Montague Keen
- Thread starter arcticpenguin
- Start date
I asked the questions before T'ai Chi dropped by.
trvlr2
Muse
*Ahem* Namecalling probably doesn't cause people to change beliefs,IMHO. Neither does a rational presentation of fact.
Satire may cause people to examine a closely held belief ,by holding the belief up to ridicule, which IS the dfinition of satire.
Nitpicking is a waste of time.
Comments about Fleming, Pasteur, Curie: those data, while old, are provable today.
Faith seems to involve giving up rationality.
Please don't shoot me, I'm just telling what the voices say!
Satire may cause people to examine a closely held belief ,by holding the belief up to ridicule, which IS the dfinition of satire.
Nitpicking is a waste of time.
Comments about Fleming, Pasteur, Curie: those data, while old, are provable today.
Faith seems to involve giving up rationality.
Please don't shoot me, I'm just telling what the voices say!
Well, we know you do. Still got your database of everything they've said?
Perhaps instead of debating this amongst yourselves, you might ask a believer or a former believer what works best. I'm somewhere in between.
My answer would be that Pyrrho is completely right. Name-calling, ridiculing, sneering, etc. is never the way to engage with someone. That is, if your goal is to get them to think a different way. It's always helpful to remember that many of these people have suffered recent losses, so kindness and gentleness should be in order.
Of course, if your goal is just to turn off the people you're trying to debate, then by all means adopt the Claus/Cantata style!
BTW, my favorite medium these days is Shirley Ghostman.
I believe it is possible, even likely given my experiences, but I'm not fully convinced. I've also come to realize it is currently impossible to prove such phenomenon if it does exist; therefore, I no longer spend time thinking about it. It made for an interesting couple of years, and given that I was grieving and not interested in anything else, it was time well spent.
Nothing wrong with being direct, I just didn't find you to be very nice. Like I said, it depends on your goal. If it's to try to change my mind, then your style doesn't work well.
I forgot to add to my above post: also try to show some respect for people's experiences. You may think they are a load of crap, but they are important to us. I still honor mine. If you start by completely dismissing and ridiculing them, you're not going to get anywhere.
I wasn't necessarily referring to you on that one. Just putting it out to skeptics in general, as I've seen many that immediately ridicule someone's experience and their interpretation of it.
As for proving mediumship, I probably should have said "extremely difficult", not "impossible". Reason being that mediumship, if it exists, clearly doesn't bring through such highly specific information that one can determine it can only come from spirit. That is my main frustration with mediumship and why I eventually lost interest. If mediumship is real, it is quite imperfect, and it's really up to the sitter to decide if they are getting messages and information from deceased loved ones.
I think that there could be good studies where people claiming to be authentic mediums and admitted cold readers give readings to the same sitter and they are rated. The ratings should be higher for the authentic mediums. If they are, then I think there's something to it and perhaps other forms of testing could be designed. If they aren't, then mediumship is either bogus or indistinguishable from cold reading and therefore useless.
Anyway, I just dropped by to give my two cents on how best to engage with believers. I don't have a lot of interest in discussing mediumship anymore--I've moved on. Do check out "High Spirits with Shirley Ghostman" on BBC America if you get a chance.
Wow. A couple surprises here in Commentary Issue land, a subforum I must ashamedely admit to rarely visiting.
First, to see a topic on Montague Keen. Then it turns out to be from 2003 and has been bumped.
You may be interested in this article about that "validation".
The second surprise was to see posts from RC! Holy smokes!
How the hell are ya, RC? A damn fine and exceptional pleasure to see you here again.
First, to see a topic on Montague Keen. Then it turns out to be from 2003 and has been bumped.
You may be interested in this article about that "validation".
The second surprise was to see posts from RC! Holy smokes!
How the hell are ya, RC? A damn fine and exceptional pleasure to see you here again.
Hey there, Luke! It's great to see you as well. I know, it looks like I've been lurking for years, just waiting to pounce when Claus mentioned neofight, etc., but I was actually alerted to this thread by someone you all don't know.
I'm doing quite well and spend most of my online time arguing about the best Stevie Nicks song with other nuts. I hope you and the family are well...
My family and I are doing very well, thanks.
I hope this means you will be around here regularly again.
I'd have to go with "Stop Draggin' My Heart Around", but really any Stevie Nicks song is a good song. ETA: I'm probably the only person here who ever saw the movie "Streets of Fire" but there was a song in there called "Sorcerer" which had Stevie Nicks on backup, not lead, so I don't know if it counts if I say that is my favorite Stevie Nicks tune.
Last edited:
Well, before this goes further, let me just add that a lot of cultures do not hold spirits to be highly intelligent. The Greeks referred to them them shades, and they weren't the only one. Mediumship then, would entirely depend on the strength of the spirit in question. Then of course, you have the issue of how does a person jettison a spirit in the first place, and continue on, which brings you to a form of vitalism. It could be concluded then, that both people, the medium in question, and the spirit, would require a lot of vital power in order to have anything resembling an observable encounter. Just my take on it anyway.
[Admin: Please delete the other dodgy formatted post. Didn't catch it in time..]
LOL Claus! I'm glad to see that you are well and still posting over here. And still invoking the names of the 3 Gorgons no less. When I heard that, I couldn't resist coming back here to say hello.
Oh, and just for the record, Claus, those "heaps of evidence" you refer to are all pretty much in your own mind. As much as you won't like hearing this, neither you, nor anyone else that I came across, has ever come close to replicating what John Edward does, and the one test that Lurker administered to believers like myself on the JE board over at TVTalkshows, demonstrated that, given enough of a sample, I can tell the difference between the specific, meaningful type of information that a JE can produce, and the vague, hit and miss guesswork that a cold-reader throws out there, hoping to get lucky. I know. I know. John Edward has just had a lot more practice. Right! lol
But I didn't come here to debate mediumship with you, Claus/Cantata. Like my good friend, RC, I have pretty much moved on from the topic, and nowadays I mostly debate politics. I just wanted to say "hi" to you, and to tell you that back in the day, I even enjoyed our little verbal jousting.....for the most part. You are quite the character. Of course, after reading your exchanges with pyrrho, I was reminded of how tedious your sophistry could become. I just don't have that kind of patience any more.
So, on that note, I will take my leave. Greetings to Luke T also, if he even remembers me. I wish you all well. Happy Springtime!....Jackie, aka neofight
It counts because Stevie wrote the song. Marilyn Martin recorded it for "Streets of Fire", and Stevie wound up recording it for her 2001 "Trouble In Shangri-La" album. It's one of my favorites also!
I'll definitely hang out here more often, Luke. I recall having some great discussions here on a variety of topics. In fact, if it weren't for this board, I wouldn't be the big bluegrass fan as I am today.
And hello Neo!
Well, look who is here... The proverbial believer.
First, you should inform the administrators that you have multiple accounts. That is a violation of Rule #7:
Odd that the old believers from TVTalkshows suddenly drop by, one by one. Steve Grenard, RC, then you. Will Clancie come back, too?
How about addressing this evidence of yours that John Edward can talk to the dead?
You are still a true believer: Quick with the claims, but scared of facing the music.
LOL Claus! I'm glad to see that you are well and still posting over here. And still invoking the names of the 3 Gorgons no less. When I heard that, I couldn't resist coming back here to say hello.
First, you should inform the administrators that you have multiple accounts. That is a violation of Rule #7:
Odd that the old believers from TVTalkshows suddenly drop by, one by one. Steve Grenard, RC, then you. Will Clancie come back, too?
Oh, and just for the record, Claus, those "heaps of evidence" you refer to are all pretty much in your own mind. As much as you won't like hearing this, neither you, nor anyone else that I came across, has ever come close to replicating what John Edward does, and the one test that Lurker administered to believers like myself on the JE board over at TVTalkshows, demonstrated that, given enough of a sample, I can tell the difference between the specific, meaningful type of information that a JE can produce, and the vague, hit and miss guesswork that a cold-reader throws out there, hoping to get lucky. I know. I know. John Edward has just had a lot more practice. Right! lol
How about addressing this evidence of yours that John Edward can talk to the dead?
But I didn't come here to debate mediumship with you, Claus/Cantata. Like my good friend, RC, I have pretty much moved on from the topic, and nowadays I mostly debate politics. I just wanted to say "hi" to you, and to tell you that back in the day, I even enjoyed our little verbal jousting.....for the most part. You are quite the character. Of course, after reading your exchanges with pyrrho, I was reminded of how tedious your sophistry could become. I just don't have that kind of patience any more.
So, on that note, I will take my leave. Greetings to Luke T also, if he even remembers me. I wish you all well. Happy Springtime!....Jackie, aka neofight
You are still a true believer: Quick with the claims, but scared of facing the music.
NoZed Avenger
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2002
- Messages
- 11,286
This just in:
Montague Keen still dead.
Updates will follow as events warrant.
Montague Keen still dead.
Updates will follow as events warrant.
In whose opinion? I guess you've never seen Kreskin? You've never watched a cold-reader?
John Edward can be visibly observed cold-reading people, and what sometimes looks like a bit of hot-reading as well. It is established that he edits his shows to remove the 'misses' to some extent, that he asks for history of his audience, etc.
Claiming that "nobody has ever come close ..." is going to be hard to support. Would you please mind showing some evidence for that that arises out of something beyond your own mind?
He also edited to remove many of the hits. You'd see this when he did a follow-up with people who were read and would show more of the original reading. I was always surprised that some good hits had been edited out.
And what you do mean about asking for the history of his audience? Those who got tickets to be in the Crossing Over audience were not asked about their history. Nor are any of those who go to his seminars.
I lean towards thinking JE is a fake, but it has always annoyed me when people make claims that aren't true. Why not just focus on what actually has been established?
Why would you go after Neo for making a strong claim without supporting evidence when you are doing the exact same thing? Shouldn't the debate rules be the same on both sides?