A Great Example That Refutes Psychic Powers

[Gerald]

I don't want to start a flame war. I just want to pass along an interesting link that I found and have a civil discussion about it to see what your thoughts are on the matter.

How to Prove Photography To A Blind Man

[Dharma]

In the photography example, the author is testing the existence of photography on the physical plane with a physical device. It translates well.

A psychic is pulling information from other dimensions and grounding them into the physical experience. It's not a mechanized process in any respect, so I guess results will vary since the application is not standard.

If you look at something like Technical Remote Viewing, there's a mechanized trip into the dimensions. They have a better success ratio than any psychic.

[YouseffTheSheep]

You can't use something as simple as photography to explain something as complex as psychic phenomena.

The analogy sounds nice, but the two are apples and oranges.

[Savage]

I wonder: How would a blind man, having seen such evidence that photography exists, then prove photography to a skeptical blind man without the assistance of a sighted person?

This is generally the approach taken by skeptics -- they look to other blind people for proof or disproof of the psychic and paranormal.

The blind thought experiment is flawed though, since from the blind person's perspective, it's as much a proof of ESP as it is of photography. All it shows is that there's something possible beyond the blind person's senses. But it can't really prove to the blind man what the mechanism behind it is. That requires a leap of faith. Ultimately the blind person must trust the sighted people's explanation if he's to accept the existence of photography. A skeptical blind person would remain open to other possibilities, knowing that the sighted people could be deceived.

[nara]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

I wonder: How would a blind man, having seen such evidence that photography exists, then prove photography to a skeptical blind man without the assistance of a sighted person?

He could document the results of his experiments and show them to the other blind man. The other blind man could accept his findings or seek out sighted people to perform his own experiments. Eventually you will end up with a ton of blind people who performed their own independant testing and they've all obtained similar results.

All it shows is that there's something possible beyond the blind person's senses. But it can't really prove to the blind man what the mechanism behind it is. That requires a leap of faith. Ultimately the blind person must trust the sighted people's explanation if he's to accept the existence of photography. A skeptical blind person would remain open to other possibilities, knowing that the sighted people could be deceived.

You basically just described science. Nothing should ever be accepted as 100% fact but as the mountains of evidence begin to pile up, you can state with a high certainty that something will occur or state how something works.

The same applies for the blind man. Since he can't see he can never be 100% sure that he isn't being tricked but experiment after experiment will leave him with fewer and fewer doubts. He should never be free of all his doubts but well designed and repeated experiments will leave him with very very few.

A good reason why this article relates to psychic abilities is because parapsychology and paranormal study is the only (that I know of) branch of science that has not made any progress in over 100 years. And its not because science is full of close-minded materialistic people. There are tons of people in the parapsychology field that believe in it and are trying to obtain significant results. They have yet to be successful in over 100 years of experimenting.

If there was really something too psychic abilites, as there is to photography, the evidence would be in its favor. Just as the blind man must concede (even though he has doubts) that photography is highly likely, so to the scientists would have to concede that psychic abilities are highly likely.

That so many scientists are willing to dismiss claims of, so called, significant paranormal findings as quickly as they do, says a LOT in my opinion. It says that given 100+ years of experimenting, you can state with a high certainty that the claim of paranormal findings was not properly controlled or it hasn't yet been reproduced. It is highly likely that further testing will not produce similar significant statistical results.

Personally, I liked the article and thought it made a good argument against psychic abilities.

[DiscoDan]

The example is flawed in that it assumes we know whether or not the second person can see. But what if 99% of the world were blind? And what if 25% of blind people claimed to see (for monetary reasons)? Statistically, we would reject the "photography" hypothesis even though it does, in actuality, exist. How can we be certain the same is not happening with psychic phenomena?

[Ijin Kaion]

for all that has been said allready as an add-on about proving.

to prove is an action, the action of proving is showing another what is there ,in general thought right?
then by means of proving, you could prove to a blind man pictures exist.
but the means of how to show them is a different matter indeed.

as said before a physical object with no intentional build to see the "paranormal" could never pick up any trace or sign of the "paranormal," because it is not a device built for doing so.

so then the link`s contents where negated by this simple concept.

but as to explain rather then to shut the door immediatly, people come in a wide variety, evolution takes place throughout the centuries and the generations, people alter, it was there in the beginning it will be there at the end.
some people are not able to notice the "paranormal," some people notice too much.
in newer generations people don`t grow anymore in the normal known and accepted physical dimension, where a rock is a rock and a tree is a tree.

evolution takes place sometimes out of boredom i guess, but people are starting to notice that there is more then just this accepted physical world.

the only one we accept is heaven, since hell is mostly left forgotten and hoped to not be there.

so to not linger any further, the term "paranormal" wich i write with "" since the paranormal is what in older times was something that they couldn`t understand, pick up, or notice.
silly if you ask me, but halas...

so when trying to prove what is more then the physical realm, you need to know what to look for, you need to be able to see the truths of it.
and most of all you need to seek it with a mind filled with curiocity, rather then a mind filled with doubt.

but thanks for the info nonetheless, it proved my point after all.

[CBreeze27]

Hi All,

This is my first post of I hope many. I found it ironic that the author of that article used people that are 'blind' and those with 'sight'. In order for his example to relate to psychic activities, I would argue that you would have to use equivalent examples. In the pyschic realm, most of us are 'blind', and few can 'see'. So taking one blind man in the example in a world filled with sighted people is easier to convince that what the sighted are saying is true. It's the equivalent of having a world of people with pyschic abilities with only a few that don't. You can't make an example of trying to prove or disprove the minority by making an example using the majority. What would happen in the example if they were ALL blind trying to take a picture and then describing to each other what the results were? Now say, a few of those blinded were actually legally blind? They would be able to see some of the images, but not a clear picture. Wouldn't that explain why pyschics aren't 100% correct? What if the person interpretting the picture has double vision, and instead of seeing 1 or 2 fingers, sees 2 or 4 fingers? The blind people being told photography exists would start to have doubts. How do you prove to a blind man the moon exists? The example of how to prove to a blind man that photography exists has no more revelance to pyschic or paranormal activities than proving to a blind man you can turn bread into toast.

No matter what your belief system is on how we got here, either through a God or through Evolution, neither side can be argued convincingly to the other side as prove that one exists and one does not. But just because it can't be proven, doesn't mean it doesn't exist, for the simple reason...we ARE here. We DO exist. Even though we can't prove how it's done.

[Yukio]

It is already difficulty to explain "stereoscopic vision" for people that don't see in 3D. Talking about 4D, It is also difficulty like trying to explain somethings to preachers that don't believe in visions.

Maybe if you go a step further with the "analogies" ...
Use a 3D program and the Engineers laser generator to make 3D sculputures on real time to the blind person.
Try to explain the ("alleged") 4D (Space and Time) to someone that don't believe in Precognition or Vidents .

Also, in the mean time .Make some improvements into the software that read tests and translate to speak language ... Make a entry into some loterry and donate the winning amount to some foundation.
Like this:
http://www.fundacaodorina.org.br/

Dorina Nowill.

[Yukio]

http://www.inf.ufrgs.br/~oliveira/pu...etch_final.pdf

Don't miss that you will need some machine to reconstruct the image into a "3D" prototype ...

2D/3D to ...
Older "photographic pictures" were only in 2D!

[Ijin Kaion]

a lot of d talk:P

well a device to show the energy must first be made with energy.
i have an ethereal device i built a long time ago and perfected over the years.
it`s called an overhead because it floats over something.

it`s a medical device that scans the physical and energetic bodies to any kind of energetic output, and then it maps it into a 3d image.
perfect for surgery.

but then comes the big thing, how to make that thing physical?
well i`m working on that, but if i am able to do that then i can offer you an entire lab with tons of devices and loads of data about energy.
took me a long time to build it.

so my biggest concern for the moment is not trying to show the other side, but trying to merge it back together so i can finnish my work here.

[Decheron]

To a sceptic, no proof is possible -
To the believer, none is necessary.

This quote was made by a member of the Most Haunted team; it was originally from another source, can't remember if it was a book, comic or tv programme.