Personal Development for Smart People Forums - View Single Post

RandomJohn · 11-06-2006, 08:01 PM

I've read it, and buy the basic premise as a framework for thinking about emotions and consciousness.

I'm curious about the muscle testing idea, which I've heard from several sources now. My wife and I tried a double-blind test of it last night, and it bombed seriously. The setup was pretty sound scientifically (I consult on clinical trial designs by vocation):

I chose several DVDs from our collection and placed them in envelopes so that neither one could identify
She shuffled the DVDs
I muscle tested her, wrote an ID number on the flap on the inside so you would have to lift the flap to see it
I wrote the ID number along with the result of the test on a result paper
When we were done, she took the envelopes from me, we shuffled them, and then she presented me with the envelope
We would do the test
She would get the ID from the flap and write the ID down with the result (new page -- she didn't see her results)
We compared results and then identified the DVD

Result: we disagreed on nearly every DVD, except one!

So as I see it, there were a couple of reasons for this result:

The muscle test is invalid
We didn't know what we were doing (this is the first time we did any muscle testing)
We resonate with different things (after all, we don't really know what's going on with muscle testing)

I hear that other double-blind tests have had dramatically different results, so I'm not too quick to accept #1. #2 is possible, and we did have a little trouble knowing what was "weak" and "strong." #3 is plausible as well, but would be a very confusing and unsatisfying explanation in light of the identity of the DVDs.

However, I'm not sure that you can do a double-blind test to disprove the framework. I treat it as Buddha's raft: use it as a wonderful framework for the purposes it works, and use something else that works better in other situations.

11-06-2006, 08:01 PM	#2 (permalink)
RandomJohn Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: NC Posts: 155	I've read it, and buy the basic premise as a framework for thinking about emotions and consciousness. I'm curious about the muscle testing idea, which I've heard from several sources now. My wife and I tried a double-blind test of it last night, and it bombed seriously. The setup was pretty sound scientifically (I consult on clinical trial designs by vocation): I chose several DVDs from our collection and placed them in envelopes so that neither one could identify She shuffled the DVDs I muscle tested her, wrote an ID number on the flap on the inside so you would have to lift the flap to see it I wrote the ID number along with the result of the test on a result paper When we were done, she took the envelopes from me, we shuffled them, and then she presented me with the envelope We would do the test She would get the ID from the flap and write the ID down with the result (new page -- she didn't see her results) We compared results and then identified the DVD Result: we disagreed on nearly every DVD, except one! So as I see it, there were a couple of reasons for this result: The muscle test is invalid We didn't know what we were doing (this is the first time we did any muscle testing) We resonate with different things (after all, we don't really know what's going on with muscle testing) I hear that other double-blind tests have had dramatically different results, so I'm not too quick to accept #1. #2 is possible, and we did have a little trouble knowing what was "weak" and "strong." #3 is plausible as well, but would be a very confusing and unsatisfying explanation in light of the identity of the DVDs. However, I'm not sure that you can do a double-blind test to disprove the framework. I treat it as Buddha's raft: use it as a wonderful framework for the purposes it works, and use something else that works better in other situations.