The power of words.

[thaiboxerken]

It's amazing how simple words can really upset people or really bring to light how ridiculous a claim is. Paranormalists often claim people have psychic powers or can see the future and etc. They call these "gifts" or "abilities."

However, I call them superpowers. When I use the term "superpowers" while discussing these claims with them, they immediately take offense. Why? Is it because it shows how absurd their claim is? They often retort with "it's not a superpower and I didn't claim it was." However, what they describe IS a superpower, no matter what they want to call it. I have to wonder if it makes them feel silly when I use that term.

 

[phildonnia]

I read in Psychology Today (april 2006, pg 22) that "hypnosis" is slowly being replaced with "visualization" or "relaxation". This, apparently, to avoid the negative stereotypes of manchurian-candidate zombies.

Ironically, "visualization" doesn't work as well, since apparently, it helps for the patient to have certain predjudices regardint the procedure going in.

 

[cpolk]

It's amazing how simple words can really upset people or really bring to light how ridiculous a claim is. Paranormalists often claim people have psychic powers or can see the future and etc. They call these "gifts" or "abilities."

However, I call them superpowers. When I use the term "superpowers" while discussing these claims with them, they immediately take offense. Why? Is it because it shows how absurd their claim is? They often retort with "it's not a superpower and I didn't claim it was." However, what they describe IS a superpower, no matter what they want to call it. I have to wonder if it makes them feel silly when I use that term.

I believe it is the same reason we are getting into discussions of semantics in the consciousness/reality thread: people want to believe that what they have is divinely special.

Although "super-power" is special, it is not rooted in divinity. It sounds decidedly comic-book-ish; that is how it has become known in society, anyway. You are right, because the words themselves describe what it is. They are arguing about its social use rather than its definition.

 

[Tony]

It's amazing how simple words can really upset people or really bring to light how ridiculous a claim is. Paranormalists often claim people have psychic powers or can see the future and etc. They call these "gifts" or "abilities."

However, I call them superpowers. When I use the term "superpowers" while discussing these claims with them, they immediately take offense. Why? Is it because it shows how absurd their claim is? They often retort with "it's not a superpower and I didn't claim it was." However, what they describe IS a superpower, no matter what they want to call it. I have to wonder if it makes them feel silly when I use that term.

I can think of a few other words that get people all pissy.

"Myth" in place of "religion".

"Superstition" in place of "faith".

"Fraud" in place of "Pope"

“Gullible” in place of “faithful”.

"Toilet paper" in place of "Bible/Koran".

“Fanatic” in place of “devout”.

 

[thaiboxerken]

"More faithful" in place of "religious terrorist."

 

[Iacchus]

It's amazing how simple words can really upset people or really bring to light how ridiculous a claim is. Paranormalists often claim people have psychic powers or can see the future and etc. They call these "gifts" or "abilities."

While I may question how much of this is real, I don't doubt such things are possible. There are a lot of folks out there preying on other people's gullibility.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Yeah, people get upset when you refer to the miracles of Jesus as "magic" or "sorcery".

 

[Iacchus]

And if there is a resurrection, this is the only miracle that should suffice. Any other miracle would only allude to this.

 

[thaiboxerken]

WTF are you talking about, Iacchus?

 

[TragicMonkey]

WTF are you talking about, Iacchus?

Like the "understood 'you' " in English, there is no need to iterate this remark. It is taken for granted that it follows, universally, any Iacchus statement.

 

[T'ai Chi]

C.S. Lewis explains what Iaachus wrote about

 

[Mercutio]

C.S. Lewis explains what Iaachus wrote about

I thought it was Timothy Leary.

 

[Beerina]

And if there is a resurrection, this is the only miracle that should suffice. Any other miracle would only allude to this.

Except that within a few hundred years medical technology might very well be able to repair dead, i.e. greatly damaged cells, and thus resurrect people dead much longer than three days.

Life is an engineering problem, nothing more.

 

[Iacchus]

C.S. Lewis explains what Iaachus wrote about

Indeed.

 

[RandFan]

I thought it was Timothy Leary.

I saw the Moody Blues in the summer of 1995.

?

 

[T'ai Chi]

Indeed.

I read it in Miracles and thought C.S. Lewis explained it pretty well.

 

[David Swidler]

Don't many practitioners of these things claim anyone can do it?

 

[Mercutio]

Don't many practitioners of these things claim anyone can do it?

Depends. If they wish to charge you money to have them do it, it is something only a special person can do, and well worth paying for. If they wish to charge you money to teach you how to do it, it is something anyone can do, if only they learn from a qualified expert.

 

[Tricky]

Calling holy communion "ritualized cannibalism" seems to offend some Christians too.

 

[bluess]

A fairly decent woman at my office, who will talk about other religions' myths at the drop of a hat, got VERY offended when I said something about the Christian Easter myth. I guess I shouldn't have said anything when she'd just come back from church with the ashes on her forehead....