« At the end of its string? | Main | For whom the bell Tolles »

Comments

This one hits close to home.

I remember deciding that Tolle wasn't worth reading because 1) I hate the whole guru thing and 2) I thought his publicity photo on the book cover was funny-looking with a weak chin.

I'm glad I overcame those prejudices, because 1) Tolle doesn't do the "guru" thing anyway and 2) is a ridiculous reason, straight out of the ego's bag of tricks.

Well, in your ego's defense, the guy is kinda funny-looking.

It's the same on both sides of the aisle. I can't count the number of times that I've seen open-minded skeptics accused of being delibrately biased, closed-minded, et cetera. It's disheartening for someone like myself, who tries to view all sides of an issue impartially. A bit of civility on all sides of the parapsychology debate would certainly be welcome.

I agree that there is plenty of ego to go around. However, given the impressive accumulation of evidence for psi (some of which is now finding its way even into mainstream journals), I'm starting to think that "open-minded skepticism" on this subject is a bit of an oxymoron. It's (almost) like being an open-minded skeptic on the issue of the Earth being round ...

I can't commit myself to fully accept the existence of psi, primarily because of the replication problem and lack of a comprehensive theory. If someone were to come forward with even a provisional theory to predict the workings of psi, I'd be more convinced. However, at this point, the combination of what seems to be a random effect, (in that neither believers nor skeptics seem to get consistent results), and questions about whether psi is statistically proven, shed some doubt in my mind.

I don't dismiss the positive results obtained in research, though, as a) they are too prevalent to be simply cast aside, and b) I can't find grounds to dismiss all positive results. I'm not satisfied with the contention that it's merely methodological failures or statistical artefacts.

>I can't commit myself to fully accept the existence of psi, primarily because of the replication problem and lack of a comprehensive theory.

I did my best to address the issue of replication in my June 22 post "Repeat As Needed." As for theory - well, we still don't have a consensus on how gravity works, but no one doubts that it's a real phenomenon.

True, but there are a distinct lack of experiments where people have dropped things that fail to fall. ;)

I read your post from 22 June, and I agree with it, to an extent. However, I will point out that the statistical validity of psi varies, depending on whose meta-analysis you read.

The comments to this entry are closed.