If you read the article, the rules were only that both parties have to agree on a test and if someone passed the test they won the prize. There wasn’t a “gotcha” clause like “Oh since you did it it’s clearly allowed by physics and we don’t have to pay up!” So like if someone showed they had psychic powers sufficient to pass an agreed upon test it doesn’t matter if there’s a natural explanation for it, they would have still won the prize.
Well, in seriousness, and more interestingly, I’m not really willing to call supernatural powers real or fake, currently. There exist some stories I’ve come across, which are likely real, which contain absolutely unexplainable phenomenon. Just this morning, someone in a Discord I’m in (who wouldn’t just fake stories) was explaining how someone they knew had a psychotic break on psychedelics, and, in the ambulance, narrated the paramedics’ childhoods with disturbing accuracy. A trusted moderator of that space responded to my skepticism with “psychics absolutely exist, but the vast majority are just grifters”.
Note: Without getting into all the context, this moderator is not the kind of person to simply believe in conspiracy theories.
I used to be a Reddit atheist (ew), and I’ve gone from thinking I know everything, to being very serious about accepting different views–no matter how absurd. We’re unaware of so many more things than we’re aware of.
I’m of the opinion that if psychic abilities exist, they can not be on command. They might. They might not. I would rather be honest than claim to be factual–I don’t know.
Most of that is just mentalism, which is effective and useful but works off a psychological and stochastic approach but is absolutely explainable and not supernatural despite its applications in manipulating people. See: Jacob Wysocki in the one year later episode of game changer
A LOT of mentalism is stage magic, and has nothing to do with psychology. That’s part of the set dressing they’re trying to sell you, they’re just magicians as with a 21st century coat of paint on top.
If you read the article, the rules were only that both parties have to agree on a test and if someone passed the test they won the prize. There wasn’t a “gotcha” clause like “Oh since you did it it’s clearly allowed by physics and we don’t have to pay up!” So like if someone showed they had psychic powers sufficient to pass an agreed upon test it doesn’t matter if there’s a natural explanation for it, they would have still won the prize.
Well, in seriousness, and more interestingly, I’m not really willing to call supernatural powers real or fake, currently. There exist some stories I’ve come across, which are likely real, which contain absolutely unexplainable phenomenon. Just this morning, someone in a Discord I’m in (who wouldn’t just fake stories) was explaining how someone they knew had a psychotic break on psychedelics, and, in the ambulance, narrated the paramedics’ childhoods with disturbing accuracy. A trusted moderator of that space responded to my skepticism with “psychics absolutely exist, but the vast majority are just grifters”.
Note: Without getting into all the context, this moderator is not the kind of person to simply believe in conspiracy theories.
I used to be a Reddit atheist (ew), and I’ve gone from thinking I know everything, to being very serious about accepting different views–no matter how absurd. We’re unaware of so many more things than we’re aware of.
I’m of the opinion that if psychic abilities exist, they can not be on command. They might. They might not. I would rather be honest than claim to be factual–I don’t know.
Most of that is just mentalism, which is effective and useful but works off a psychological and stochastic approach but is absolutely explainable and not supernatural despite its applications in manipulating people. See: Jacob Wysocki in the one year later episode of game changer
A LOT of mentalism is stage magic, and has nothing to do with psychology. That’s part of the set dressing they’re trying to sell you, they’re just magicians as with a 21st century coat of paint on top.