Hypothetical question for Sceptics

[Waning Moon Conrad]

If you experienced telepathy, both receiving and sending and it was so very specific as to make coincidence highly implausible, would your position regarding non-belief in the possibility of psychic phenomena and/or spirituality change?

I do mean highly implausible. Very, very, extremely, highly, astronomically-by-kiloparsecs implausible.

[Sarpedon]

Why, yes, once I ruled out hallucination. Just as I would reconsider christianity if I saw a priest's prayers causing someone to regrow a lost limb.

Whats your point?

[Plognark]

If you experienced telepathy, both receiving and sending and it was so very specific as to make coincidence highly implausible, would your position regarding non-belief in the possibility of psychic phenomena and/or spirituality change?

I do mean highly implausible. Very, very, extremely, highly, astronomically-by-kiloparsecs implausible.

It would have to be repeatable and testable by double blind methods. If it can do that, we're on to something.

[NZSkep]

same.
I would be convinced if I could repeat it under controlled conditions.
Otherwise it would be too difficult torule out cooincidence, or anyother factors e.g. theperson was whispering but thought they were thinking and i heard them.

[Betenoire]

It would have to be repeatable and testable by double blind methods. If it can do that, we're on to something.

And all means of physical interaction between me and the sender/receiver would have to be removed to confirm it was an "extrasensory" phenomenon.

[DNAReplicator]

If you experienced telepathy, both receiving and sending and it was so very specific as to make coincidence highly implausible, would your position regarding non-belief in the possibility of psychic phenomena and/or spirituality change?

I do mean highly implausible. Very, very, extremely, highly, astronomically-by-kiloparsecs implausible.

Most people have a very weak grasp of probablility, so my first assumption would be that the implausability would be grossly overstated.

But.....if it were that unlikley, and it was repeatable and testable.....then yes.

[David B]

And all means of physical interaction between me and the sender/receiver would have to be removed to confirm it was an "extrasensory" phenomenon.

And other people would have to confirm that it was happening.

But basically - if anything is demonstrated to happen by methods that satisfy sceptical examination (including repeatability) , then the fact of that being demonstrated would have to be taken on board, the implications of it considered, and the mechanisms for it explored.

David B

[BioBeing]

If I could repeat it to my own satisfaction, using approriate controls.

If the person I was in telepathic communication with also reported exactly the same as I did.

If we could then get James Randi to devise a test for us and pass.

Then I would believe.

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't think it would prove it to me. The problem is that you can't rule out the high tech solution. Is it truly a psychic phenomenon or are we just not seeing the equipment that's doing it?

[ForensicAtheist]

Isn't the real purpose of the OP to ask people if they would be willing to change their beliefs if strong evidence was presented for something contrary to their original beliefs?

My answer is yes. I'm open to changing my views, opinions, and beliefs(or lack of beliefs) if strong evidence is presented.

[skepticalbip]

If you experienced telepathy, both receiving and sending and it was so very specific as to make coincidence highly implausible, would your position regarding non-belief in the possibility of psychic phenomena and/or spirituality change?
This question seems to me to be confusing two (or maybe three) very different things. A phenomena that can be demonstrated and tested is simply that - a real phenomena. How could anyone familiar with the scientific method not accept it as real (I can imagine the rush seeking grants to study it however)? I think you may need to explain how such a real phenomena (if it existed) has anything to do with psychic phenomena or spirituality.

[Godless Dave]

If you experienced telepathy, both receiving and sending and it was so very specific as to make coincidence highly implausible, would your position regarding non-belief in the possibility of psychic phenomena and/or spirituality change?

I do mean highly implausible. Very, very, extremely, highly, astronomically-by-kiloparsecs implausible.

My non-belief in psychic phenomena would change, but not my non-belief in spirituality. I would assume there was a scientific explanation for telepathy.

[epepke]

If you experienced telepathy, both receiving and sending and it was so very specific as to make coincidence highly implausible, would your position regarding non-belief in the possibility of psychic phenomena and/or spirituality change?

I do mean highly implausible. Very, very, extremely, highly, astronomically-by-kiloparsecs implausible.

You misunderstand skeptics, I think.

If I had evidence of telepathy, then there would be evidence for it, and it would move to the realm of science.

Would it affect my skepticism of anything else for which there is little or no good evidence? No.

Skepticism is about not believing in things for which there is little or no good evidence.

[youngalexander]

If you experienced telepathy, both receiving and sending and it was so very specific as to make coincidence highly implausible, would your position regarding non-belief in the possibility of psychic phenomena and/or spirituality change?
I suspect that I would be highly skeptical of such an experience. I saw my father's ghost once, clear as a bell, but there was a perfectly rational explanation.

As many others have sed, it would require extensive testing.

[Waning Moon Conrad]

This question seems to me to be confusing two (or maybe three) very different things. A phenomena that can be demonstrated and tested is simply that - a real phenomena. How could anyone familiar with the scientific method not accept it as real (I can imagine the rush seeking grants to study it however)? I think you may need to explain how such a real phenomena (if it existed) has anything to do with psychic phenomena or spirituality.

Isn't telepathy classified as a psychic phenomenon?

[David B]

Isn't telepathy classified as a psychic phenomenon?

I suppose that it is.

However, I also suppose that the idea of people being able to talk to each other across the Atlantic would have been thought of as supernatural a couple of hundred years ago.

Now it is done as a matter of course, through mechanisms which are understood.

If there were sufficient evidence that telepathy existed (which there ain't), then the mechanisms for it would be explored, and, should they be discovered, telepathy would be brought into the realm of the natural.

I very strongly doubt that this will happen.

Still - should such evidence emerge, then it would have to be taken seriously.

David B

[Waning Moon Conrad]

Thanks for your answers everyone.:wave:

[skepticalbip]

Isn't telepathy classified as a psychic phenomenon?It is now because it can not be tested. You changed it in your hypothetical question to something that could be tested so no longer psychic.

I find this difficult to answer because of the way the question was originally asked in the OP. I assumed from the the OP that the question was asked about a phenomena that could be demonstrated - If it can be demonstrated, it can be tested and understood (at least to some extent). My understanding of "psychic phenomena" is that it is all those claims of powers or phenomena that can not be tested by science. Maybe you could give me a better definition.

A phenomena that can be demonstrated and tested, even if it is not yet understood, does not fit my understanding of "psychic phenomena". For instance, say a group of primitive scientists have no idea about reading and writing. Someone claims to be able to pass information to a friend in a different building without calling to him. To test his claim, these scientists test the claim. He scribbles a test message on a scrap of paper which is delivered to his friend who reads it. The scientists are intrigued but can study the claim being demonstrated.

I think you are confusing the problem here. You have taken a claimed phenomena, telepathy, that is not demonstrable (so a claim of a psychic phenomena) and asked would we believe it if it were real and could be demonstrated. In other words, I would believe in flying pigs if someone would provide some of them for me to study - this doesn't mean that I believe there are flying pigs (unless and until someone shows me one).

[Waning Moon Conrad]

It is now because it can not be tested. You changed it in your hypothetical question to something that could be tested so no longer psychic.


My apologies. I didn't give enough care to framing the question and assumed that everyone (was telepathic:D ) would know precisely what I meant.

I'm actually not asking about repeatability or lab-testability.

I'm literally just asking in the sense of, if you experienced a few instances at various times but couldn't switch it on or off.

I was curious to know whether people in such an instance would take the possibility of telepathy seriously.

[Sven]

My apologies. I didn't give enough care to framing the question and assumed that everyone (was telepathic:D ) would know precisely what I meant.

I'm actually not asking about repeatability or lab-testability.

I'm literally just asking in the sense of, if you experienced a few instances at various times but couldn't switch it on or off.

I was curious to know whether people in such an instance would take the possibility of telepathy seriously.
I would take it seriously - but not as a paranormal phenomenon, but as something yet to be explained by science. One possible explanation would be that I'm becoming insane.

[David B]

My apologies. I didn't give enough care to framing the question and assumed that everyone (was telepathic:D ) would know precisely what I meant.

I'm actually not asking about repeatability or lab-testability.

I'm literally just asking in the sense of, if you experienced a few instances at various times but couldn't switch it on or off.

I was curious to know whether people in such an instance would take the possibility of telepathy seriously.

I suspect that most people at some points in their lives have experienced the phone ringing, and intuiting that it is the caller. Finding that memorable, but forgetting the times the intuition has been wrong, for an example.

Is that the sort of thing you mean?

There are all sorts of factors that can lead to people being genuinely mistaken about thinking that they have had a genuine telepathic experience.

I think you'd have to rule out all of them, to take the telepathy seriously, and, since telepathy is an extraordinary claim, you'd have to give the benefit of doubt to the possibility of being misled by a hidden persuader.

I hope you'll find this link useful.

http://skepdic.com/hiddenpersuaders.html

David B

[David Vestal]

If you experienced telepathy, both receiving and sending and it was so very specific as to make coincidence highly implausible, would your position regarding non-belief in the possibility of psychic phenomena and/or spirituality change?

I do mean highly implausible. Very, very, extremely, highly, astronomically-by-kiloparsecs implausible.

Yes, I'd believe in psychic phenomena. And claiming Randi's million dollars would be my very first course of action.

[Vicious Love]

I'm actually not asking about repeatability or lab-testability.

I'm literally just asking in the sense of, if you experienced a few instances at various times but couldn't switch it on or off.

If the simplest explanation were mind-to-mind contact by unknown mechanism, I would assume mind-to-mind contact by unknown mechanism, and try to figure out some way to make it repeatable or lab-testable and either falsify it or discern the mechanism.

I was curious to know whether people in such an instance would take the possibility of telepathy seriously.

Absolutely, after ruling out hallucination, coincidence, deception, and so on.

[untermensche]

Spirituality?

Not when dealing with living people.

What could spirits possibly have to do with it?

Whatever a spirit might be.

Show me something a spirit does, not a living human, and you have suggested the spiritual.

[Betenoire]

My apologies. I didn't give enough care to framing the question and assumed that everyone (was telepathic:D ) would know precisely what I meant.

I'm actually not asking about repeatability or lab-testability.

I'm literally just asking in the sense of, if you experienced a few instances at various times but couldn't switch it on or off.

I was curious to know whether people in such an instance would take the possibility of telepathy seriously.

I can actually speak from a similar experience on this:
I've had prophetic dreams, dreams that represented a few brief minutes of reality that I later found myself living through. It's "de ja vu", but not in the "I've been here before" sense, just the "I've dreamed this", and oh yeah I can remember exactly the morning I woke up from the dream when I dreamed this. Also, when I occasionally do remember one of these dreams upon waking (it's rare that I remember any dream) I can usually predict "I bet that's going to happen to me".
But I can't repeat the phenomenon at will, can't control it, and can't really describe a functional mechanism. It's not testable. It is, for all intents and purposes, mental masturbation, and I'm really not even willing to discard the usual explanation for de ja vu.
Plus, it's not like it's useful. I didn't dream about terrorists crashing planes into buildings or dead corpses buried in the woods. The worst thing I ever went through this process on was a fight with a couple of friends over the death penalty. Usually it's snippets of pointless conversations. Really, it just boils down to Jungian synchronicity of the most boring manifestation. Big whup.
Interestingly enough, the mood stabilizers I'm on have really cut back the frequency of these occurences.

[Matty]

My non-belief in psychic phenomena would change, but not my non-belief in spirituality. I would assume there was a scientific explanation for telepathy.

Exactly that. And i'd demand some pretty stringent retests to control for any non psychic communication (cheating!) , intentional or not.


Were you actually expecting many no's WMC?

[EvolvedAndygal]

If telepathy was demonstrated in many carefully done, controlled, experiments, then yes, I would change my beliefs about the existence of telepathy, however I would believe in a scientific natural explanation for it rather then a spiritual/mystical explanation.

[Waning Moon Conrad]

Exactly that. And i'd demand some pretty stringent retests to control for any non psychic communication (cheating!) , intentional or not.


Were you actually expecting many no's WMC?

For a moment I was wondering what the hell you meant by experiencing N.O's, then I looked again and read your question correctly. It's time I went to bed. My eyes are beginning to play silly tricks.

The amount of no's aren't really surprising.

[Waning Moon Conrad]

I suspect that most people at some points in their lives have experienced the phone ringing, and intuiting that it is the caller. Finding that memorable, but forgetting the times the intuition has been wrong, for an example.

Is that the sort of thing you mean?

Not really. My question refers to more blatant hypothetical examples that one might hear about from time to time from people you don't think are bullshitting.

The sort of thing where you might think of calling out to your mother who is upstairs and she actually answers. Or you hear her calling and go into her room and ask what she wants and she states that she didn't call out but thought of calling out to you. And where you really do know that you didn't call out vocally but really were only thinking of it and rehearsing it in your mind.

[David B]

Not really. My question refers to more blatant hypothetical examples that one might hear about from time to time from people you don't think are bullshitting.

The sort of thing where you might think of calling out to your mother who is upstairs and she actually answers. Or you hear her calling and go into her room and ask what she wants and she states that she didn't call out but thought of calling out to you. And where you really do know that you didn't call out vocally but really were only thinking of it and rehearsing it in your mind.

Hmm. a few of those hidden persuaders are actually relevant to that sort of thing.

Not least, http://skepdic.com/confirmbias.html

David B

[WWJD4aKlondikeBar]

If you experienced telepathy, both receiving and sending and it was so very specific as to make coincidence highly implausible, would your position regarding non-belief in the possibility of psychic phenomena and/or spirituality change?

I do mean highly implausible. Very, very, extremely, highly, astronomically-by-kiloparsecs implausible.

I already have. Of course, it involved a lot of drugs and my skeptic friends just made me admit that I was in a less-than-scientifically-verifiable environment. That doubt doesn't mean that I completely disbelieve the possibility of telepathy. As I've said before, there are a lot of things that we're nowhere near recognizing with science; a credit to the accomplishments of it.