Suggestions for Ouija Board experiments

[Explorer]

I found one of these boards and decided to see what the fuss was about.
The milton bradley version is just a flat particle board with the sticker of numbers and letters covering it, and a plastic pointer that is suspended by 3 pegs.

Unsurprisingly, it does absolutely nothing. But I guess I forgot I needed a bloodied bible, 3 virgins and a full moon. Sigh.

You have wasted money. A small upturned tumbler on a smooth table using cutout letters and numbers in an alphabetical circle, and "yes" and "no" at opposite ends of the inside middle, plus say another three reliable and serious friends, will suffice.

Decide who will ask the questions and take notes. Each person places one finger lightly on the glass, four people is ideal. Allow free movement of the arm, and then start asking a question. The most seriously interested person should be the questioner and ask questions which are of personal interest, on any subject at all. The glass will eventually start to circle around the inside of the circle, continue to do so for some time, and then veer off to the first letter or number, then proceed to the second and so on. When another question is asked, the circulating motion will usually start again, and the above should be repeated.

Often the messages are just single word responses, and so the questions should be geared to that. If, after that it doesn't work, then I would definitely give up trying.

 

[Czarcasm]

You have wasted money. A small upturned tumbler on a smooth table using cutout letters and numbers in an alphabetical circle, and "yes" and "no" at opposite ends of the inside middle, plus say another three reliable and serious friends, will suffice.

Decide who will ask the questions and take notes. Each person places one finger lightly on the glass, four people is ideal. Allow free movement of the arm, and then start asking a question. The most seriously interested person should be the questioner and ask questions which are of personal interest, on any subject at all. The glass will eventually start to circle around the inside of the circle, continue to do so for some time, and then veer off to the first letter or number, then proceed to the second and so on. When another question is asked, the circulating motion will usually start again, and the above should be repeated.

Often the messages are just single word responses, and so the questions should be geared to that. If, after that it doesn't work, then I would definitely give up trying.

So, instead of using a real toy, we're supposed to be using a cheap homemade knock-off of a real toy, and this makes all the difference? Should people throw away their professional tarot decks and use pinochle decks remade with a magic marker?

 

[Ladewig]

You have wasted money. A small upturned tumbler on a smooth table using cutout letters and numbers in an alphabetical circle, and "yes" and "no" at opposite ends of the inside middle, plus say another three reliable and serious friends, will suffice.

Decide who will ask the questions and take notes. Each person places one finger lightly on the glass, four people is ideal. Allow free movement of the arm, and then start asking a question. The most seriously interested person should be the questioner and ask questions which are of personal interest, on any subject at all. The glass will eventually start to circle around the inside of the circle, continue to do so for some time, and then veer off to the first letter or number, then proceed to the second and so on. When another question is asked, the circulating motion will usually start again, and the above should be repeated.

Often the messages are just single word responses, and so the questions should be geared to that. If, after that it doesn't work, then I would definitely give up trying.

I'm still unsure what you are describing. Will the answers be anything other than words that one of the planchette/glass movers decides upon? Is there anything beyond one or more persons pushing the object around in a controlled effort to spell out a specific word?

 

[rcfieldz]

No ghosts?

noticed this thread and thought that I'd just say that the blindfolding experiment does/can work.

years ago I was part of a paranormal team who were very sceptical and performed lots of different experiments as scientific as reasonably practicle.

one of the experiments was to blind fold every person who was in contact with the planchette, made to turn their heads away from the talking board and also the board was rotated to a different angle.

Whilst the results were not as good as usual and the planchette seemed quite 'sluggish' but it did still work, but the part that amazed me was when the planchette moved over a letter (there was a small window in the planchette) it quite often wouldn't be directly over the letter or mid way between letters so I called out to be more accurate over the letter and sure enough everytime it would adjust PERFECTLY over the letter.

I still can't explain that to this day.


and btw I am still not a believer in ghosts.

Then I guess your denying the Holy ghost...

 

[Explorer]

So, instead of using a real toy, we're supposed to be using a cheap homemade knock-off of a real toy, and this makes all the difference? Should people throw away their professional tarot decks and use pinochle decks remade with a magic marker?

The homemade knock off works, that is all I am saying. Just because some company makes a posh version heart shaped in wood or plastic, doesn't mean it is going to work any better. I was simply trying to be helpful. I have never used a factory produced planchette, and never had any failures. If that does not satify you, then that is your problem, not mine.

As I said above, don't knock unless you try it!

 

[Explorer]

I'm still unsure what you are describing. Will the answers be anything other than words that one of the planchette/glass movers decides upon? Is there anything beyond one or more persons pushing the object around in a controlled effort to spell out a specific word?

No, this is the whole point of ouija, nobody knows what is going to happen. There is no agenda other than what is set by the questioner who dictates the questions in my method, at least. The answers are often unexpected and unpredictable, and seemingly beyond the conscious thinking of the participants during the session. That no doubt, is why the messages have been attributed to disembodied spirits in the past.

The movement emphasis on the glass may derive from one particular dominant finger on the glass, but nobody is necessarily aware that it is they who are the dominant one. In my humble opinion it may very well be the questioner as I imply in my recommendations above for a successful technique, but the questioner is usually equally amazed at some of the creative outcomes from the session, as the next person.

 

[Ladewig]

The answers are often unexpected and unpredictable, and seemingly beyond the conscious thinking of the participants during the session.

1) I am unsure why you believe that unexpected answers is evidence that something other than conscious pushing of the glass is at play here.

2)Also, how do you know the limits of someone else's conscious thinking? In order for you to opine that the answers are beyond those limits, you must have some idea what those limits are?


3) If we set up a spread exactly as you describe, and you were to pick four people that you were certain to not consciously push the glass, and I were to pick four JREFers and told one to push the glass in creative and unexpected ways, then is there any way that a team of experienced observers would be able to distinguish between the two tables?

 

[ExMinister]

1) I am unsure why you believe that unexpected answers is evidence that something other than conscious pushing of the glass is at play here.

2)Also, how do you know the limits of someone else's conscious thinking? In order for you to opine that the answers are beyond those limits, you must have some idea what those limits are?


3) If we set up a spread exactly as you describe, and you were to pick four people that you were certain to not consciously push the glass, and I were to pick four JREFers and told one to push the glass in creative and unexpected ways, then is there any way that a team of experienced observers would be able to distinguish between the two tables?

1) If you try the board alone, and you can get it to work, you will believe that something other than conscious pushing of the glass/planchette is at play. That does not mean anyone need believe you. It is an anecdote. Nothing more. If you succeed with this, you might find it strange enough to wish that you could be hooked up to an MRI machine out of curiosity as to which part of your brain you are in dialogue with.

2) Beyond conscious awareness in the general sense of the term, implying an absence of awareness of any conscious intention.

3) No.

 

[Explorer]

1) I am unsure why you believe that unexpected answers is evidence that something other than conscious pushing of the glass is at play here.

2)Also, how do you know the limits of someone else's conscious thinking? In order for you to opine that the answers are beyond those limits, you must have some idea what those limits are?


3) If we set up a spread exactly as you describe, and you were to pick four people that you were certain to not consciously push the glass, and I were to pick four JREFers and told one to push the glass in creative and unexpected ways, then is there any way that a team of experienced observers would be able to distinguish between the two tables?

1. There is the unconscious part of the brain, which we were told on BBC Horizon programme this week, makes up around 95% of our decision making processes. So, again, I have to repeat probably for the third time on this thread, I do not believe anything paranormal is taking place within a Ouija session.

2. Answer 1. above covers that to a certain extent, but as Exminister has said, it would be possible to scientifically analyse what is going on here with existing technology. All it needs would be a little inclination, money and time, to do this.

3. No. Therefore, if you are starting from the premise that something needs to be debunked here, it would be a fruitless procedure. What would be a more sensible and defining approach, would be to carry out sessions with participants hooked up to brain imaging equipment, and motor nerve arm movement monitoring, in tandem. In this way, the comparison between your example groups could be based on useful data, and not subjective feedback from just visual observations.

 

[philkensebben]

I found one of these boards and decided to see what the fuss was about.
The milton bradley version is just a flat particle board with the sticker of numbers and letters covering it, and a plastic pointer that is suspended by 3 pegs.

Unsurprisingly, it does absolutely nothing. But I guess I forgot I needed a bloodied bible, 3 virgins and a full moon. Sigh.

Look again on the box : Sold seperately.

 

[Pixel42]

as Exminister has said, it would be possible to scientifically analyse what is going on here with existing technology.

May I ask how? If you saw the Horizon programme you'll know how difficult it was to find a kind of automatic motion which could be performed whilst its performer was in a brain scanner. How could anyone use a ouija board whilst in one?

At the moment I would imagine the best that could be acheived would be to monitor the participants' brain waves as they used the ouija board. I think the results would be of sufficient interest for that to be worth doing, but it certainly wouldn't give enough information to "scientifically analyse what is going on".

 

[Explorer]

May I ask how? If you saw the Horizon programme you'll know how difficult it was to find a kind of automatic motion which could be performed whilst its performer was in a brain scanner. How could anyone use a ouija board whilst in one?

At the moment I would imagine the best that could be acheived would be to monitor the participants' brain waves as they used the ouija board. I think the results would be of sufficient interest for that to be worth doing, but it certainly wouldn't give enough information to "scientifically analyse what is going on".

Of course it would not be practical to use a massive full body scanner, I accept that, but as you suggest, brainactivity can be monitored in a variety of other practical ways.

It would provide whatever information it would provide, for analysis. Do not pre-judge the outcome. It would serve to show perhaps who is the the dominant "pusher " of the glass, and who is the most passive. It may also show what part of the brain is active in the main, during the session, the conscious or the unconscious, and that is a good start, IMHO.

Cheaper and smaller imaging scanners that focus just on the brain and allow research in a more practical way, when human activities take place, I am certain will be developed eventually, and take this kind of research much further forward.

 

[Mike!]

Find a large spooky looking abandoned old house in the middle of nowhere with at least one large walk in closet. Nail the ouija board to the floor in the center of the closet. Now place your volunteer group of believers in the closet too. Nail the closet door shut. Tell them the board will provide the answers on how to escape. Nail the rest of the doors shut as you exit the house. Wait around and see if they can get out, or just leave them there, like it matters at all.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

.... and take this kind of research much further forward.

To what end ?



Total abandonment of the Magic 8 Ball for all of life's pressing questions ?

 

[Ladewig]

1. There is the unconscious part of the brain, which we were told on BBC Horizon programme this week, makes up around 95% of our decision making processes. So, again, I have to repeat probably for the third time on this thread, I do not believe anything paranormal is taking place within a Ouija session.

OK, nothing paranormal is taking place. I still want to know why your examination of the spelled out answers leads you to believe that they are "seemingly beyond .. conscious thinking" and not simply the result of the conscious? I am not denying the existence of the unconscious.

The answers are often unexpected and unpredictable, and seemingly beyond the conscious thinking of the participants during the session.

 

[ExMinister]

To what end ?



Total abandonment of the Magic 8 Ball for all of life's pressing questions ?

I for one would never advocate abandonment of the Magic 8 Ball.

But isn't it even a little bit interesting that with a Ouija board, the subconscious mind is somehow given a voice? Not just a yes or no swing-of-the-pendulum kind of voice, but actual words and phrases and even an apparent personality?

But maybe this is old news to neuroscience.

It may be that the research already exists to fully explain this, and the voices in schizophrenia as well, or other instances where "not self" parts of the brain "speak," for lack of any better way to describe it.

Or it may well be that we don't have the technology to study it, or that the cost of the research would outweigh the benefits, which could be better utilized elsewhere.

At any rate, unless someone makes a paranormal claim about the Ouija board, I don't think there is really any way to test it by observation only. The woo claim that the spirits are providing information could be tested like any other such claim, though the believers always seem to find a way to justify when it fails, and for which reason being able to pinpoint exactly which parts of the brain are in fact involved here would be yet another step toward rationality.

It is easy to dismiss it as gullibility or even deception, but those who have experienced it the way I have will not find those accusations helpful, and many will continue to believe in a paranormal explanation as a result.

Science will eventually find an answer to this, if it hasn't already. The more we can explain, the less woo there will be, to state the obvious. But offering explanations that don't fit the facts (as with the accusations of gullibility or deception, in cases where the experiencer knows these not to be the case) does more harm than good.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

I think the only proper response to people that try to start conversations about "the mysterious Ouija Board" is to interrupt them with "It's just a toy", and walk away.

On what grounds? I have a good friend, a friendly and intelligent girl, who believes she "made contact" with a spirit with a ouija board. She believes in them very strongly, and believes she "made contact" with the angry spirit of a boy who had died near where they used the board. Taking the "sceptic stereotype" approach by telling her it's a "toy" and walking away sounds very harmful to our friendship and very unproductive in terms of shaking her belief. Most likely the only thing you'll "accomplish" is making her even more prejudiced against "sceptics" and more entrenched in her beliefs.

But isn't it even a little bit interesting that with a Ouija board, the subconscious mind is somehow given a voice? Not just a yes or no swing-of-the-pendulum kind of voice, but actual words and phrases and even an apparent personality?

The subconscious is pretty good at making experiences for us when we dream, you know.

 

[Pup]

I'm curious what it means when you can't work a ouija board or dowse. I've never been able to do it. Presumably I have just as much subconscious as anybody else, but I wonder if it's like wiggling your ears: either you can or you can't.

 

[Explorer]

OK, nothing paranormal is taking place. I still want to know why your examination of the spelled out answers leads you to believe that they are "seemingly beyond .. conscious thinking" and not simply the result of the conscious? I am not denying the existence of the unconscious.

OK, I shall repeat. If they were fully conscious responses from a participant they would be recognised for that, in the same way that I am fully aware that the words that form this very sentence are emanating from the conscious part of my brain.

Sorry, but I don't know why you find that a difficult concept?

 

[Czarcasm]

On what grounds? I have a good friend, a friendly and intelligent girl, who believes she "made contact" with a spirit with a ouija board. She believes in them very strongly, and believes she "made contact" with the angry spirit of a boy who had died near where they used the board. Taking the "sceptic stereotype" approach by telling her it's a "toy" and walking away sounds very harmful to our friendship and very unproductive in terms of shaking her belief. Most likely the only thing you'll "accomplish" is making her even more prejudiced against "sceptics" and more entrenched in her beliefs.

I'm sorry, but while a child having an invisible friend is cute and shows imagination, an adult having invisible friends only shows us that said adult needs professional help. If more people would just not humor in any way such beliefs and instead try to convince them to seek therapy, this wouldn't be such a widespread problem. When did good mental health become a matter of personal choice?