An examination of the question: can skeptics be skeptical of skepticism?

John Jackson © 2008

• Skeptical
  
  Skeptical means doubtful. The Cambridge online dictionary defines skeptical as “doubting that something is true or useful”. For example: “The minister claimed that raising fuel tax would help combat global warming; but the audience were skeptical”.
  
  
• Skepticism
  
  The common usage of skepticism also means to be doubtful. For example: “The government’s claim to have reduced poverty was met with skepticism”.
  
  However, scientific skepticism, as used by skeptics, does not simply mean to be doubtful. In fact, skepticism is actually a methodology, not a single concept. It is an approach to claims and knowledge that includes many components (see: What is Skepticism?).

Whenever a word has more than one meaning, there’s always the possibility of making a fallacy of equivocation and that is what is happening with the question “are you skeptical of skepticism?” When people use this question they intend it to mean “are you doubtful of your system of doubt?” but when it’s applied to scientific skepticism, what they’re actually asking is “are you doubtful of your methodology?” – in other words, do you or can you question your methods of inquiry?

The intended use of the question is meant to create the paradoxical situation described above but the actual question (as it pertains to scientific skepticism that skeptics advocate) creates no such problem.

The methods of inquiry that constitute skepticism should be subject to doubt and inquiry in the same way that other things are investigated in this manner and the fact that methodologies are open to scrutiny in this way just adds to the strength of skepticism as a tool for acquiring knowledge. Indeed, this is why skepticism has changed from early skepticism where knowledge was thought to be impossible (which is self-refuting!) to modern scientific skepticism that is used as a tool to acquire knowledge. If skepticism wasn’t open to doubt or scrutiny, it would never change.

Conclusion

The question “are you skeptical of skepticism?” is meant to show that skepticism leads to skeptics holding a paradoxical position; however, as has been explained, this seeming paradox is only created by making a fallacy of equivocation by those who don’t know what modern, scientific skepticism actually is.

Skepticism is not the same as merely being skeptical; and not only can skeptics be skeptical of skepticism – they should be.

Title: Dr Christine Mohr: Magical Beliefs and the Two Cerebral Hemispheres

When: 09.12.2008 18.00 h – 19.30 h

Where: Goldsmiths, University of London – London

Category: Anomalistic Psychology Research Unit Lectures

Description

Abstract

Magical thinking and/or belief is one of the productive symptoms reported from patients with schizophrenia, and is, at the same time, a common experience in the general population. In both instances, this thinking style has been related to an attenuated left hemispheric dominance for language, and a consecutive disinhibition of remote associative processing in the right hemisphere. While this right hemisphere contribution to language processing in the patient population might impinge normal conversational capacities, the same processes in the general population might facilitate creative thinking. Studies using neuropharmacological manipulations (dopamine agonistic treatment) support the view that magical belief in the general population is not simply on the continuum to psychosis, but might reflect a well-adapted personality dimension showing evolutionary advantages.

Biography

Christine Mohr did her PhD on the “neuropsychology of magical belief” at the University of Zurich, Switzerland, and has continued working in this field ever since. In 2004, she joined the Department of Experimental Psychology at the University of Bristol as a lecturer where she teaches Neuropsychiatry. With respect to paranormal belief, she mainly investigates and publishes on the neuropsychological correlates of these beliefs, and aims to understand why some individuals with such “bizarre” beliefs are considered by most as absolutely healthy (but spiritual), while in others it is considered pathological (psychotic). This is particularly relevant, because the dimensional, or rather quasi-dimensional view of psychosis would indicate that the healthy expression might have evolutionary advantages.

Street: New Cross

ZIP: SE14 6NW

City: London

John Jackson © UK-Skeptics

Ectoplasm:

• Claim:
  
  Ectoplasm is a product of ethereal energy which usually forms as a fog like mist, solid white mass, or as a vortex. It emanates from various orifices of the medium, most commonly the mouth, nose and ears. Ectoplasm can form into rods which can be used to move objects and even levitate people in their chairs.
  
  
• Explanation:
  
  Ectoplasm is the fabric chiffon. Chiffon is highly compressible and can be hidden easily about the medium’s body or introduced to her by her assistant. Mediums can cover themselves with the fabric and hide/reveal themselves from behind a black curtain to make themselves look like a materialisation. Chiffon can also be wrapped around rods and other pieces of equipment which are then used to move things around. The chair levitation is achieved by assistants holding one chair leg each and lifting the chair up.

Voice trumpets:

• Claim.
  
  The spirits do not speak loudly so some form of amplification is required. This is usually in the form of a trumpet which is placed on a table. During the séance the trumpet is often seen to levitate and move around whilst the spirit voice comes through it.
  
  
• Explanation:
  
  The trumpet is often marked with a luminous paint so that the levitation can be seen in the dark. The trumpet simply has a hidden extendable handle which the medium (or assistant) uses to pick it up and wave it around in a way that looks too fast to be produced by someone holding it. The voices are produced by the medium who uses a second smaller trumpet to speak through.
  
  For an account of a medium being caught red-handed see: Tony Youens’ article.

Apportation:

• Claim.
  
  The spirits can make items materialise during the séance ranging from semi-precious stones to peoples’ personal belongings that they may have lost at some other time.
  
  
• Explanation:
  
  Simple apports are just placed there by the medium in the dark. The items are usually worthless and are given as souvenirs to the sitters. Where missing personal items are apported back to their owners, it is a case of the mediums, or their helpers, actually stealing or pick-pocketing these items from their owners and miraculously returning them to their owners via the spirits. This occurrence is more likely to happen where people attend the same places regularly.

Table tipping and levitation.

• Claim.
  
  Sitters at the table all place their hands on top of the table. The spirits then levitate the table during the séance with everyone’s hands remaining on the top of the table.
  
  
• Explanation:
  
  There are several methods of levitating tables, many of which are still used by magicians today so we will not reveal the more sophisticated methods. Simple table manipulations have been performed for a long time. Eusapia Palladino (1854-1918) was a medium who developed a simple method. She used a special lightweight table which was designed so that her foot could be hooked beneath one of the legs. Pressing down with her hands and up with her foot gave her control of the table.
  
  With more advanced trickery large, heavy tables can be made to levitate even with a person sitting on it.

Raps and taps.

• Claim.
  
  The spirits often make noises from small taps to loud bangs.
  
  
• Explanation:
  
  The medium and the assistants make the noises. It can be as simple as using a children’s peashooter.

Spirit lights.

• Claim.
  
  Flashes of lights appear near or around the medium, often as the spirits are coming through.
  
  
• Explanation:
  
  Wire wool brushed across the terminals of a high-voltage battery will make some strange and spooky looking flashes and sparks.

But the medium was tied to the chair…

• Claim.
  
  At the start of the séance, the medium is often tied to a chair with ropes. This rules out trickery.
  
  
• Explanation:
  
  There are also tricks employed here. The chair may have detachable arms. The ropes may have been tied by an accomplice who leaves enough room for the medium to slip out of and back into the apparent restraint.
  
  Where rooms are set up for the sole purpose of séances, there is often a secret door through which accomplices enter after the lights go out. Many effects can be created by accomplices who do the tricks of black art; often seen as a stage act where people dressed in black in front of a black background go unseen and the effects they create look miraculous.
  
  It is surprising just how quickly magicians can free themselves from ropes that are genuinely tied by other people.

There are other tricks and techniques used in physical mediumship, many of which have been around for a century or more. The tricks are quite mundane when seen in daylight, yet the effect that they produce in darkness can be quite profound.

Although physical mediumship is on the decline today, it is remarkable that many people still believe that spirits are coming through when the mediums are using the same tricks that were exposed by magicians like Houdini over eighty years ago.

Do irrational beliefs lead to harm?

John Jackson © UK-Skeptics

It can seem like a very pertinent question and it can be surprisingly difficult to answer; particularly when you’re dealing with a single case like someone’s mother who believes in angels: “If she believes and it brings her comfort, what’s the harm?“

The problem with this argument is that it’s based on the Hasty Generalisation fallacy (the fallacy of insufficient sample), and the False Dichotomy fallacy (where only two alternatives are considered). The implication being that if one person’s mother believes something weird and hasn’t been harmed by it then this sort of belief is therefore universally harmless. The skeptic’s position is further confounded by the fact that the idea of ‘bringing comfort’ is an Appeal to Emotion so trying to oppose or take that belief away makes the skeptic look somewhat mean and cold-hearted.

It is probably better to acknowledge that for most people, most of the time, that holding weird or irrational beliefs will not result in harm. In fact, people hold these beliefs because they get some benefit from them. Belief in the afterlife and that mediums can pass messages from the dead can give people the comfort of believing (they’d claim knowing) that their loved ones haven’t really died, or adopting a ‘holistic lifestyle’ of only eating organic food and only using alternative medicine can give people a feeling of empowerment by taking control of their health (the ‘illusion of control’), promoting well-being and preventing disease, for example.

However, such beliefs do pose the threat of harm. Someone who treats their family with homeopathic remedies rather than conventional medicine will not be harming anyone most of the time as most illnesses and diseases are fought off by the immune system anyway; but if a family member actually develops something serious and it is treated with homeopathic remedies, that is when the potential for harm occurs.

So what we have here is not an absolute position where we can say that everyone who holds weird beliefs is going to be harmed by them, but a one where we can say that people who hold and trust in unaccepted and even disproved ideas are putting themselves at an increased risk of being harmed. Holding irrational beliefs is a risk factor for harm, not an absolute.

Irrational beliefs, and actions based upon them, are more likely to cause harm to people in times of crisis rather than in their day-to-day lives.

How harm can occur

The “what’s the harm?” arguments tend to be used with regard to single cases with a certain context – as illustrated in the introduction; however, harm from irrational beliefs can occur in many different ways depending on who holds them and the position they hold in society. Some ways in which harm can arise from irrational beliefs include:

• Economic harm
  
  This can occur to individuals, businesses, government agencies, institutions, etc. Spending hours on the phone to ‘gifted psychics’ can prove extremely costly to the individual; lending huge sums of money to people who can’t afford to pay it back in the chase for more profit can prove extremely costly to banks, the government, and ultimately the taxpayer (as we have recently found to our cost!); spending money to ‘invest’ in an MLM business in the hope of making it rich…. one day.
  
  
• Direct harm
  
  Direct harm occurs as a direct consequence of an action: Suffering a stroke after a chiropractic neck manipulation; being poisoned or killed by the unknown compounds in a herbal remedy; severely malnourished children due to being fed a strict vegan diet by their parents; orphaned children through their mother needlessly dying in childbirth because her religion has interpreted scripture so that blood transfusions are not allowed.
  
  
• Indirect harm
  
  Indirect harm occurs as a consequence of previous action or due to the beliefs and actions of others: Children dying through needless treatments for autism because the parents believe that it was caused by heavy metals in a vaccine despite the evidence against this; physical/emotional harm caused by avoiding proper medical care because of the belief in alternative medicine; children being harmed or killed by preventable diseases because their parents believe the anti-vaccination propaganda.
  
  
• Psychological harm
  
  Caused by psychological investment in irrational concepts: False hope being given by ‘psychic detectives’ who involve themselves with murder and missing persons cases; distrusting things like medicine/science/institutions/etc. through conspiracy theories; irrational fears of things like Mercury in fillings, Aspartame in food, or fluoride in water; stress and anxiety caused through the belief in curses and spells, possession by demons, etc.
  
  
• Social harm
  
  This can manifest itself by things such as: poor public policy (using lie detectors to monitor paedophiles); wasting resources (using taxpayers’ money to fund homeopathic hospitals); preventing scientific research and advances because of religious arguments; making major decisions without basing them on evidence or in spite of the evidence – e.g. going to war based on the belief that the enemy possesses weapons of mass destruction.

Evidence

Although we often hear of such harm and it makes intuitive sense that believing in things that aren’t true would have the potential for harm, it is surprisingly difficult to quantify this harm. Of course that doesn’t mean it isn’t occurring, it’s just that no one is monitoring and measuring it systematically.

It is known and accepted (by skeptics, at least) that in some cases people are psychologically harmed by their visits to mediums in the quest to contact a dead loved one. This can result in harm caused by things the medium comes out with in one reading or it can be a case of the person developing what’s known as ‘psychic dependency’ (where they become ‘addicted’ to mediums and ’spirit contact’ and get trapped in the grieving process) – however, there are no official figures as to the prevalence of this type of harm.

Fortunately, there is a website that is documenting cases of harm that have been reported in the media. See: What’s the Harm?

These cases are only the ones that have made the media, and so will be a gross under-representation of the true figures, but at least they do provide an evidence trail as the stories can be verified, and there’s a section providing scientific evidence too.

Conclusion

The case for harm caused by irrational or ‘weird’ beliefs is probably a one that is overstated much of the time. For most people, most of the time, their beliefs will not cause them any harm (and probably provide benefits) – which is likely why they persist.

However, this does not mean that such beliefs are without their consequences. The potential for the different types of harm outlined above increase when people rely on them most (times of crisis) or when people who have influence hold them. There is no reason why someone who holds weird beliefs or an irrational world-view cannot make high office!

Arguing with someone asking “what’s the harm?” can be difficult, as whether a belief (or action based upon it) causes harm is context dependent.

Telling someone that their granny is at risk of harm because she attends a spiritualist church to get messages from her late husband is really not making a strong case (in fact it would make the skeptic look foolish); but when it’s a government official who believes in homeopathy and is in a position to allocate public money, then the case for harm is clear cut – in this instance spending money on homeopathy instead of proper medical care could result in indirect harm (patients losing out on real treatment because the money was spent in a homeopathic hospital instead, for example).

So yes, irrational beliefs can and do lead to harm. It is also frequently quite difficult to get this point across in a debate, as the context is often not appropriate; for example, single-case scenarios considered at one point in time only. To understand the potential for harm, we need to assess the bigger picture; for that is the correct context in which to appreciate this issue.

We don’t normally take part in these ’skeptics versus believer’ debates as they usually turn out to be of little value – skeptics often being included simply to provide some token opposition. UKS forum member Richard Sutherland decided that he would, however, represent the skeptics’ side of the debate; and this conversation turned out to quite different to the usual:

The first point of note was that the radio station were not doing the programme simply to promote the psychic. Host Joe Finnegan actually sounded rather sceptical of psychics’ claims himself and did a good job of allowing both sides of the debate to be heard.

The second point of note was the the psychic, who calls herself ‘psychic Anna’ (Anna Brennan), agreed live on air to take the JREF $1,000,000 paranormal challenge.

Listen to the broadcast here:

UKS Media: listen to the skeptic vs the psychic programme (MP3)

Despite the usual insults and personal attacks by the psychic (“you’re negative”, “you’re cold”, “I’d like to know what happened to you as a child to make you this way”, “I feel sorry for people who can’t open up to possibilities”, etc.), Richard did a superb job of getting information pertaining to the debate over and did a sterling job in representing skeptics and skepticism.

The main purpose of this commentary, however, is to leave a permanent record of ‘psychic Anna’ (Anna Brennan) agreeing to taking the JREF $1,000,000 challenge live on air.

It is extremely unlikely that she will actually go through with this and if she’s pressed on the issue will undoubtedly come out with the old and tired excuses – but we do have a record of her agreeing to it.

London Skeptics in the Pub

Monday 8th December 2008

The Penderel’s Oak, Holborn. A £2 donation is requested to cover the guest speaker’s travelling expenses and sundries. All are welcome. Turn up at any time during the evening. The room is open for food and drink from about 5.30pm and talks start at 7pm.

The event was founded in 1999, for all those interested in the paranormal, alternative medicine, psychic powers, pseudo-science, UFOs, alien abductions, creationism, Fortean phenomena, cult religions, water-divining, lost civilizations etc. A guest speaker is invited each month to present a topic of interest, which is followed by an informal discussion in a relaxed and friendly pub atmosphere. The UK-Skeptics forum is a good place for continuing discussions after the meeting. There is also an associated facebook group you can join.

Skeptics versus Believers

UFOs and alien abductions: Serious defence and national security issues at stake, or intriguing phenomena with their roots in psychology and belief? Professor Chris French and Nick Pope square up to each other in a head-to-head debate with a difference. Because we like to be a little bit controversial (and we thought it would be fun), we have them swap roles and argue each other’s case. Will Chris French convince you that ET really is visiting us on a regular basis? Or will Nick Pope persuade you that psychological factors can account for such claims? Come along and cast your vote!

Speakers

Professor Chris French and Nick Pope

Chris French is a Professor of Psychology and Head of the Anomalistic Psychology Research Unit in the Psychology Department at Goldsmiths College, University of London (www.goldsmiths.ac.uk/apru). He teaches a course entitled Anomalistic Psychology as part of the BSc (Hons) Psychology programme at Goldsmiths College. He is a Chartered Psychologist and a Fellow of the British Psychological Society, Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufacturers & Commerce, and the Institute for Cultural Research. He is also a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of the British False Memory Society and the Advisory Board of the Center for Inquiry, London. He has published over 100 articles and chapters covering a wide range of topics within psychology. His main current area of research is the psychology of paranormal beliefs and anomalous experiences. In addition to academic activities, such as conference presentations and invited talks in other departments, he frequently appears on radio and television casting a sceptical eye over paranormal claims.

Nick used to work at the Ministry of Defence, where from 1991 to 1994 he was posted to a division where his duties included investigating UFOs. Initially sceptical, his official research and investigation convinced him that the UFO phenomenon raised important defence, national security and flight safety issues. He was particularly interested in cases where the witnesses were pilots or where UFOs were tracked on radar. Nick is now recognised as a leading authority on UFOs and the unexplained.

Chillzero © 2006

Catherine (Chillzero) writes from the perspective of scepticism, with an established background of belief in the paranormal. Having examined how psychics arrive at their predictions – from both sides of the fence – Catherine reveals here how they perform. It may be worth highlighting here that any psychic who appears on the media is granted permission to do so only under the laws that govern entertainment, and so the word perform is most appropriate.

I used to believe I had psychic abilities. I gave tarot readings, I consulted my spirit guide, and believed in the spirit of nature as being a force in all things. I would not consider the old me to be a con artist – I was not intentionally deceiving people. I honestly believed I was given the ability to interpret signs, and that I was using it for good. So I believed I was genuine, as did plenty of other people. I could read the traffic around me uncannily well, knowing when a driver was about to turn suddenly, or not turn where they signalled to. I was good at reading tarot cards and at helping people come to decisions about events in their lives. I would spook people by telling them who was calling when the phone rang, or that someone we were waiting for had just come into the bar although my back was turned to the door – that sort of thing.

However, even as I did all this, I constantly came up with questions about what I was doing, and how I managed to do it. Why could I only get instinctive flashes about things? Why could I not use this ‘power’ when I concentrated hard on something important? What about the times I was wrong (although they were freakishly few – even looking back as a hardened sceptic) – what happened then?The new-age people I was involved with had no tolerance for such curiosity. They felt I should just accept my gift unquestioningly, and use it to the best extent I could. But I was never satisfied with this. Finally, guided by some sceptics, I tested myself on what external information I could possibly have noticed, and realised that I am more of an expert on body language, or verbal subtleties than most. I soon realised that I was very good at picking up subliminal signals from people, or noticing things in the distance. In traffic I could see reflections in streetside windows, or a change in the lights on the ground of the road where a car was approaching unseen. Phone calls were often a matter of logical assumption and deduction – it was all a matter of fast critical/ logical thinking. With doing readings I realised I was getting a lot more information about a person’s situation from them or their friends – often before we even met to read. I wasn’t asking for it or actively seeking it out, but I picked up on things that were said, or more – the way they were said. I filed information away and didn’t even fully realize that this mental library was where I was drawing information from when I spoke to them later. As I read tarot I could discern from the other person’s reactions whether I was on track or completely wrong, and was horrified to realize during one reading that I had adjusted what I told them accordingly. This realization rocked my self perception completely, and I felt unable to continue the deception. Continuing on this path would have made me a con-artist, without question.

The more I investigated, the less paranormal my abilities seemed to become. I revisited old acquaintances from the new-age shops and conventions I used to frequent and was disappointed to find that I could apply the same reasoning to what they did. I could reasonably determine what they would tell others, and where they had identified that information. Some of my associates were of the sincere belief that they had genuine powers, and that they worked for the powers of good. Some others, however, became obvious to me as frauds, who knew that they were able to read and manipulate people and situations to their own benefit or profit. This benefit is not necessarily monetary; it could come in the form of barter, time, advertising (even just by word of mouth) or gifts. One woman in particular was very good at convincing people that she wished to have no reward, no publicity, and so on, and yet the way she did this gained their further confidence and admiration, and ensured that they raved about her to just about everyone they knew. From conversations I had with her, I know this was a deliberate and very effective ploy.

Consider this: if a psychic contacts you about your missing family member, then they are obviously aware of your story, and therefore your control over this situation is non-existent. They may have heard radio appeals for information, or seen the news bulletins. They may have read the newspapers that covered your plight. They may even have actively researched all of these. They may contact you via a family member or friend. The point is that they already know something, and even if they tell you that they have only been made aware of the smallest bit of information about you – why would you believe a stranger? How can you know how much they have actually managed to learn, or whether they have contacts within the police? If they come to you through a close associate, then no matter how well intentioned your friend/relative may be, you can’t know how much information they may have passed on – even unintentionally and unwittingly. Even if this psychic genuinely believes in their ability, you can never be certain that they haven’t been exposed to more information than perhaps even they realize.

Then there is the information they provide. There is no documented evidence that any psychic has ever provided information that led directly and accurately to a missing person. There are plenty of stories of psychic leading police to the general areas where bodies have been found, stories of psychics determining the final fates of people, or identifying a vague description of a perpetrator. These stories are not substantiated by evidence that could confirm that psychics are any more accurate than a non-psychic making an educated guess. And much of this information cannot be verified because of the incredibly high percentage of unsolved cases.

Finally, there is the approach that psychics take. At first, most psychics will be incredibly friendly and open. They need to do this to build a semblance of trust between themselves and you – they need you to relax, and to feel that you can open up to them. That way you will give out more information and signals than you realize. I know this from experience, although I never realized at the time how manipulative the reading situation could be. I believed I was merely trying to set the other person at ease, but there is definitely a little more to it. Next, psychics tend to be unshakably confident that they are right, or must at least be deferred to. I have never yet seen a self proclaimed psychic defer to anyone else’s knowledge on any subject, or admit they were wrong. This was where my problems with my abilities began to shake a little; I knew I wasn’t an expert in everything, and was reluctant to insist upon my answers in the face of someone who could possibly know better. A person’s confidence in a statement they put forward can make it very difficult for you to consider it critically. It can be frustrating to attempt to discuss it, and that kind of discussion is less likely to happen between you and a psychic when you are already in an altered state of reality; whether from grief, confusion, lack of sleep, or even years later, lack of closure; and desperate for information.

You may like to believe that people in general are not that manipulative, and ask why should psychics be singled out for such criticism? My answer is this: find your local area’s most successful salesperson – an estate agent, a car salesman, or even a higher priced clothes retailer for example. Go and observe them selling items. Listen to what they say about their products. Watch how they read signals from their clients, and how they adjust their approach to match different types of client, determined by the client’s dress, speech, confidence, or the car they arrived in. See for yourself how much information can be gleaned about a person and their current situation – without the benefit of press coverage. Now think, why should psychics be any different?

You will be approached with an offer of help. The insinuation will be that you cannot possibly turn this away, because it is the closest thing to walking away from your loved one when you see them wave a hand for you to find them. This is nothing more than manipulation of your emotions. You should feel no guilt for ignoring these ‘leads’ that do not arise from any established evidential route. They may claim that they cannot rest, that they cannot quiet the voices, until they give you the information. This makes a direct connection to your own sleepless nights and lack of closure. It is a play on your grief that should not be tolerated.

I never lost a family member, but I had several continuous years of incredible misfortune, and I can personally vouch for the negative side of believing in psychic ability. I got plenty of help initially, but this waned as my misfortunes just continued and increased. I suffered for years as my new-age associates explained karma to me: everything happens for a reason/ everything you do comes back to you/ things only happen to you that you deserve to experience. In other words, when bad things happen to you, you personally did something to deserve it – maybe not even in this lifetime. All events are lessons to learn, and if things don’t get better, then you are clearly failing to learn the correct lesson. I consider this attitude highly abusive, and it cost me many years of personal growth and comfort when I was made to believe that basically I deserved everything I got and that I wasn’t doing the right things to make things go right again. My mental health suffered dramatically as a result, because it was frustrating and depressing in the extreme to experience what I was going through, let alone to be made to feel that it was all my own fault anyway. I am here now to tell you that this is wrong. It is not your fault that this terrible thing has happened. You are not being punished for past life sins, and nor is your loved one. You have no cause for guilt if you turn a psychic’s offer of ‘help’ away.

If a psychic contacts you to offer their help, hand them a load of posters to distribute, or bring them on a land search if you are still at that stage. Make their help be productive to you, and consider why they would not join in this kind of effort if they really ‘felt’ your plight as they claim to. They may ask you to weigh up what they have to gain against what you have to lose, for a simple conversation. Well, just think about this for a moment. They usually gain publicity, even if they do not perform well. They will always have apologisers to justify whatever they may get wrong. Even if they are completely wrong they can still gain sympathy with believers because at least they did their duty to try to help. They also step into your life for a while. They gain involvement in your personal trauma, and become involved in a drama outside their own lives. What do you lose? You lose time. You spend energy that you need for yourself and those that are still around you. You get distracted from your control of your situation; having to incorporate new opinions and ideas into the steep learning curve that you are already having to cope with. You may get ideas for new areas to pursue – this may even led the police in new directions. Those directions could, unfortunately distract effort away from the correct areas for concern.

There are no genuine mediums. There are people with genuine intentions, but not psychic powers. There are people who could be helpful if you were discussing difficult choices you needed to make, but often your friends can do that for you without the mumbo jumbo. It’s a matter of reading, yes, but not reading cards, or signs, or what spirits show you – it’s a matter of reading the environment and the person before them. And then there are the con artists who read the newspapers, audience listings, area information, web sites, etc to glean what they need – as well as reading the people around them. Don’t waste your time and energy trying to distinguish between them. Your focus should remain on your loved ones, and not on placating a snubbed psychic, or inviting more strangers into your very personal situation.

John Jackson © UK-Skeptics

When looked at logically, alternative remedies make no sense. Why then are so many people placing their faith in these treatments that, essentially, do nothing?

What type of people are attracted to alternative medicine?

The first, and most obvious, answer that critics come up with is that those who use alternative remedies do so because they are stupid and gullible. This, however, is wrong.

The tendency is that people are more likely to use alternative treatments the more educated they are. The level of education a person has attained is probably the the best indicator that a person is likely to use some form of alternative treatment. This apparent paradox may be explained by the fact that more educated people are more likely to be interested in and read up on things that they are exposed to, they are more likely to question the perceived authority of conventional medical practitioners, and if they have an illness, be more likely to learn about it and consider other forms of treatment for it. Of course, educated people are likely to have more money to spend on alternative medicine too.

Being intelligent or well educated does not mean that a person is going to think more logically; in fact, it often results in them becoming better at defending and justifying their irrational beliefs.

There is not a single answer to who will use alternative remedies but there are some generalised groups of people who will use it based on perceptions of their health or their world view:

1. Those in poor general health.
   
   Someone in poorer than average health has obviously had less success in dealing with it than someone in good general health. This could be the reason why they are more likely to try all kinds of remedies in the hope that they will find one that will work for them.
   
   It is known that many people who use alternative remedies consider their health to be poorer than average. Many chronic (long term) conditions do not respond well to conventional treatments and this can lead to disillusionment in the sufferer, who may, understandably, seek out alternatives.
   
   
2. Somatizers.
   
   A somatizer is someone who experiences or reports physical symptoms yet there is no actual physical cause for their symptoms (this was originally called psychosomatic illness). Somatizers are often regarded as malingerers, and dismissed as such, which can leave them frustrated. They therefore turn, or may even be encouraged to turn by their doctor, to alternative remedies.
   
   Somatizers’ symptoms are thought to have psychological causes but people with such conditions strongly reject any psychological diagnosis, explanation or treatment; insisting that their symptoms are due to a physiological condition. It is this unwillingness to even consider any psychological explanation for their illness that is the reason why somatizers’ psychological problems are so difficult to treat with conventional medicine.
   
   Often, these people are after some sympathy, reassurance, and recognition; the emotional comfort of someone caring and taking them seriously. Alternative practitioners are very patient-focused, so they cater for this need better than conventional doctors do; however, the patient’s underlying cause is never addressed.

There are two aspects to giving treatments: the remedy and the doctor/patient relationship. Conventional medicine is strong on effective remedies but a consultation may be very short and the doctor may spend more time looking at a computer screen than at the patient.

Alternative remedies on the other hand, offer little or nothing in the way of effective treatments, but a good practitioner will spend a lot of time focusing on the patient. People who have conditions which are not being successfully treated or which are psychosomatic are more likely to be attracted to the alternative practitioner who offers a patient-centred, sympathetic approach.

1. Cultural beliefs and influences.
   
   Many new-age and eastern spiritual beliefs are based on an ideology called “pantheism”. This is a world view where God does not exist as taught by the monotheistic religions, the concept is a one of God being the spiritual essence or life force of the universe rather than being a separate entity and its creator. Chi, Prana, Innate Intelligence, Mana, and Vital Energy are all examples of this proposed, but never detected, life force.
   
   This is where the spirit-mind-body concept and the belief in a holistic approach to treatments originate. Reinforced by advertisers’ hyperbole, a large proportion of people have been led to believe that everything deemed natural, green, herbal, organic, or ‘in harmony with nature’ is somehow better than manufactured or scientific alternatives. This concept is based on the Naturalistic Fallacy: the false notion that there’s inherent good in nature.
   
   Alternative medicine is congruent with this world view. Those who see themselves as spiritual, environmentally friendly, in touch with nature etc. are the largest group of alternative medicine users.
   
   
2. Uncritical believers.
   
   Most people believe that conventional medicine works because that is what they have been told. They are not inquisitive and do not worry about how or why orthodox medicine works, as long as it does. They place trust in their doctor and the system of medicine they practise.
   
   The same is true for alternative medicine. People who use it, believe it works. They are not interested in the theory of how alternative remedies are meant to work or whether they have passed clinical trials; they place trust in the practitioners and the system in which they practise.
   
   It is unlikely that people would use something if they did not believe it worked. The belief in medicine, whether conventional or alternative, is usually formed with the same unquestioning attitude.

Some reasons that people seek out alternative remedies:

1. They are unhappy with, or distrustful of, conventional medicine.
   
   Unfortunately, conventional medicine is not perfect; people do have bad experiences with it. This can lead people to distrust conventional medicine and sometimes shun it. This is only true of a small proportion of people, but the big danger for them is that they are more likely to use alternative remedies as their primary source of healthcare. These people often decide to take full control of their own, and possibly also their family’s, health. The consequences of this may be damaging, even fatal.
   
   
2. Alternative remedies give them more personal control of their situation.
   
   People in poor health and those who have chronic conditions often like taking charge of their own health. Using alternative treatments gives them this autonomy. However, they do not shun conventional medicine; they are more likely to use alternative remedies in conjunction with conventional medicine.
   
   
3. The idea of alternative medicine closely matches their culture or belief system.
   
   Alternative treatments are appealing to those who hold new-age ideas and philosophies. Treatments are claimed to be holistic, and healing is the result of achieving spiritual harmony.
   
   There are probably not many people who would claim to be pantheistic new-agers; however, the advertising industry has embraced these philosophies and coupled them with a distorted view of the natural world to create the illusion that everything that is ‘natural’ and ‘in harmony with nature’ is somehow better for us.
   
   This has resulted in a substantial subculture, or market sector, of people who believe in the spirit-mind-body concept. Therefore, words like: holistic; natural; herbal; organic; etc. appeal to them.

Conclusion.

People use alternative medicines because they accept the claims made for them at face value and believe that they work; the concept of alternative medicine matches their (often spiritual) world-view; or those in poor health are looking in hope for something that works for their condition.

Alternative remedies may not be capable of passing a clinical trial, or even of actually curing anything, but they do fulfil a need in many people. Fulfilling emotional needs and curing illnesses are two different aspects of treatment.

The big problem, of course, is that because alternative remedies do little or nothing with regard to curing illness, there is an inherent, major assumption (made clear by the lack of government regulation) that people who use alternative remedies will know when conventional treatment is needed in the case of serious illness: sadly, this is not always the case.

Errors in skeptical debates: Argumentum ad Derren Browniam.

John Jackson © 2008

1. The first problem with this argument is that Derren Brown’s ability to replicate what another person does in no way actually disproves it. It does weaken their claim as it shows that it can be replicated by normal means, but it doesn’t disprove it: he may simply be obtaining similar results by a different method.
   
   
2. Secondly, people making this argument make the assumption that Derren Brown is using some advanced psychological trickery and, by inference, that psychics/mediums are doing it the same way (using advanced and complex methods) – this is not the case: there’s nothing advanced or particularly complicated about an interaction where psychic belief and claimed ability are encountered that results in a successful reading. In fact, it’s remarkably simple.

In many instances, people state that Derren achieves his amazing psychological manipulations using things like subliminal messages (which don’t really work) or NLP (which is mostly bollocks). All this succeeds in doing is rejecting one form of nonsense (the psychic claim) for another (the bogus psychological explanations Derren gives).

Derren Brown is a magician; a mentalist. In order for mentalism (which really mimics claims of ESP) to work well it has to appear to be something mysterious. Many mentalist feats are performed – such as predicting a 3-digit number someone will choose by (apparently) writing it down first – and the trick leaves people cold because they know that it’s a trick; the problem being that the mentalist achieves his feat without a plausible mechanism or explanation as to how it’s done (unless he’s actually claiming to be psychic; but that’s another kettle of fish). What Derren does is create a plausible mechanism for doing his mentalism. He’s created a persona whereby he can psychologically manipulate people to choose whatever number/word/etc. he chooses to ‘implant’ in a person’s head. The trick is exactly the same as standard mentalism but he’s embellishing it.

It’s the embellishment of standard mentalist tricks that’s the reason that Derren Brown is so good at what he does – not some fantastical psychological ability or the use of advanced NLP techniques. This fallacy (that Derren uses advanced psychology etc.) comes up all over the place, but I do see skeptics (or at least people who don’t believe in psychics) using it too.

The psychology and NLP explanation for what Derren Brown can do is an intentionally false one. It’s what makes Derren’s mentalism ‘work’ and what makes him such a fascinating persona but the explanation is all a part of the illusion.

In summary: Derren Brown’s feats neither disprove nor explain psychic claims in any way.