those forums. And I will always defend the performance art of mentalism against the accusation that is a den of cheats and frauds, designed only to exploit others or sell snake oil, and I'll always defend people like Richard Osterlind and Bob Cassidy against the insults that have been thrown at them on this thread. Sorry you don't see that as balanced enough. |
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9982 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 11, 2017, Last Laugh wrote: methinks there is a big difference between acknowledging that any interactions with other humans involves "ethical considerations," and any attempt to define what those considerations or conclusions must be. I feel that any demonstration based on assumptions about what a potential audience feels about psychic abilities, paranormal events, etc. do require that the performer be clear on their ethical position (congruency?) -- but I will challenge/resist any person's attempt to say what my ethical position must be, or to label what I do based on their own myopic/biased view. One must "claim ethics" but never need bend to another's claim. But, I can refuse to buy a ticket to your show - and that requires at least knowing what your ethical position is.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
Philemon Vanderbeck Inner circle Seattle, WA 4694 Posts |
I have it on good authority that the Witch of Endor used a parabolic mirror to project an image onto a column of smoke, making her the first mentalist in recorded history.
Professor Philemon Vanderbeck
That Creepy Magician "I use my sixth sense to create the illusion of possessing the other five." |
|||||||||
Last Laugh Inner circle Grass Valley, California 3498 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 11, 2017, Martin Pulman wrote: Oh, no that was not intended as an insult! I appreciate your perspective and I think we agree on most things. I did not mean to imply that you are unbalanced, I appreciate your clear ethical standpoint. I see how that could be taken wrong, my apologies.
My Mentalism Podcast:
The Mystery Arts Podcast Check out my products! Direct from me (PW: cassidy) On Penguin Magic |
|||||||||
IAIN Eternal Order england 18807 Posts |
Hey, so over a century ago, we'd go to the barbers to have our teeth pulled out, no such thing as dentists back then...
So dentistry has one foot in Barnett in a weird way... So, should we still have to refer to barbers for our orthodontic needs? Regardless of history, things progress and change, in fact we sometimes look back and think "wow, we used to think that was ok?!" It used to be fine to recommend cigarettes as a slimmer aid to women, still wanna offer your daughter a pack?
I've asked to be banned
|
|||||||||
Martin Pulman Inner circle London 3399 Posts |
Quote: Witch of Endor? A mere baby. They used to do prophecies with a Para-Papyrus back in ancient Egypt (although other cheaper imp-papyri were available-but buy cheap, buy twice, as the ancients used to say!).
On Oct 11, 2017, Philemon Vanderbeck wrote: |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Performing mentalism outside of an 'entertainment' context (47 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.1 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 < |