Forthcoming UK TV - Derren Brown Seance
- Thread starter digital goldfish
- Start date
-
- Tags
- derren brown seance
Tanja said:
What I heard was different (select text to view spoiler): [snipped spoiler in case color wouldn't be accurate in quoting]
Am I going to be shot now in a magicians' vendetta?
Correct, that's also what I heard. However AFAIK it was done so slowly that the audience that was there physically wasn't in on it, and also believed it. Since it was done at night, they had no point of reference when that occurred (sorry to be vaguish there, am too lazy to make the color thing and I'd probably dork it up anyway
)But yeah that was also my understanding of how it was done, and if it was done slowly with no point of reference (and remember, they were on a boat
), the physical audience wouldn't have picked up on it, and couldn't have been 'in' on it (unless they solved it themselves and they had as many clues to do so as the TV audience). Still a neat trick though.
And I don't think you get shot, I think it's sawed in half 
Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Nap, interrupted.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2001
- Messages
- 19,141
This statement is so utterly unbelievable that it takes my breath away. I cannot conceive how you can put "cheating" on an entertainment modality in the same category as cheating on the most important discovery in the history of mankind. Apparently you take as much insult from someone not filling you in on your choice of entertainment as you do from someone lying about talking to your dead grandmother.
This is another example of how some people have a very narrow spectrum of the mundane vs. the astounding.
~~ Paul
Paul,
The two may differ in magnitude, but if I make a claim like, "I can get a lot of personal information from you simply through my understanding of psychological principles and subtleties of human communication", that's what I should do. (.....remembering the phrase "Mind power"
).The above statement is not the same as saying, "I'm entertaining you here, and I'm NOT telling how!" When you say you do it through, let's say, knowlege of psychology...but in reality, you are simply using a shill....that is a deception...a lie...and one of a magnitude, imo, to discredit the reputation of the performer.
Did you see Jamy Ian Swiss's demo at TAM1? A very good example of confirmation bias.
It never fails to amaze me how some people who scoff at everything "paranormal" are so gullible and eager to attribute quite preposterous claims to "mentalism". (Not saying you in particular, Paul. Just generally speaking.)
Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Nap, interrupted.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2001
- Messages
- 19,141
Clancie, be my guest: If you want to take offense at what Brown says vs. what he does, I don't really mind (assuming there is anything to be offended by). But to say 'It would be just as much "cheating"' as people like Edward, who are misleading the entire world about life after death, is preposterous and bizarre. I just don't understand how you can speak of both these things in the same breath.
Edited to add: Okay, I'll calm down now.
By the way, is there really anyone here who claims that Brown doesn't "cheat"? Is anyone really gullible about it, or are we just not taking offense at it?
~~ Paul
Edited to add: Okay, I'll calm down now.
By the way, is there really anyone here who claims that Brown doesn't "cheat"? Is anyone really gullible about it, or are we just not taking offense at it?
~~ Paul
Tom Morris
Thinker
- Joined
- May 6, 2004
- Messages
- 155
He's pissed off some theists. That's a positive result in my book.
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2001
- Messages
- 34,601
Wow, those particular christians just aren't thinking much. Isn't DB's show more likely to turn people away from "the occult"?
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2001
- Messages
- 34,601
Paul C. Anagnostopoulos said:
I think what really offends the believers is that Darren Brown is a skeptic and his show is of a skeptical nature.
I thought Brown claimed he didn't cheat. No?
And, related question, if mentalism really -could- achieve these remarkable feats through psychology, how would we distinguish this unusual level of "mind power" from something paranormal?
Well, for one thing, JE might be a fake who's deluded, not intentionally cheating.
If Brown is cheating (and saying he isn't), he knows full well that he's lying.
I think just its wrong to intentionally and inaccurately attribute powers to psychology and the mind that, in reality, people don't have and can't have.
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2001
- Messages
- 34,601
I think just its wrong to intentionally and inaccurately attribute powers to psychology and the mind that, in reality, people don't have and can't have.
Have any examples of DB doing this?
Have any examples of DB doing this?
davidhorman
Muse
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2001
- Messages
- 991
thaiboxerken said:
None of these are proof, but they quack like a duck:
"Psychologically" divining which hand a subject will be waving over yours while a white-coated, clipboard-carrying "scientist" looks on from the side?
Appearing to "psychologically empower" someone with the ability to stop a "random stranger" in the street remotely, and commanding them to turn around?
Claiming to use your incredible psychological powers to avoid plugging your brain with a bullet, only to have the local police tell everyone that you told them how you were going to do it and they were satisfied that you were never in any danger whatsoever?
One I remembered just today: DB crossed an assault course of broken glass, barbed wire and other things-you-wouldn't-like-to-step-on by listening to one person answering yes or no (either truthfully or falsely) to his questions. Then at the end, he appeared to put his life on the line with only a 1 in 3 chance of not dying, but falling 6 feet on to what would be either a crash mat or a concrete floor, all on the basis of this guy's tone of voice. DB is neither hyper-intelligent enough nor stupid enough to do that for real.
I had another think about the comparison between DB and mediums. What if NLP (neuro-linguistic programming, one of DB's buzzwords) became the Next Big Thing? Next thing you know, people aren't consulting psychics any more, that's not scientific, they're consulting these neo-psychologists who claim they can persuade you to draw a picture of an elephant with a Jedi mind trick, when actually, it's bullsh!t. Oh sure, it's for entertainment purposes only - but then that's the disclaimer on John Edward's show too.
The above situation is supposed to be entirely hypothetical and I can't really see it happening - but then I'd probably think the same about TV psychics if they were a new phenomena.
David
Interesting Ian
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2004
- Messages
- 7,675
Clancie said:
Yes absolutely. I entirely agree.
Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Nap, interrupted.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2001
- Messages
- 19,141
He does? Are you sure? Maybe he's just deluded.
Here is Brown's Web site. Sounds to me as if he's leaving the door open for just about any sort of trick:
http://www.derrenbrown.co.uk/
~~ Paul
Tanja
Comfortably Numb
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2003
- Messages
- 3,339
davidhorman said:
I agree with you, David, I think I mentioned the broken glass and wire trick in another thread a month or so ago. I am convinced that he either could see through the blindfold, or was fed the information in some other way.
I argued his tricks with a couple of people who were convinced you really can learn to use psychology to hear with such certainty if someone is lying, or to predict which number they will choose etc. I probably have less illusions of what you can do with psychology as I am a psychologist myself. And it is true that most people who I discussed Derren Brown with DO believe him when he says that he is reading the tone of his voice. But then some people do believe that David Copperfield made the Statue of Liberty dissapear, or that the assistant is cut in half, or that the magician is really handcuffed in escape tricks. So I maintain that it is part of the magician's trade to deceive the audience in order to awe and entertain them even more. To me personally magic tricks became more interesting rather than less interesting since I learned how some of them ae done.
(By the way I would really really like to know how they substitute envelopes)
Beancounter
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- May 12, 2004
- Messages
- 418
Originally posted by Ian:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Clancie
I think just its wrong to intentionally and inaccurately attribute powers to psychology and the mind that, in reality, people don't have and can't have.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes absolutely. I entirely agree."
Ian, why do you entirely agree that "people....can't have" psychological powers as described by Clancie and yet you make a massive song and dance about the fact that you are so open minded about mediums and sh!t on anyone who suggests that they can't contact the dead.
Consistency, please.
Incidently, I do agree that if a magician (or whatever you want to call them) explicitly claims that they do not use stooges, then to do so is a different "lie" than the misdirection that all stage magicians use. IMO this would be a "I want my money back" situation.
However, sleight of hand could be "psychological" as the magician is tricking your mind into believeing something that did not happen. Whether doing this by words, hand or some other form of suggestion seems to be largely irrelevant.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Clancie
I think just its wrong to intentionally and inaccurately attribute powers to psychology and the mind that, in reality, people don't have and can't have.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes absolutely. I entirely agree."
Ian, why do you entirely agree that "people....can't have" psychological powers as described by Clancie and yet you make a massive song and dance about the fact that you are so open minded about mediums and sh!t on anyone who suggests that they can't contact the dead.
Consistency, please.
Incidently, I do agree that if a magician (or whatever you want to call them) explicitly claims that they do not use stooges, then to do so is a different "lie" than the misdirection that all stage magicians use. IMO this would be a "I want my money back" situation.
However, sleight of hand could be "psychological" as the magician is tricking your mind into believeing something that did not happen. Whether doing this by words, hand or some other form of suggestion seems to be largely irrelevant.
Clancie said:
He is an entertainer - how can he be said to be cheating us by entertaining us?
I gave an example before - does an actor cheat the audience by having a fake tear? According to your reasoning he does.
How do you describe what most magicians do?
They use their knowledge of how the mind works, what people will look at, what will distract someone’s attention and what will make them suggestible to ensure they can successfully misdirect us. They make sure by using their knowledge of the mind that we don’t look at the “right” things and spot their quite often simple tricks. How this is anything but applied psychology I don’t know. By your reasoning all magicians are guilty of “cheating” us since they don’t tell us at the beginning that this trick is done using psychological techniques, a trapdoor and a mirror.
(Edited to add.)
Where does DB tell us he is not cheating?
(Edited because I don't think amny magicians use woks.)
davidhorman said:
Have you got the words he used when he described the trick to the participants and to the TV audience? (I should have the show somewhere as mpegs but I'm being lazy.) I've noticed often in his patter he will talk about "psychology" but then when he describes his trick he becomes as careful as Paul Daniel's ever was in setting up the situation.
Remember his job as an entertainer is to keep us guessing, to misdirect us and then to trick us, that is what he is paid to do.
davidhorman said:
I've not seen this one yet. Again what are the actual words he used? He often starts with an anecdote about the "mind" and then moves into the trick patter, talking and distracting the participant and the audience. That you connect the two is part of his misdirection. He doesn't want you to be looking for the flag that went up.
davidhorman said:
You mean when you've seen a magician catch a bullet in her teeth that it was cheating to know she was never in any danger, that it was all a trick?
With all the regulations we have today do you rally think a theatre would allow a magician to have a gun loaded with real ammunition that could be fired into the audience. That hasn't been true for many decades.
So far all you have mentioned is the same as all magicians do. I've not seen you put forward any behaviour that I haven't seen other magicians doing.
I just don’t understand why Derren Brown is a cheat but David Copperfield and Ali Bongo aren’t.
davidhorman said:
What you are saying seems to be that it is wrong that an entertainer uses some spiel to entertain me just because it could be used by some unscrupulous person to fraud or manipulate someone?
To me this is bordering on real "Big Brother" censorship and control. I know you are not saying he shouldn’t be allowed on TV but the reasoning that certain concepts, certain wording and so on shouldn’t be used to create entertainment well that really is Orwell’s Big Brother.
Unethical people have preyed on other people since, I suspect, the dawn of humans.
(Edited for bits.)
My two pennies worth...
IMO If Derren Brown claims not to use stooges or camera tricks to achieve his results and does so, then this is cheating.
IMO If Derren Brown claims to be able to use his "mentalist powers" to detemine the name of an audience member's dog and in fact he used metiuculous research then this is not cheating (though it is a little disappointing)
IMO if Derren Brown claims that he was able to predict the picture of the bear becuase of an elaborate set-up and instead it was down to a small camera in the ceiling the then this is not cheating (though it is a little sneaky)
IMO If Derren Brown claims not to use stooges or camera tricks to achieve his results and does so, then this is cheating.
IMO If Derren Brown claims to be able to use his "mentalist powers" to detemine the name of an audience member's dog and in fact he used metiuculous research then this is not cheating (though it is a little disappointing)
IMO if Derren Brown claims that he was able to predict the picture of the bear becuase of an elaborate set-up and instead it was down to a small camera in the ceiling the then this is not cheating (though it is a little sneaky)
davidhorman
Muse
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2001
- Messages
- 991
That was aimed at Clancie, but since we have a similar standpoint on DB I'll throw my 2p in. Does the actor cheat the audience in this case? No. But if you switch to the commentary and the actor tells you how he made himself cry by thinking about all the starving children in Africa he does so much charity work for, then yes.
If they swear blind that they're using the power of unagi and they've trained for seven years in a Tibetan monastery to heighten their senses? Yup.
David