Carlitos, Ok, you were never implying I was lying...I'm sorry I misunderstood. However, I believe,the computer evidence I presented and explained in detail most certainly should have been enough to prove my point anyway. Yes, I know, you disagree.
John Edward - psychic or what?
- Thread starter RemieV
- Start date
-
- Tags
- john edward
No it does not imply you are lying. It was just to point out that saying you are not a liar does nothing to establish the truth of what you say because that is exactly what a liar would say.
As for your gut, I suggest you let it get on with its job of food processing, and start thinking with your brain.
Fast Eddie B
Philosopher
This shows a certain contempt that's all too common.
Maybe I should coin a term: Argumentum Ad I'm-Happier-Than-You.
It paints a divide where people who believe in telepathy or angels or astrology or telekinesis or unicorns or whatever are happy and bright and open minded.
Those who reject those beliefs are unhappy, dour, cynical naysayers. For whom pity is felt.
No pity is necessary - there's nothing in the nature of reality that prevents happiness, and certainly nothing in woo that guarantees it.
kerikiwi....Which is why I also said I understand people may not believe me. Guess you just felt you needed to reaffirm something I already understood.
Not at all. I just felt the need to point out the pointlessness of your saying you are not a liar.
Liars and non-liars would say that, so it is a waste of time stating it.
That's the filling in the blanks part. Or the confirmation bias. Or the selective memory part. Or all three plus confabulation.
Last edited:
dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
If Robin or batvette could telepathically broadcast the stories to us that would settle the point.
No, no, no, it's not demonstrable. It's not repeatable in any reliable fashion. It just is and you'll just have to trust them. And your gut, though I still haven't been informed as to what one's intestines have to do with it.
OK, understood.
batvette
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2012
- Messages
- 470
To you, it is. You weren't there, it didn't happen to you.
Before I posted it and repeatedly since I reiterated I don't expect it to mean much to others.
So you are only stating the painfully obvious. However it would also be foolish to think all the explanations of fallacious logic should be accepted by me and cause me to dismiss what I witnessed.
No , Fast Eddie, that's not an accurate portrayal of what I think.
Fast Eddie B
Philosopher
OK.
Then when you said this:
...then instead of believing there may be things out there that you never thought possible...you choose to believe the person is lying? Obviously I can't change that, but it is sad.
What, exactly, are you referring to as sad - and why?
BTW, I don't think any of the accounts given in this thread are lies or fabrications. That does not imply that I accept them exactly as described.
No, I did not ignore it. It was not germane to the point I was making, but I left it in because I don't like to take things out of context.
Here is the part you think I ignored:
My comments were specifically about the sufficiency of your electronic methods, which you said proved your hypothesis alone. If you will read my post again you will see that I end with specifically that statement.Robin Stettnisch said:
What you think you remember witnessing. There is no evidence for what you actually witnessed, nor will there ever be.
If you don't expect it to mean much, then why are you wasting time here? This is a critical thinking site; what kind of replies do you expect to anecdotes claiming mental telepathy?
Garrette, yes, I see what you were trying to do and I was wrong in my interpretation. Apologies again.
Fast Eddie, I was going on the idea that if you examine every possible theory that could explain my story including coincidence etc. And you don't see how any of those could explain it so you fall back to the person must be lying instead of a possibility of something more, well I do find that sad....cause that would truly be a closed mind. Don't need to believe to be happy and believers can most certainly be unhappy. If I didn't like and respect some of you clowns I would have left for good ages ago.
: )
Gladly accepted. No problems here.
xterra
So far, so good...
Robin,
Just so we don't get sidetracked again by the expression, I will take “my gut” to mean “my gut feeling,” which itself is another way of saying unexamined belief or instinct or intuition. For me, the most accurate of the three is intuition, so I will use that.
You have said several times, during this thread and during the life after death thread, that you believe as you do based on your intuition. The one I remember most vividly was when your intuition said that RemieV would support your belief that John Edward actually performed some paranormal feat, having to do with information he gave you that you believed he could not possibly have known in any other way.
RemieV categorically denied that she agreed with you. There was, if I recall, some discussion between the two of you about that, but she continued to say that she does not believe Edward communicates with dead people.
Without discussing whether John Edward would or would not have been able to know this information, have you looked back at those occasions, have you re-read parts of these rather lengthy discussions, and have you noted the number of times “your gut” told you you were correct -- but you were wrong? Have you considered any evidence that your intuition in these matters may not always be correct?*
If you continue to insist that '”your gut” knows, what is the basis for this insistence? Is it merely unexamined intuition, or are there explanations, is there objective evidence, verifiable evidence, that people like ... I don't want to impute to other people perspectives that they may not hold ... like me, could look at and say "Robin is right"?
xterra
GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENT: I AM NOT CALLING ROBIN A LIAR, NOR DO I THINK SHE IS TROLLING. I think that for the most part, she is sincere in what she says. However, I think that like many (most?) of us, once she has established a position and fortified it by her reiterations, she may find it hard to abandon.
*I am not concerned with your intuition in other matters, as for instance whether the dog is about to get out of the yard, or whether the cat is about to pounce on the fish you left on the counter. Examples only. I don't even know if you have pets.
Just so we don't get sidetracked again by the expression, I will take “my gut” to mean “my gut feeling,” which itself is another way of saying unexamined belief or instinct or intuition. For me, the most accurate of the three is intuition, so I will use that.
You have said several times, during this thread and during the life after death thread, that you believe as you do based on your intuition. The one I remember most vividly was when your intuition said that RemieV would support your belief that John Edward actually performed some paranormal feat, having to do with information he gave you that you believed he could not possibly have known in any other way.
RemieV categorically denied that she agreed with you. There was, if I recall, some discussion between the two of you about that, but she continued to say that she does not believe Edward communicates with dead people.
Without discussing whether John Edward would or would not have been able to know this information, have you looked back at those occasions, have you re-read parts of these rather lengthy discussions, and have you noted the number of times “your gut” told you you were correct -- but you were wrong? Have you considered any evidence that your intuition in these matters may not always be correct?*
If you continue to insist that '”your gut” knows, what is the basis for this insistence? Is it merely unexamined intuition, or are there explanations, is there objective evidence, verifiable evidence, that people like ... I don't want to impute to other people perspectives that they may not hold ... like me, could look at and say "Robin is right"?
xterra
GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENT: I AM NOT CALLING ROBIN A LIAR, NOR DO I THINK SHE IS TROLLING. I think that for the most part, she is sincere in what she says. However, I think that like many (most?) of us, once she has established a position and fortified it by her reiterations, she may find it hard to abandon.
*I am not concerned with your intuition in other matters, as for instance whether the dog is about to get out of the yard, or whether the cat is about to pounce on the fish you left on the counter. Examples only. I don't even know if you have pets.
xterra, I don't believe you should always just trust your gut (intuition I like better too), sometimes yes, sometimes no, but most of the time, not all, you need to first use reason and knowledge and experience and common sense. If after that you are still undecided, yes I would trust my intuition. I do realize you can still be wrong. But for the most part I think not. Example , when my Mom got the library reserve card in the mail ( that is how they did it then) with my Dad's name and book he would love etc...I wanted "proof" that was a real sign so I actually called the main headquarters of the library system to discuss how that could have happened. And I called the library it originated from and spoke with a few employees who worked in that area. You must always investigate and just be open to other possibilities. But at some point, yes, you must make a decision as to what you believe is more likely. And be open to new information that could change your assessment later on as well. I am such an annoying skeptic I even asked my Nana to prove to me she was there while I was "dreaming!"
http://yorktown-somers.patch.com/blog_posts/is-it-just-a-dreamor-something-more
But sometimes I feel I am not being heard ,for example, I say we didn't talk about anything purposely at the John Edward event and someone here responds that he had spies who overheard us. Or Carlitos, who didn't agree my computer assessment should be enough proof as to 1 person with many aliases but gave me implausible alternatives as to how it could have happened (ex. as I interpret...34 different people at same library using same terminal to read my blog and wanting to comment by either lying or just being nasty...with noone in between logging off wanting to do something totally different.) These kinds of things make me believe some are not "hearing" me cause they come up with explanations they feel are accurate when I already showed how they are not accurate and why. Or it shows me they wouldn't believe no matter what cause their explanations are more unlikely than mine! Anyway, for the most part, absent any intentionally nasty comments, I do enjoy the topics and the discussion.
xterra
So far, so good...
Robin,
Did you in fact go back to check the posts about your intuitions? If not, would you please do that now and let me know what you find.
ETA I am trying to help you decide just how much your intuition has helped you in this forum. We can both go back and look. We might not always agree on the significance of what we find, but we can find it.
Thank you.
xterra
Did you in fact go back to check the posts about your intuitions? If not, would you please do that now and let me know what you find.
ETA I am trying to help you decide just how much your intuition has helped you in this forum. We can both go back and look. We might not always agree on the significance of what we find, but we can find it.
Thank you.
xterra
Last edited: