I'm sure everyone has had that said to them at some point when debating the reality of mediums and other erroneous beliefs.
I find it particularly annoying as:
- It's used as a 'virtue word' (a one that is specifically used to portray a positive image).
Because of this, it makes it hard to argue against it as it shifts the focus of debate from whether mediums are really communicating with the dead to a one of them providing comfort to people. Then the skeptic is made to look like he is trying to take away or deny something positive from the recipient of the reading.
- I'm not actually convinced that it is true.
OK, some people will find some solace from someone telling them things they want to hear, but in general people go to psychics and mediums looking for guidance and help with emotional issues (boyfriend trouble etc.) and as they often keep going back or phoning the hotlines, nothing ever really gets resolved.
That's not giving comfort, it's exploitation.
I think it's an argument to be aware of and it's often (probably unintentionally) thrown into a debate as a red herring.
Has anyone else got any thoughts on how to handle it? ???
.
John,
One idea is to point out that, even if no obvious harm has been done to the general wellbeing of those who buy these goods and services, they have still paid money for nothing. And if they haven't got much money to start with, the real harm becomes obvious.
BTW, do you know that your Evil Twin was hanging about here the other day? :)
The problem with trying to counter the argument is that it takes a long time to explain why it is not valid. Like I say, it's because 'comfort' is used as a 'virtue word' in the first place that creates a problem.
I'm thinking that the next time it's used on me I'll ask the person whether they can answer their own question which might give the chance to explore it a bit more.
Who's that then? ???BTW, do you know that your Evil Twin was hanging about here the other day?
And what makes you think I'm any better?
.
Another thought is to ask whether buyer and seller are agreed that what's on offer is comfort.
My experience ( anecdote alert!) is that neither party is very keen to say yes to this, as they can see that the next question is going to be " False comfort?" So they are much more likely to say that any comfort provided is a byproduct of the process. That is, the buyer is comforted by the thought that he has learned something true and useful from the vendor.
But now we are back where we want to be: talking about truth, not comfort. Seems to work, some of the time...
The Evil Twin? Rum cove, calling himself Dodgy John or something like that, swanking about the place wearing your avatar...
No I think people go to mediums because they want some sort of contact witha loved one who's died quite often, now to pretend that they do is more than exploitation really isn't it. it's plain fraud!
My Mother died when I was a very young child, and I went to a medium when I was a teenager, seeking... I dunno, some kind of information about what my mum was like.
I quickly realised I was wasting my time and valuable money, and looking back I think it's really bad to play on people's emotions like that.
Hear hear, Ginger. I have known people who succumbed to the same temptation as you did, and of course there is nothing to be had but empoverishment and delusion.
Such deception would be dealt with ruthlessly by Trading Standards, if it was in any other service industry. Where's a decent Fraudulent Mediums Act when you need it >:(
Perhaps we should set up a regulating body - call it off-Phych or something..Originally Posted by Jocky
I'm sure we come up with a really good name, how about the Office for Psychic investigation and services - OFPIS. :D
I like the Office for Spooky Incidents Devoid of Explanation - OFSIDE
I vote for the Office For Totally Outrageous Psychic Illogical Claims
or is that OFTOPIC ....
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks