Vision From Feeling

[desertgal]

It is this one claim that leads me to believe that more than being delusional, you're a compulsive liar.

No, it isn't that simple. She IS a compulsive liar, but not intentionally. It's the nature of a delusional disorder. In her mind, fiction becomes fact. "I have thought it, so, therefore, it must be." Unfortunately, as you've seen, it is also impossible for her to accept any logical and reasonable arguments against her belief in her "facts".

 

[Ashles]

UncaYimmy, I've sent you PM's about wanting to speak with you alone. I am typing up the documents for the study and would love to have a chance to speak with you. I'll find an online chat room for us from which we can copy the discussion and make it available for all those curious Forum members.

And why not just use the moderated thread created for that exact purpose?

Oh yes the usual overcomplication and obfuscation.

This thread should be published as a textbook for standard evasive claimant behaviour. It's got the lot.

 

[Ashles]

Ah, I love to see you guys talk amongst yourselves so nicely and answer each others' questions.
That's right, annihilate each other engage in productive conversation. Keep up the good work, while I've snuck away to work on arranging the study.

I think this post says a lot about Anita's wishful thinking.

She would love everyone here to be a little more divided about her claim.
Unfortunately everyone seems to be pretty much in complete agreement.
(Of course that won't in any way make Anita any more objectively critical of her own claim.)

I'm also totally baffled why Anita is giving this new 'study' such a build up. Does she still not understand it adds absolutely no more weight to her claim than the other anecdotes?
(Unless of course her new study 'disproves' her ability to herself... Oh I'm such a kidder )

 

[Moochie]

Well, I don't know. I sometimes think I'm an uber-skeptic, in that I haven't believed a word of what "Anita's" written. The only reason I keep reading is because the writer writes well, and has exhibited a measure of self-restraint when answering critics that surpasses what we usually see and expect. "Anita" deserves kudos just for that.

As for armchair psychiatric diagnostics -- I'm loath to make them at the best of times, and here I'm certain that the diagnoses that have been proffered are incorrect.

I don't know what "Anita's" up to. That also makes continuing to read interesting.

All we really have thus far are the writings. Is there any corroboration -- I mean real corroboration for anything that's been claimed? I don't have anything. Therefore I treat the entire exercise as a piece of speculative fiction, designed to, perhaps among other things, see how skeptical skeptics really are.


M.

 

[Locknar]

My claim that peanut oil is unusual is an absolutely correct statement... <snip>

First, you were wrong. Period. Peanut oil is sold in three gallon containers at Wal Mart, so obviously it cannot be unusual.

Using this as one of countless examples, it highlights a systemic problem in that VFF refuses to admit she is wrong about anything.

Stop trying to convince us that what you have presented is worthy of investigating. It's not. Seriously. We have explained all of the other things should have done already that would have kept you from reaching this point. I refuse to go through them again.

Truth is, not one person here has expressed any inkling that your abilities have a remote chance of being real. The only reason that I, for one, want to see you get tested is to prove you wrong in the hopes that you will learn from this experience.

I speak for many when I say we just want you to see what we already know with a practical certainty: You are not special. You are but one of many who have believed themselves to have a unique, never before seen abilities who, through a lack of critical thinking and with a touch of narcissism, refused to admit the truth.

Harsh? Yes. Honest. Yes.

Well said.

 

[Ashles]

Well, I don't know. I sometimes think I'm an uber-skeptic, in that I haven't believed a word of what "Anita's" written. The only reason I keep reading is because the writer writes well, and has exhibited a measure of self-restraint when answering critics that surpasses what we usually see and expect. "Anita" deserves kudos just for that.

I read it differently than that. In my opinion the more discussion (of any sort) surrounding her claim the more it remains, to Anita, a live and valid project.
There is a lot to be said for those who think we should stop discussing this and feeding the thread until there is actually something new to discuss. but there are just so many odd things to respond to...

As for armchair psychiatric diagnostics -- I'm loath to make them at the best of times, and here I'm certain that the diagnoses that have been proffered are incorrect.

Agreed 100% - I think there is little to be gained from attempting to ascribe complex psychological disorders to somebody simply from this thread.
Even if someone were actually delusional, posting "You're delusional" on an internet thread is unlikely to have any useful impact on them. Because the person is... delusional and probably doesn't think they are delusional.
(Not that I'm saying Anita is.)

Let's all (and I include myself here) try to take a step back and only focus on things that can actually be properly, independently, tested and how they might be tested.
And for Anita this means that any 'ability' that you describe that is too weak or unreliable to actually be tested is probably not really of any use mentioning at this stage. If you can't test it then you can't really have any particular confidence it is real as opposed to guessing, chance, illusion, incorrect recall, confirmation bias etc.

One question - how reliable is the sensation perceived from an image 'ability'? (The one decribed with the marajuana image from the electron microscope).
Is that good enough to test?
Do they have to be microscopic images or would any images do?

 

[Sideroxylon]

It’s true that we don’t know all there is to know about this amazing world but let’s face it this is all pretty silly stuff. Makes me wonder if sceptics should play the game in such cases.

 

[Locknar]

One question - how reliable is the sensation perceived from an image 'ability'? (The one decribed with the marajuana image from the electron microscope).
Is that good enough to test?
Do they have to be microscopic images or would any images do?

BOLD added by Locknar

Given the multitude of VFF claims that have been discussed testing wise I'm not sure adding yet another testing scenario is a wise course of action.

 

[Agatha]

Well, who would have thought it, it's not a unique ability - someone has posted a comment on VfF's guestbook with the homepage http://thedoctorandthepsychic.com/

Only this woman diagnoses from handprints, and apparently has undergone "some of the first scientifically controlled experiments involving psychic medical diagnosis".

There is, apparently, no limit to what credulous people, even educated and science-trained people, will believe.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Well, who would have thought it, it's not a unique ability - someone has posted a comment on VfF's guestbook with the homepage http://thedoctorandthepsychic.com/

Only this woman diagnoses from handprints, and apparently has undergone "some of the first scientifically controlled experiments involving psychic medical diagnosis".

There is, apparently, no limit to what credulous people, even educated and science-trained people, will believe.

I think her Marvelesque origin story gives here one up though:

The true story of an Illinois housewife who is struck by lightning, and soon afterward discovers that she has psychic abilities.

 

[Jonquill]

Agatha - and Natasha Demika http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Natasha_Demkina

 

[Agatha]

They are everywhere! Well, I for one welcome our psychic-diagnosing overlords.

Seriously, VfF, what the difference between your apparent ability, and the apparent ability of a cold reader? Everything you have told us, including the anecdotes, can be accounted for by cold reading.

 

[Ashles]

Given the multitude of VFF claims that have been discussed testing wise I'm not sure adding yet another testing scenario is a wise course of action.

I seems this is one that could be tested here on the forum.

But I have a strange hunch that for some reason it won't one of the ones strong enough to actually be testable.

 

[Ashles]

Well, who would have thought it, it's not a unique ability - someone has posted a comment on VfF's guestbook with the homepage http://thedoctorandthepsychic.com/

Only this woman diagnoses from handprints, and apparently has undergone "some of the first scientifically controlled experiments involving psychic medical diagnosis".

There is, apparently, no limit to what credulous people, even educated and science-trained people, will believe.

Wow, guess we should go easy on Anita.
This doctor hasn't been able to generate any interest or independent verification after three decades with this "plus-sized, Christian housewife".

 

[Akhenaten]

Slightly puzzled. You addressing VfF or me?

Oh geez Mate, not you. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[Moochie]

well, who would have thought it, it's not a unique ability - someone has posted a comment on vff's guestbook with the homepage http://thedoctorandthepsychic.com/

only this woman diagnoses from handprints, and apparently has undergone "some of the first scientifically controlled experiments involving psychic medical diagnosis".

There is, apparently, no limit to what credulous people, even educated and science-trained people, will believe.

I like how Dr. Curry maintained a "scholarly skepticism"...




M.

ETA: This is weird -- I type a colon with a capital d and it comes out as colon and lowercase d. Ditto with my initial -- I type it capital m and it comes out lowercase. Is this a glitch in the forum software?

 

[Moochie]

Fifth time lucky, but how strange?


M.

 

[Ashles]

Fifth time lucky, but how strange?

I wonder if Anita will be claiming responsibility and another new ability?

 

[Moochie]

I wonder if Anita will be claiming responsibility and another new ability?

Yikes! I've been psychically molested!


M.

 

[desertgal]

As for armchair psychiatric diagnostics -- I'm loath to make them at the best of times, and here I'm certain that the diagnoses that have been proffered are incorrect.
M.

Well, here's the thing - I didn't offer a diagnosis. I offered an observation. You, though, in the above statement, ARE offering an armchair diagnosis. You are certain that any observations of a personality disorder and/or psychiatric problems are incorrect. You are diagnosing Anita to be free of any disorder.

Not arguing with you - just curious as to why you would immediately do something you just advised against.

Even if someone were actually delusional, posting "You're delusional" on an internet thread is unlikely to have any useful impact on them. Because the person is... delusional and probably doesn't think they are delusional.

Probably not, but it is my opinion, and I am entitled to it. And I have not made an armchair diagnosis of a personality disorder. I've said that, speaking from my point of view as someone with a personality disorder, I've observed some marked similarities in Anita's thousands of words, and my belief that she is delusional is not unfounded. Period. It's an observation, not a diagnosis.

Her words, if true, fit the definition of delusional, and she would benefit from psychiatric help. If they are deliberate lies, then, obviously, not all her dogs are barking, and she would also benefit from psychiatric help. Either way, encouraging her to seek psychiatric help is not a bad thing, nor is it wrong.