Personal Development for Smart People Forums - View Single Post - Can Photoreading really go that far? (Derren Brown)

bluedragon · 11-01-2009, 05:40 PM

Maybe I am fooled, but I don't think my reasoning is foolish in itself. When someone does something impressive, many people jump and say that it can't be done, and that the artist must be using a trick. Derren, for example , says psychics are all fake, because HE is able to do what they do, with mentalism. (at least, he thinks he can). That doesn't mean that all psychics are actually mentalists. I don't think it is a good strategy to automatically dismiss what someone does just because WE can do it using another method, and because we believe his supposed skill doesn't exist. This, in principle.

As for this particular situation, I understand what photoreading is about, but I don't see why it couldn't be honed up to the point where you would become so good, so proficient, that you would really be able to memorize concrete sentences, and not just the general idea.

If the eye can really register so much information, why couldn't we train ourselves to grasp the essential names and titles from a page, for example, and discard the irrelevant information?

Anyway, I will learn Photoreading myself, as soon as I decide I can afford it. Then I will be able to check it out for myself.

11-01-2009, 05:40 PM	#10 (permalink)
bluedragon Family Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bucharest, Romania Posts: 1,370	Maybe I am fooled, but I don't think my reasoning is foolish in itself. When someone does something impressive, many people jump and say that it can't be done, and that the artist must be using a trick. Derren, for example , says psychics are all fake, because HE is able to do what they do, with mentalism. (at least, he thinks he can). That doesn't mean that all psychics are actually mentalists. I don't think it is a good strategy to automatically dismiss what someone does just because WE can do it using another method, and because we believe his supposed skill doesn't exist. This, in principle. As for this particular situation, I understand what photoreading is about, but I don't see why it couldn't be honed up to the point where you would become so good, so proficient, that you would really be able to memorize concrete sentences, and not just the general idea. If the eye can really register so much information, why couldn't we train ourselves to grasp the essential names and titles from a page, for example, and discard the irrelevant information? Anyway, I will learn Photoreading myself, as soon as I decide I can afford it. Then I will be able to check it out for myself. Last edited by bluedragon; 11-01-2009 at 05:46 PM.