Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan  That is because non-skeptics don't need much convincing, they are credulous and naive. |
I understand that POV. It's a valid one to choose, albeit rather limiting in terms of practical application. Many people end up there because they've been victimized by their own gullibility in the past, so skepticism is adopted as a shield. It's sort of like closing your eyes because you saw something unpleasant.
However, in this case I'm talking about the ability to have direct experiences, not merely the interpretation of third-party data. So it's not about convincing. It's about imparting the skills for direct application. Skeptics essentially render themselves impotent when it comes to learning and applying what non-skeptics might consider basic skills. It's like being unable to type on a keyboard because you don't believe it's possible to move your fingers that fast. Normally you could convince the skeptic it's possible via a quick demonstration. But imagine trying to convince a skeptic who refuses to even look at a keyboard because he *knows* typing is impossible. Until the skeptic decides to loosen up and get curious about typing, there's no basis for demonstration.
So you can't teach a skill like astral projection to a skeptic who already *knows* there are no astral worlds or astral entities. The skeptic will refuse to even look.
At the same time, you can take a non-skeptic and get them having personal experiences with a bit of training. Then they'll have a new skill for life.