Supernatural can never be "proved" to exist (Split from Hypothetical Million...)

[GzuzKryzt]

...
If the transmitter and receiver are attuned to each other it does not matter where they are.
Further, the transmitter does not have to 'go' anywhere for the receiver to register the character of the transmission, or for the transmitter to register the reception of its transmission.
...

...
2...It can only be demonstrated and experienced at its own level: Something outside the scope of the MDC.

It's a very simple question, maatorc: Can you, will you back this up with anything? No or yes?

The process of demonstrating this is deemed to be impossible and characterized as fraud and deception by the JREF.

You are evading. Can you, will you back this up with anything? No or yes? This being:

...
If the transmitter and receiver are attuned to each other it does not matter where they are.
Further, the transmitter does not have to 'go' anywhere for the receiver to register the character of the transmission, or for the transmitter to register the reception of its transmission.
...

 

[maatorc]

You are evading. Can you, will you back this up with anything? No or yes? This being:

Originally Posted by maatorc View Post ...
If the transmitter and receiver are attuned to each other it does not matter where they are. Further, the transmitter does not have to 'go' anywhere for the receiver to register the character of the transmission, or for the transmitter to register the reception of its transmission....

Exactly what form would this have to take?

 

[maatorc]

OK, get two people who don't believe in "reductionist thinking," two folks who are "attuned" to each other. Neither needs to be a skeptic or affiliated with JREF. Put the two people in separate rooms, or same room with a curtain between them. Someone rolls a pair of dice. Say they come up 12. So the transmitter transmits the number 12 to the other person. The other person writes the number down. I can't speak for JREF, but I'll bet they'd go for something like that. Sound good, Maatorc?

If the JREF is willing to pay on what the 'other person' writes down, that is on something once removed from the actual transmission procedure, I see no problem.
What the 'other person' writes down does not actually prove or demonstrate a transmission, but if it is acceptable under the rules, so be it.

 

[arthwollipot]

No, the mechanics of the demonstration are NOT the process.
The process of any psychic event is the actual psychic-mental action of performing it, which mental action is not in itself materially measurable, as distinct from its effects which may be observable and measurable.

So although we might be able to measure a demonstration, that would have no relation to whether the psychic projection actually took place?

Say I gave the projector the word "green".
The projector sends the word "green" to the receiver.
The receiver says "I received 'Thursday'".

This does not demonstrate whether psychic projection took place or not, because it is only an effect - a mechanic of the demonstration. Okay, so...

Say I gave the projector the word "green".
The projector sends the word "green" to the receiver.
The receiver says "I received 'green'".

This still does not demonstrate that the psychic projection actually took place, because it is still only an effect - a mechanic of the demonstration.

If I understand you correctly (and I'm quite sure I don't), you're saying that psychic projection can take place even though it cannot be demonstrated. As other posters have said - if it can't be demonstrated, how can we be sure that it takes place? It sounds to me like you're just making up excuses not to apply for the MDC.

I'm having some trouble following what you're trying to say, maatorc, so please tell me if this assessment is correct, and if not, where I have gone wrong.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

Exactly what form would this have to take?

You made the statement.
You decide about the form, maatorc.

I propose a verifiable documentation, e.g. a published written piece would do.

 

[Gr8wight]

If the JREF is willing to pay on what the 'other person' writes down, that is on something once removed from the actual transmission procedure, I see no problem.
What the 'other person' writes down does not actually prove or demonstrate a transmission, but if it is acceptable under the rules, so be it.

You have said yourself that it is impossible to prove a transmission. What we are looking for is evidence of the result of a transmission. A successful result of the transmission would be the receiver being in possession of information he previously did not have. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?

 

[jimtron]

Maatorc:

What the 'other person' writes down does not actually prove or demonstrate a transmission...

So how do you know that this is real? What makes you convinced that phenomena like this are real? Do you see what we're getting at?

1: a claim is made that RV (or some other paranormal ability) is possible
2: we're skeptical, so we ask for evidence, and propose a test
3: we're told that the test we propose wouldn't actually demonstrate the paranormal ability, but we're not given a better alternative
4: we remain skeptical, and wonder, if there's no way to demonstrate the paranormal ability, how anyone knows it really exists

However, I am still very interested in observing this test where two people attuned to each other can communicate a word or other information. Can you do this, or do you know someone who can do this? Regardless of whether you think this would prove a paranormal ability, it would nonetheless be impressive.

 

[maatorc]

.....So how do you know that this is real? What makes you convinced that phenomena like this are real? Do you see what we're getting at?......

There is one only way one can know it is real, and I have spelled it out many times.

 

[jimtron]

There is one only way one can know it is real, and I have spelled it out many times.

I must have missed it--would you mind concisely stating here what the one way is? Or tell me the numbers of the posts where you mentioned this, or at least the threads?

I would love to hear a concise, clear, specific explanation of the one way you can know if it's real.

 

[ben m]

Alexander Graham Bell: I can communicate via this arrangement of wires and magnets, I call it the "telephone".
Maatorc: You cannot prove that it works.
Bell: Sure I can. Make up a random sentence, I'll speak it into this end of the box, and my assistant Watson will receive it in the next building.
Maatorc: No. You don't understand at all.
arthwollipot: I'm skeptical, but let's see. Say, "Come here, Watson, I want you."
Bell (into box): "Come here, Watson, I want you".
(enter Watson)
Watson: I heard you say, "Come here, Watson, I want you", clear as a bell.
Maatorc: You can't prove that you did.
Bell: What? He just did; if he didn't hear it, he wouldn't have known what I said.
Maatorc: But you can't prove how he heard it; you have only shown a phenomenon.
arthwollipot (to Bell): I'd like to buy stock in your phenomenon, sir.
Maatorc: You're still not getting it. You are unable to show that this box does what you claim it does.
Bell (into box): Operator? Connect me to Bellevue, please.

 

[maatorc]

Alexander Graham Bell: I can communicate via this arrangement of wires and magnets, I call it the "telephone".
Maatorc: You cannot prove that it works.
Bell: Sure I can. Make up a random sentence, I'll speak it into this end of the box, and my assistant Watson will receive it in the next building.
Maatorc: No. You don't understand at all.
arthwollipot: I'm skeptical, but let's see. Say, "Come here, Watson, I want you."
Bell (into box): "Come here, Watson, I want you".
(enter Watson)
Watson: I heard you say, "Come here, Watson, I want you", clear as a bell.
Maatorc: You can't prove that you did.
Bell: What? He just did; if he didn't hear it, he wouldn't have known what I said.
Maatorc: But you can't prove how he heard it; you have only shown a phenomenon.
arthwollipot (to Bell): I'd like to buy stock in your phenomenon, sir.
Maatorc: You're still not getting it. You are unable to show that this box does what you claim it does.
Bell (into box): Operator? Connect me to Bellevue, please.

You're still not getting it.

 

[maatorc]

1...If I understand you correctly......you're saying that psychic projection can take place even though it cannot be demonstrated...
2...if it can't be demonstrated,...
3...how can we be sure that it takes place?...
4...It sounds to me like you're just making up excuses not to apply for the MDC.

1... You are nearly there. In itself psychic projection is a strictly mental event.
2... It cannot in itself, as a strictly mental event, just like an ordinary thought, be materially-physically measured.
3... The one only way to be sure it takes place is to be a participant in the actual mental process of the event.
4... The standard hang-up of this site: The inability to distinguish principles from personalities.

 

[jimtron]

Maatorc:

Would you mind responding to post #149?

 

[arthwollipot]

1... You are nearly there. In itself psychic projection is a strictly mental event.
2... It cannot in itself, as a strictly mental event, just like an ordinary thought, be materially-physically measured.
3... The one only way to be sure it takes place is to be a participant in the actual mental process of the event.
4... The standard hang-up of this site: The inability to distinguish principles from personalities.

So why won't you accept it when Watson says "I heard you say 'come here Watson, I want you'"? Can the recipient of the mental event ever report to others that they have been the recipient? Why or why not?

 

[AkuManiMani]

I can think of nothing more inexplicable than existence itself.

The search for "God"

The search for "Truth"

The search for a theory of "everything"

They are all a search for the fundament -- an ultimate root of all things. This is as logically possible as catching the horizon.

There is no real distinction between "natural" and "supernatural". What we call the "natural" is the tentative knowns of the greater unknowns of the "supernatural".

 

[AkuManiMani]

1... You are nearly there. In itself psychic projection is a strictly mental event.

Which means...?

2... It cannot in itself, as a strictly mental event, just like an ordinary thought, be materially-physically measured.

Thats not necessarily true. Mental and "physical" events are both part of reality and, therefore, have a common 'cause or overlap. If this were not true there would be no way for our intentions to move our bodies. The real question is whether or not the events you describe have an objective reality beyond misperception and -- if so -- do we currently have the technological means of measuring it. If we do not it is still, in principle, possible to measure it -- tho such measurement may be beyond our current skills.

If something cannot be seen, smelt, touched, heard or tasted and cannot be detected with any method currently known and has no known effect in or on the real world.

What is the difference between that and nothing at all?

.

Interestingly enough, that argument is identical the the arguments of the logical positivist movement that disputed and defamed the existence of atoms. Their campaign against the theory of atoms was so brutal and vociferous that it quite likely contributed to driving Ludwig Boltzmann to suicide.

Total reliance on crude rule-of-thumb epistemology is a scientific handicap, imo.

 

[maatorc]

Maatorc: Would you mind responding to post #149?

See answer 3 in post 152.

 

[maatorc]

......There is no real distinction between "natural" and "supernatural". What we call the "natural" is the tentative knowns of the greater unknowns of the "supernatural".

Agree, and go further: There is nothing super beyond the natural.

 

[maatorc]

Originally Posted by maatorc View Post
You are nearly there. In itself psychic projection is a strictly mental event.

Which means...? ......

That consciousness is a universal energy embracing phenomenal and noumenal reality, and not merely a function of material brain chemistry.

 

[Gr8wight]

Note that maatorc is studiously ignoring my questions. He cannot honestly and safely answer those without jeopardizing his entire argument, so he flat out ignores them.