talkmagic.co.uk

Very interesting indeed !!!!! i always think that people's personality is very unique and very different and hard to categorise.. i read horoscopes for fun or books like understand a person from their handwriting and stuffs.. but i never believe it fully cos a person is very unpredictable.. but this is still interesting to check out

queen of clubs wrote:Sorry for referring to it as a trick - I didn't know that gets up people's noses, hehe. The reason I said trick is because I know full well that he didn't really "connect" with my mind, and the month you're born in has nothing to do with the type of tree you're likely to draw, so he either guessed my star sign, or did some research and found my birthday out, which I'm sure must be on the internet somewhere. Hence trick.

I'm just massively cynical about these things. Maybe I should pick this book up!

Actually someone that knows this sort of thing AND their personality traits as associated with Astrology could match up most that they come into contact with. There's far more truth and accuracy in things than "some" would like to give credit... especially when you have skeptical scientific research backfire in your face and proves a high degree of validity around something, like Astrology... the parallels are a bit more above "mere chance" than some wish to "allow". Then again, you'll find that Hand Reading and Face Reading has a significant sum of "legitimate" scientific (medical world) substantiation.

Pardon my being so bold, but you assumed something, seeing it from the "magicians" point of view vs. the data that exists around the subject outside this biased sub-culture of the mind... or as Einstein put it, "There's a lot more too it than meets the eye..."

I know you're vastly experienced in this particular field and I know next to nothing about it and am only starting to learn, but I wasn't aware there were significant tests that showed astrology to be anything more than a load of rubbish. In fact, I thought that astrologists and the like were notoriously shy of any invitation to prove their abilities under test conditions.

Did you ever see that documentary by Professor Dawkins where he suggested to an astrologist that they should hand his readings out to people blindly and see if they found them accurate or not, and the man flatly refused to have anything to do with it, saying such a scientific test would be "obscene"?

I mean, for astrology to be real would require there to only be 12 different types of people, because when you pick up a copy of The Sun or some other rag and read your star sign for the day, are you really supposed to believe that everyone else in the world who was born at the same time of year is going to also have those experiences?

Statements like "Gemini is hovering over Saturn, which means that you'll likely be reminded of a past aquaintance in the next few days" sounds intriguing, and for all the people who do have that experience in the next few days it will seem like a hit, but for the countless others who don't find it applies, they just forget they ever read it. Win/win, right?

Cold reading, vaguery, lucky guesses and Bandler (did I spell that right?) statements, to me, are just tricks. I would love to be proved wrong.

queen of clubs wrote:Cold reading, vaguery, lucky guesses and Bandler (did I spell that right?) statements, to me, are just tricks. I would love to be proved wrong.

Spelled correctly, but you mean Barnum statements: there's something for everyone.

I'm also intrigued about the research Craig talks about, but I suspect this was on the personality types associated with Sun signs (or possibly more details natal chart analysis), not predictive astrology.

I've got the 'Draw Me a Tree' DVD, and hope to watch it this weekend. I had a similar idea about getting people to draw houses a couple of years ago.

Part-Timer wrote:Spelled correctly, but you mean Barnum statements: there's something for everyone.

Ah, thank you! That's what I was trying to remember. Bandler is something different - isn't he the guy who wrote some of the most important books on NLP or something? (Again, showing my ignorance but hopefully my enthusiasm, too )

Part-Timer wrote:...I've got the 'Draw Me a Tree' DVD, and hope to watch it this weekend...

Be sure to post your thoughts! It would be good to get another opinion on it. This thread has got me thoroughly gripped.

twice now i've gone to watch this - twice i've fallen asleep...ggrrrr...

stupid tiredness....its not cos the content is boring..the bits i saw floating in and out of conciousness were very interesting...

queen of clubs wrote:Ah, thank you! That's what I was trying to remember. Bandler is something different - isn't he the guy who wrote some of the most important books on NLP or something? (Again, showing my ignorance but hopefully my enthusiasm, too )

Yes, Richard Bandler's famous for his work on NLP.

I'm about to watch the DVD, so I'll try and post my comments soon.

I picked it up on friday and sat down for a quick watch in the arvo. Unfortunately other stuff was going on that needed my attention so I haven't had a proper study yet but it's clear and practical material that's rooted (chuckle) in real science. On it's own it can give you a decent character summary and Rudy goes over the signature in detail too.

Part-Timer wrote:

queen of clubs wrote:Ah, thank you! That's what I was trying to remember. Bandler is something different - isn't he the guy who wrote some of the most important books on NLP or something? (Again, showing my ignorance but hopefully my enthusiasm, too )

Yes, Richard Bandler's famous for his work on NLP.

I'm about to watch the DVD, so I'll try and post my comments soon.

Do bear in mind that there are some rather noted skeptics out there that place NLP and Hypnosis into a category "quackery" just as they do UFOology, ESP and the Fairy folk.

As to the Astrology issue there was one famous Oops of a backfire that took place in the 50s that was repeated in the 70s and I believe a similar bit of research was done even more recently. The first was the one that took folks most off guard in that ardent skeptics crunched the data only to find that a huge amount of mathematical accuracy does exist when it comes to the character traits and penchants of persons born within similar sun signs and other related factors... the one in the 70s (I think it was) found interesting Parallels in a handful of people born on the same day and within similar geographic influences as Prince Charles, each proving to be sporting similar shoes when it comes to power and position as well as life accomplishments... this obvious does not mean that they are all in line for "the" throne but "a" throne most certainly, such as CEO and Executive Manager positions within their rightful vocations, etc.

This is just some of that trivial stuff I pick up when watching late night PBS and Science Channel shows. I don't write it all down in that I simply can't believe I'm the only person that caught one of these episodes and thus, I don't understand why I need to document and prove my claims... I don't see that asked of most others and frankly, I get quite bored of it.

Many years ago, before I'd even heard of "mentalism", I studied astrology and tarot reading seriously and found the results amazingly accurate. With hindsight I suspect I was doing a cold reading without realising it!

Speaking with my serious astrology hat on, the trouble with Sun signs is that they relate to a person's innermost self, not necessarily the obvious exterior traits. Your Sun sign points to the underlying theme of your life, the reason you're here, the lessons you're learning, and so on -- deep stuff that doesn't begin to percolate into consciousness until middle age or later.

Most of a person's obvious characteristics derive from the sign on the Ascendant, which describes your immediate approach to life. Unfortunately, although pretty much everybody knows their Sun sign, not many know their Ascendant, so they can't confirm any guesses!

But Sun signs can be spot-on sometimes. Colin and I are both pretty typical textbook Cancerians. And when I met a cousin of mine for the first time a few years ago, she made a comment to the effect that she was allergic or sensitive to so many things, couldn't take an aspirin without it keeping her awake all night, etc. I said, "You wouldn't happen to be a Pisces, would you?" Yep.

Famed Astrologer Linda Goodman was known for attending mixers, long before her books ever hit the shelf, and as she walked through the room she'd look people over and have a very brief chat with them and then name their Zodiac... her accuracy level was uncanny and was based 100% on what she knew about Astrology and the quirks it implants or imprints onto people.

Alain Nu has a wonderful routine known as ZODIESQUE that I've used for years (you can find it in the SYZYGY collection) which cites some legitimate research facts pertaining to the time of year people are born and common traits associated with them... this course of thought is of course, broken down and leads to the issue of Astrology and the performer's ability to draw out a rough image representing a random audience member's Sun Sign... it's a beautiful bit of business that has a level of "fact" attached to it... something Paul Brook reflects upon in his book ALCHEMICAL TOOLS and a tool known to and exploited by Mentalists for decades; it's what I refer to as "Telling them the truth" i.e. the more valid data you can sew into your presentation that can be researched or even coincidentally discovered by your patrons, the greater their view of you as an "expert" and gifted personality. The weaving of BS that has no honest grounds upon which to stand is insulting to one's patrons and likewise demeans both, you and the craft -- the art of being a Psychic Entertainer.



And Before Someone Goes There... Ms. Goodman wasn't using any kind of anagram or other such trickery in those early year demonstrations of hers. I know that magic-types can quasi-replicate this sort of demonstration but I can assure you, they can't deliver a demonstration in as clean a manner as Ms. Goodman (and many other's of her ilk) are known to do.

Craig Browning wrote:Do bear in mind that there are some rather noted skeptics out there that place NLP and Hypnosis into a category "quackery" just as they do UFOology, ESP and the Fairy folk.

I'm far from sure that the claims made for NLP really hold water. I've not researched the subject much, however.

Thanks for the information on the astrology studies. It's interesting that there was some research done, and that it went in a way some might consider surprising. I must admit that, personally, I am not too shocked. I find that a lot of people really do fit in with their Sun signs. For example, the person who sits opposite me is very organised, tidy and carries anti-bacterial handspray/wipes. Anyone care to guess what sign she is?

Now for my views on the DVD.

I thought it was very well presented and clear. Rudy Hunter gives you a lot of information to be going on with, and he's also the kind of guy you can imagine doing well from readings.

There is lots of material on doing the actual tree readings, along with information about analysing someone's signature. Also, Rudy gives some more generic advice on readings, which is valuable.

Quite a bit of the information presented in the DVD could be used with other systems involving drawing analysis, for example, doodle interpretations. As such, it might also come in handy for anyone who wants to do some readings as part of a drawing duplication or psychometry/personality analysis effect, such as 'Sneak Thief'.

Very good 9.5 out of 10