talkmagic.co.uk

And...

Butler wrote:The reason why fools and knaves thrive better in the world than wiser and honester men is because they are nearer to the general temper of mankind, which is nothing but a mixture of cheat and folly.

I believe in the theory of the "self fullfilling prophecy".

a simple example being:

So convinced sales of Coca-Cola would be big this week, the store owner made his Coca-Cola display 5 times it's normal size. As a result he sold 5 times more Coca-Cola than he normally would in the same period.

I also believe in the power of positive thinking:

Although sales of Coca-Cola were down the previous week, the store owner, convinced the sales of Coca-Cola would bounce back, made his Coca-Cola display 5 times it's normal size. As a result he sold 5 times more Coca-Cola than he did the week before.

I do believe having a positive attitude can help one influence decisions we make "along the way". in particular, if we visualise our goals so they are clear... I believe we tend to make "mini decisions" along the way that help us get to our goals. I am talking subconcious decision making here though, not "hocus-pocus".

The football players are a great example.

Dave has a similar one when he's got a bike race. He wont shave for 3 days before it (don't ask me why though). The only time that he didn't follow that, he crashed his bike and ended up stuck in bed for 3 days.

Now he goes as far as getting me to hide his razor so that he can't accidentally have a shave.

I suppose ultimately it boils down to this..

one asks for constant proof...and the other one asks for nothing but belief...

and never the twain shall meet...especially windsor davis...

i find it fascinating though, imagine a scientist a couple of hundred years back saying "but i believe there's these things called atoms!"

and all his esteemed friends saying "prove it sunbeam, prove it..."

Can't remember who said 'There is no reality, only perception.'
I think Einstein said 'Reality is an illusion, but a persistent one.'

I suppose Quote-a-rama is better than what this thread could have become. Maybe this should be a new rule: in future all posts in 'debate' threads must consist of attributed quotes only.

As Tomo will undoubtedly agree, scientific proof is based on probability....I can drop a piece of chalk a million times and there is still a chance that it might not fall on the millionth + 1 attempt. We tend to focus on the probbility that it will fall...

If you are a Bayesian you accept the non-event as much as you do the event, while looking at the tendencies....I was on Radio Five Live debating crime figures one morning, which come from two sources: a random survey and reporting to the police, both of which will yield different distributions of crime statistics for any one year.

I was at pains to explain this to a guest on the show, who said, 'If I want to know if crime is getting worse, I look out my window and see if my car has broken into.' Oy vey! I do despair...

Now, absence of an explanation for something does not mean it does not work or exist...(cf Abraxus's remark about atoms)...I tried a cool thing I was reading in a Wicca book the other night and it worked. I then found out Reiki practitioners also do it.

There is a nice new book called The Black Swan (an homage to Popper), which is critical of how science focuses on significant findings and not the non-significant findings. Dean Radin's The Conscious Universe argues that collectively there is scientific evidence for psi phenomena.

For me, it is best to remain open minded, explore alternative views and balance the argument based on the best evidence available.

As for rationality: game theory has shown that the aggregation of collective rational choices can lead to completely irrational outcomes...

DrTodd wrote:As for rationality: game theory has shown that the aggregation of collective rational choices can lead to completely irrational outcomes...

Indeed, like inducing companies to bid up to £15 billion for a 3G license only to realise that it was subsequently impossible to turn a profit. Most 3G licenses have since reverted, while the game theorist who invented the auction found himself in front of the Queen collecting a gong.

I think it's worth clarifying what we mean by rational - reason is a relative thing after all, shaped by upbringing. For instance, the great rationalist Descartes reasoned the existence of God and the Soul a priori, and saw empirical evidence as inferior because of the involvement of the senses which suffer from the problem of Illusion.

Personally, while I tend to side with what the evidence supports, I certainly do not look down upon those with beliefs in alternative medicines and the like. Perhaps certain practices only work with certain people? It sounds unlikely if you consider it from the viewpoint that all human beings are built in similar ways, but we don't know that is an absolute fact.

Hume wrote about how we can never fully understand causation nor justify induction after all. Just as we can never fully understand why when we kick something it makes a sound so we can never fully understand how and why the body works.

Besides - when you think about it there is very little reason to believe in an external world; our belief in it is the result of our past experience, of inferring cause and effect. In truth the evidence - our sense data - merely points towards, perhaps, us being brains in vats and that is all. Our memories can be doubted - maybe all this empirical evidence was recorded wrongly? Maybe the world was created ten seconds ago and we've been given a load of false memories. We cannot say for sure either way! The only thing we can be certain of is that with which we are directly acquainted - the perceptions we are having, be they real or not.

So I am taking on faith that our perceptions of the world are accurate representations of it externally :.

abraxus wrote:cancer patients during chemo that remained more positive and as relaxed as possible during it got better quicker and didnt suffer as much as those that didnt...

Absolutely right. Studies have shown that anxiety and pain are linked, and that reducing the anxiety (by having a positive outlook, knowing what to expect after the operation) will reduce the pain afterwards.

abraxus wrote:personally...if it works for you and gets you through something...well...

for example, who am i to sit next to a little old lady with cancer and say to her "oy luv, don't bother praying...it wont work..."

Actually, it's quite likely that it would work - a sense of autonomy and being able to affect one's environment and future have given people with terminal illnesses longer to live. Not by much, granted, but longer than they might have done without it.

So from this perspective although there may be no rational reason to believe in homeopathy being causally responsible (independent of the mind) for helping somebody to get better faster, it is quite rational to embrace a procedure provided you genuinely believe that it will help you - because it will, indirectly, through your belief in it.

Anyhow, I guess I'm not really adding anything to the debate... none of you probably exist anyway .

Nice one Cardza, especially Hume's fundamental problem of causal inference....and thanks for mentioning Descartes my favourite rational Rosicrucian...and inspiration...

I knew at some point philosophy would raise its ugly head

Although I find philosophy itself is meant to be THE haven for rationality and by definition is about thought I personally find most aspects of it are more mental masturbation and questioning the answers rather than actually dealing with solving the question itself.....I'm gonna get crucifed for this no doubt.
Anyway we can all wax lyrical about whether we truley exist or not, whether its all shadows cast by on the cave wall and all we know is mearly what our senses percive for us so we never get primary input but the fact of the matter is the human being evolved with these senses, we have them and for the time being that's how we make sense of our universe.
None of these pondering changes any of the original question on why some people insist on denying or ignoring the extremely reliable information that science brings us and instead believe in the more fantastical.
Is this mearly a matter of sub-consciously kidding ones self into a world that seems more mystical or magical?
I look at the world around me everyday and although disappointed by the actions and beliefs of many of my fellow traveller I still have enormous wonders that science and its rational look on the universe has to offer.
I'm also incredibly enjoying reading all the posts on this thread and all the different insights especially the ones I dont agree with. great. thanks

Some may oppose me for what may seem like an overly simplified answer, but here it is: The universe and what happens in it, is not always rational; therefore, how can humans be expected to exceed the the powers of the universe?