talkmagic.co.uk

I think we all have our "rituals" and "good luck" pieces... human beings thrive on ritual and habit, why else would the assembly line idea be so efficient?:lol:

Now call me stupid for asking (actually don't, it would be rude), but what is wrong with refusing to believe in something that has absolutely no proof. And on that point, what is wrong for asking for proof.

This is a "catch-all" statement that is not 100% accurate. You fail to recognize the data from those that have proven and who do legit research into the paranormal and spiritual as well as mundane prowess of the human animal and those more subtle senses we all have. Your statement comes strictly from what one side of the contention offers and their "research" general stems from the taint of having already made up their minds that it's all bogus... why else would the good people at CSICOPS tamper with the findings of their one and only research project, when the data was supporting things they didn't want to accept? Worse, they got caught doing it!

At least there is sensible debate her, as opposed to that other ofrum which has a bunch of mentalists all trying to convince themselves they are the real deal whilst offering balloon modelling on the side. They are all convinced that 'Raymond' can see into Criss Angels envelope. Bizarre.

I'm uncertain which forum you're speaking of, I've not run across such a place to my knowledge and I belong to most of the more active Mentalist groups but I agree with you, producing a motorcycle on stage as part of an Add-a-number routine is bogus and has nothing to do with mentalism, it's pure stage magic and proof that there is a grotesque difference between mentalism and magic.

On the other hand, you are also revealing how little you understand about the psychology of mentalism and how "Belief" is a primary tool employed within the craft. IT IS NOT A MAGIC SHOW and none of what we do should ever be presented as one would a "Magic Trick"... yet, the cynical minds of our current decade have given everyone permission to take half-measures and see it all in just said light vs. striving to achieve enchantment. I can assure you, if you study the old ways of presenting mentalism... not Dunninger or Annemann but Nelson, Hull, and even those of more recent note like John Riggs, Richard Webster, Stephan Minch and Ron Martin... you will see what mentalism is and how what we see today is not one in the same.

The problem with Angel's envelopes is that he's a magician e.g. he can change the truth as to what is in the envelopes on a whim. So it is not a legit, nor wise "challenge" just proof that this middle-aged goth child is immature, ignorant and resentful of the fact that he's not in the limelight within this particular show... I can assure you however, a seasoned Mentalist could discover what is in the envelope via a means that Angel and his buddies would have serious difficulty figuring out... hell, Criss didn't even know who Alain Nu or John Riggs were and yet accused them of stealing "his" metal bending and blindfold drive stunts.... the child has a serious problem with foot in mouth syndrome.

Again, there is no way to change a fixed thing; you are presently of a mind-set that excludes even the possibility that "something" wondrous might actually exist that goes beyond the imaginings of the human ego or intellect. This is a sad thing, something Jay Scott Berry and I talked about years ago as we tried to understand how someone could call themselves a "Magician" and not leave the door open for the possibility that miracles happen and magic can be quite tangible.

I am likewise a "fixed" thing; though I am a very active skeptic I refuse to be a cynic e.g. I will always leave the door open to possibility as well as probability. Much of this is due to my own experiences in this world (and I do mean living as a spiritually oriented and aware individual). Too, as I've pointed out to others, I leave this door opened so that I can enjoy the magic that I see take root when my words, my actions and my counsel help another... I've not seen many magic tricks accomplish that feat, nor have I seen many cynics willing to be responsible for the damage their point of view has done to people over the years.

But, this conversation will end up going nowhere but out of control e.g. I would suggest that it get locked, unless the evangelists of cynicism want to accept things at a draw.

For the first time I agree with Browning. As fascinating as I've found this discussion it will end up going round in circles and I'm sure at some point someone will come on a take huge offense.
We could call it a draw but I asked for evidence and none was found....I'm joking I'm joking

I can assure you, if you study the old ways of presenting mentalism... not Dunninger or Annemann but Nelson, Hull, and even those of more recent note like John Riggs, Richard Webster, Stephan Minch and Ron Martin... you will see what mentalism is and how what we see today is not one in the same.

Surely you mean what your vision of mentalism is.

Again, there is no way to change a fixed thing; you are presently of a mind-set that excludes even the possibility that "something" wondrous might actually exist that goes beyond the imaginings of the human ego or intellect. This is a sad thing, something Jay Scott Berry and I talked about years ago as we tried to understand how someone could call themselves a "Magician" and not leave the door open for the possibility that miracles happen and magic can be quite tangible.

My mind set is that something of the sort is highly unlikely, and so I would need proof before changing what I believe. Not a crazy stance i think.
And why would you have to believe such things as a magician?

extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof

greedoniz wrote:extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof

That knife cuts both ways... the obligation of the cynic is to prove their claims...which they've not yet done, they've bullied people into suppression and created a social tension that says "if you believe in anything outside intellect, ego and science you're an idiot and a fool" which allows them the illusion of holding the higher ground. But as I have pointed out, they will quickly paint any "proof" that sustains the ideas of things surreal as being "quack science" while promoting their own research as "genuine" even though they have been found and proven of bias, acts of tampering with the results, and much more.

I've oft found it odd how, in an industry that wants to boast about understanding the psychological nuances of things is rife with folks that deny the psychological dynamics tied to denial and the "magician's/intellect's ego" i.e. the myth, so to speak, that it can all be explained away and thus, justified in our mind as being a "trick" vs. the possible miracle.

The psychological studies (observations) made by professionals of the industry looking at the thespian world as a whole as well as magic in particular, paint a very ugly portrait of insecurity and desperation within the common psyche of those associated in such things. Interestingly enough, these same traits are found in those that think themselves superior to others based on education, IQ and other such dynamics... I'm not referring to those who have legitimate and proven claim to said standings, but to those that want to allude to the idea and place themselves into the role of being on par with the MENSA mind-set.

People don't want to believe for many reasons but most of the time it is from that deep kernel of feeling betrayed by God or whatever you wish to call it, sometime in our past. But where are those within the auspices of magic who have the honor to look at this deeper and more defining aspect of both, industry and personal truth?

Folks, I am a most ardent skeptic; something most of you keep forgetting to realize as you go on your defensive and step onto the JREF approved soap box that you've been trained to exploit... Dr. Pavlov would be proud. I am not an armchair expert that reads this and that study and like those that think Bible study means reading only that one book vs. all that ties to it, you just say AMEN and agree with what's been posted, never questioning or actually stepping into the trenches to find out for yourself what is real and isn't or what the reality actually is within the shut-eye world.

NEWS FLASH... I have and do! So if you want extraordinary proof to the claims, put your actions behind what your lips and mind keep regurgitating and actually forget all the pseudo-evidence you've been told to buy into and step into the spider's web for a year or two... get your hands dirty and actually see what really IS at hand and why the more cynical attitudes of today aren't on par with reality (nor are the more fanatical ramblings of the believer, by the way... it's the middle-ground folks, that's where the truth lays).

Quote:
I can assure you, if you study the old ways of presenting mentalism... not Dunninger or Annemann but Nelson, Hull, and even those of more recent note like John Riggs, Richard Webster, Stephan Minch and Ron Martin... you will see what mentalism is and how what we see today is not one in the same.


Surely you mean what your vision of mentalism is.

No... you need to actually READ what I said and then study the authors I listed. John Riggs, like my self, comes from a very long line of familiar "charlatans" and felt he'd be more honest with his game by working as a mentalist. Yet, like Richard Webster, he's written several books on being a Reader for the shut-eye market. Both of these men have been shunned greatly by the magicians of the world that want mentalism to be fun & games and just like doing kiddie parties or a comedy club show that is cut rate at best -- the clowns that see it all as being "just a trick" vs. those that can realize how much more it can be (and has been).

"My Vision" as to what Mentalism is came from somewhere folks, it's obviously not mine at any kind of exclusive level in that I've just listed four of just a few dozen folks that I've learned from and who see Mentalism in the same exact light as I do -- outside the famed Dunninger Mold all the magicians want to insist upon holding to. You may also note that the handful of people I've referenced in the above have produced MORE definitive material on Mentalism than old Joe or Theo ever considered. For that matter, Robert Nelson alone was seen as being one of the more important contributors to Mentalism for decades (from the 1920s into the early 70s), even as the 13 Step manuscripts were first being published. Present day "bibles" like T.A. Water's Mind, Myth & Magic actually being shunned and laughed at when they first came out... my first copy of the Water's material came from a $2.00 blow-out book bin at Hollywood Magic because they couldn't be given away, even at half-price.

So NO, what I say is not "MY VISION" or my exclusive philosophy as to what Mentalism is and how it should be performed, it is a philosophy that is at least 60+ years older than I am that has been the cornerstone to mentalism since its inception and well into the early and mid 1960s when some slow albeit "current events inspired" changes started taking root; ideas and approaches that were canonized via the longevity of Dunninger's reign with the media as well as the extension (revival) of the publics interest in human mental capacity/potential as was being reported via "legit" science and research groups the world over and within all of the major publications, news and talk shows of the day... we are talking about the hippie era here folks and though it is associated with great drugs and altered consciousness this was also an era of uncanny intellectual discovery and investigation as well; a lot of it dealing with the human psyche and other "surreal" ideas.

So, the Moral of The Story Is... if you're going to claim to be having Bible Study, study everything surrounding the bloody subject and not just what your preferred institutions approve of and cosign. Honest study of the subject means you are working "outside" the proverbial box and looking at the issue from ALL angles, not just the one you're comfortable with.

My Vision" as to what Mentalism is came from somewhere folks, it's obviously not mine at any kind of exclusive level in that I've just listed four of just a few dozen folks that I've learned from and who see Mentalism in the same exact light as I do --

I didn't mean that it was your exclusive vision, but the one that you subscribe to. There are other vailid approaches (as much as you dislike them), which you have noted, such as annemann and the more modern approach by the likes of Banachek, Jermay and Brown.
Do you not think it is a good thing for mentalism to evolve in the way it does. As peoples beliefs and mind sets change through the years, then the art form has evolved with it to take these on board. I'm not saying that the old should be forgotten and discarded (I love nothing more than reading the classic tomes such as annemann). But a melting pot of ideas and approaches is surely a good thing.

In the summer I was in Wales. Half way up Snowdonia when some one said in our group. “that’s not a mountain its too small” to which every one turned round and told her to shut up we are half way up the bloody thing.

I agree with Abruxs on the function of the mind. Even I the great Markdini sometimes has a good luck ritual that involves flipping a coin.

If you are half way up the mountain and cant see the bottom or have no idea you are half way up. Then maybe you are not up a mountain.

Basically those who seek proof will always seek proof. Now I am not saying I belive in this type of stuff I don’t.

The argument is endless one proves the other disproves. I am of the school unless some one could walk up to me and tell me something only I would know. Other then that I am with Greedo on this.

At the end of the day every one needs a crutch.

But on the other hand I do agree those who do this and know they are conning people who are at a low ebb are scum no better then a snake oil salesman.

And the people who subscribe to such as the snake oil sales man would keep coming back for more. One would get run out of town and then the next one would come and people would come and buy his snake oil. And the “frauds” are just that Snake oil hustlers.

On to the point of Mr Browning’s version of mentalism. People perform magic in different ways don’t they? I personaly never say I use NLP. 1) I don’t and 2) I don’t want to appear being trendy and doing what every other Mentalist is doing now.
Chris Beard asked me “What do you tell people? Do you tell them you are psychic or body language?”
My reply was thus “I let people believe what they want to , if they think I am a psychic I am if they think I am body reading then I am “

I never make claims that I am doing that. I just let the “magic” happen in the most important place there minds.

You know, there's a part of me that wants to believe. It would be nice to have a little bit of the unknown to cling onto, something that could act as a potential transporter to that happy place of astonishment that Paul Harris describes so well.

Unfortunately it seems more and more unlikely that there isn't. Or if there is it's at best about as reliable as guessing. You can't argue with people's own anecdotal tales of what they have and haven't experienced but what you can do is get 100 people with proclaimed 'abilities' and sit them in front of an envelope, one at a time, and get them to tell you what's in it. Then get 100 people off the street and get them to guess. Compare the results. Heck, repeat it with as many sets as you like.

The reason for this is simple. Even a little bit of corroborative data would go a long way but there doesn't seem to be any. For something as important as this (potentially, as Greedo points out) shouldn't there be some attempt to at least understand it properly? After all, if a child asks their mother why plants need sunlight to grow any reasonably well educated parent can give an understandable but quite complex answer. If the same child asks mummy how the lady at the fair knows what's going to happen in the future there's no rational answer that can be provided. The believing mother can only say "Because she can," followed by the kid's favourite question "Why?" In the end all the Mum can come out with is "Well she just can and you shouldn't ask how."

Collect data Tomo? Have faith man!

Tomo wrote:

themagicwand wrote:I have a stupid game on my mobile. Before a gig I sit in the car and play it. If I score above 2000 points it means the gig will go okay. If I score above 2500 points it means the gig will go very well. If I score close to 3000 (my record being 3250) the gig will be brilliant.

It may be difficult for you people on the outside to appreciate but the outcome of a mobile phone game holds sway over my professional life.

Oooooh, interesting. Collect some data.

Oh no, it's only a bit of silliness. I don't really believe the mobile phone game influences my performance. Or do I....?

BTW - I've posted on this thread several times to defend professional mediums as I know them to be basically decent human beings (I know that some will find that hard to accept - it's easier to see them as villains). However I will admit that readings I've had from "shut eyes" have tended to be quite poor to be honest.

BUT...

On Saturday night I was working a haunted house event and my specs were involved in a bit of glass moving (ouija board without the ouija board if you know what I mean). The glass had been moving brilliantly with small groups of 3 taking turns to have a finger atop the glass. Suddenly the glass began to move quite violently in large circles with the speed increasing. I asked the "spirit" to stop moving the glass. It sped up. So I told the 3 specs to take their fingers off the glass. They did and the glass sped across the table by itself - I mean this glass shot across the table and then stopped dead (as it were). Now if that's idiomotor function I'm the reincarnation of Charlie Chaplin. So we have two choices. Either I'm lying and the glass didn't move by itself across the table, or I'm telling the truth and the glass did move across the table under its own power.

If the glass moved by itself then something unexplained happened. Maybe it wasn't ghosts or spirits, maybe it had more to do with the atmosphere in the room, the heightened emotions of the specs, I don't know. But something happened.

Now I can't prove it to you. It wasn't filmed or photograped or anything. But I saw it.

Weird huh?

Interesting thread, and one that's avoided the usual rows, if steering a little close to the wind sometimes!

As another bit of devil's advocacy, what if the supernatural requires belief? You know, like that bit in Erik the Viking, when the Christian priest can't see the Norse gods?

No, I'm only joking, because the effects on a believer should still be observable by a sceptic.

Personally, I dislike the concept of mediums. I don't think they are all deliberate con artists, but I find the concept of speaking to the dead inherently unlikely.

On the other hand, I am willing to keep an open mind. I think that's the balancing act - at what point does keeping an open mind become credulity? Or, to put it another way, at what point does scepticism become as biased and blinkered as any 'believer'?

As I'm feeling mischievous, here's another one for you. Can you remember what you had for lunch four years and three days ago (without checking)?

No? Well then, memory doesn't exist. If it doesn't work all the time, exactly how it's claimed, it's fiction.

Just as with memory, where some have more natural ability than others, plus it is possible to train your memory, perhaps some people have more basic psychic ability than others, or have developed these gifts. However, if the base level is negligible, perhaps even the best psychic can only be barely above average.

Having said that, I personally don't think many of them are anything other than average, if not worse than average. Just another thought that might be of interest to us as performers.

I was going to back out of this thread but your supposition in the above (part-timer) was priceless

Hell, we could argue that farts don't exist I would think.. or (this is the biggie) LOVE don't exist... try proving it... but try to disprove it to those that have experienced it.


When asked (challenged) why my premonition around the whole 9/11 situation some years ago, and why it was not more pin-point accurate I asked my critic consider what it is like to see a two hour featured film in less than a half-second's time and then recall it completely in finite detail, without flaw or the misunderstanding of shape, size or identity of things.

Hell, in the 70s version of KING KONG referred to the Towers as being Man Made Mountains, which is what I described during the interview a month prior to the event. How could anyone accurate describe something that unheard of and fantastic when there is nothing to compare it to in memory, other than a Volcano?

Cynics are quite aware of such things and deliberately use it to their advantage and yet I bet most of them couldn't tell you in detail and completely from memory, everything that happened to them the day before 9/11.

themagicwand wrote:

Tomo wrote:Oooooh, interesting. Collect some data.

Oh no, it's only a bit of silliness. I don't really believe the mobile phone game influences my performance. Or do I....?

I was just dashing off a quick reply there. What I meant to say was that you might have an interesting personal gauge for whether a gig goes well or not, based on your high score. Sort of whether you're focused and in the zone, type of thing.

what game is it i wanna check if i can beat it now....

*sorry for off-topicness, return to your original debate...*

No? Well then, memory doesn't exist. If it doesn't work all the time, exactly how it's claimed, it's fiction.

It has never been claimed to work all the time.In fact it is quite expicitly stated that memory fades with time unless whatever you need to remember is rehersed. In your example, if you rehersed that information a few times a day, every day for that period of time, then yes you would remember. On top of that it could be tested and prooved quite easily.

Hell, we could argue that farts don't exist I would think.. or (this is the biggie) LOVE don't exist... try proving it... but try to disprove it to those that have experienced it.

Trust me, I could prove that farts exist. As for love, perhaps you couldnt prove it exists, but people have the experience of it (just like they have the experience of a psychic with a cold reader), even if it doesnt exist. There has been scientific work on it, though I dont have it to hand. One idea is that it is something created by the mind to increase our chances of reproduction. Either way it doesnt matter, where as with psychic/mediumistic ability, I think it does.