Convictions & Dogma: Not Just for the Religious

      Just like the religious have convictions and who dogmatically cling to their beliefs, there are people from the "metaphysical" camp who have and do the same. While it should be pointed out that some "metaphysical" therapies used in conjunction with modern medicine seem to work, there is, to date, zero objective confirmation that these therapies work independently(excluding placebo effect), and in fact, people can become sicker and even die from using alternative therapies exclusively. Considering this fact, it is beyond argument that such pseudo-science should be denounced on every level, despite that there might be a small percentage of people who aren't charlatans and who honestly believe that what they do "works". The former people know it's a bunch of bullshit, yes, yet, they choose to capitalize on bilking the gullible out of their money. Despicable? Yes. But for now, I want to focus on the latter group - that is, I want to focus on the small percentage of metaphysical practitioners who genuinely believe that their "powers" have a referent in reality and who passively give way to the former group. So, the reasons they believe it? Well, of course, because they want to believe it. But mostly, because of the testimonies of their "patients", which is subjective validation. When confirmation bias is wedded to subjective validation, it is a recipe for self-deception.

      As I said in the title, dogmatism isn't exclusive to the religious. Just like a Pastor or Minister is convicted to his or her beliefs and may have a vested interest in defending those beliefs, since, let's face it, their career and livelihood depends on it, the metaphysical practitioners have the same vested interest in defending their beliefs. For years and years I had engaged in conversation/debate with a Christian woman named "Karla". I eventually bowed out of the conversation because it was clear to me that she was deluded, and happily so. In 2-3 years, this woman's very best evidence for how she knew she was "right" about Christianity was that she had seen a family member's arm lengthened with her own eyes. There's no way it could be trickery/self deception, because her "feelings" confirmed it was "real".

      Well, for close to a year, I've been in an exchange with the "metaphysical" equivalent of "Karla". This woman, who calls herself "The Duracell Bunny"(but prior to this name she had taken a name that was highly suggestive of being one who has powers---think, "Miss Cleo"), is just as dogmatically attached to her beliefs as any religious person I have ever encountered. Sadly, this women creates more head-desk moments than "Karla" did. Why? Because she claims to understand what good and bad evidence is, but yet, at the end of the day this amounts to her paying lip-service to it because she offers the same horrible, flimsy, anecdotal evidence, over and over and over, ad nauseam.

Here is some of what she purports to do:

• claims to work with "energy" as it pertains to metaphysical practices such as TT(Touch therapy) and "distant healing", and even has the school credentials.('got Seminary?!).
• claims to "connect" with deceased people and various animals---and when I say "connect", I mean she claims to "communicate" using ESP. In other words, she claims to be a "spiritual medium".
• claims to diagnose various medical conditions..e.g..."kidney problems", and if the person is close to dying, she can "predict" when they'll pass.

      I attempted to point out to "The Energizer Bunny", heretoforth TEB, that her "evidence", which is largely her clients - IOW, other people who can testify that her powers "work" - is no more credible or convincing than the fact that Karla the Christian can testify that a man at her church lengthened her relative's arm. It is no more credible or convincing than when someone gets a reading from "Cleo" and says, "Wow!....how could she have possibly known that about me?!?!"

      To the critical thinker, of course the more likely explanation for the former example is that the man is a charlatan who uses and counts on subjective validation. In the later case, the more likely explanation is a cold reading, which again requires subjective validation. BTW, when I asked Karla why the spiritual healer she met hadn't reproduced his powers in a clinical setting along with a control, she made excuse after excuse after excuse..e.g.."You wouldn't believe it even if I had video or X-rays", yadda, yadda. Well, TEB's excuse is that there isn't enough time or money to prove her "powers" in a scientific setting. So, in lieu of the evidence that might actually change my mind, she's taken to writing daily posts on her blog(i.e..her online diary) describing personal anecdote, after personal anecdote, after personal anecdote. She even posted a YouTube video of a cat that is (allegedly) "soothing a baby to sleep" with its paw. And although it is written along side the video......

Please watch and tell whether this still has anything to do with natural and/or conditioned behaviour or not, 

...her mind is made up, a priori; she is convicted to her belief that certain animals have spirits with which they can communicate and relate to humans. 

       So, like clockwork, TEB has no credible evidence for her fantastic claims other than that which convinces the already-convinced. This "evidence" is useless to me, and since she cannot get that part through her cranium, I made my blog "invitation only" and I stopped attempting to break through to her on her blog(at least for the time being), which makes her "hyper".

      But where evidence is concerned, I need to back up, because I made proving her powers as easy as anyone could possibly make it. That is, in the past I offered, in the way of challenge, to have her tell me something about a deceased friend that only he and I would know. Welp, much to my unsurprise, she failed. She couldn't do it, citing a few general tidbits that could easily apply to anyone...e.g...."He played a practical joke once!"[paraphrased]. Next I wrote down a number between 1-100 and sketched an animal on a piece of paper and slid it underneath a desk lamp where it still sits, undisclosed, waiting for her to use her "powers" to disclose what's written. What did I get? More excuses.

      In closing, the following is how The Skeptic's Dictionary describes "Subjective Validation":

 Subjective validation is the process of validating words, initials, statements, or signs as accurate because one is able to find them personally meaningful and significant. Subjective validation explains why many people are seduced by the apparent accuracy of pseudo-scientific personality profiles. Subjective validation deludes everyone from the housewife who thinks her happiness depends on her blood type or horoscope, to the FBI agent who thinks criminal profiles are spot on, to the therapist who thinks her Rorschach readings are penetrating portraits of psychological disorders.

Subjective validation is an essential element of any successful cold reading done by astrologers, palm readers, tarot readers, mediums, and the like. The sitter in such readings must cooperate. Fortunately for the medium, most sitters are usually eager for the reader to succeed and are willing to work hard to find personal meaning in whatever the reader throws out. In a successful cold reading, the sitter will be convinced that the accuracy of the reading was not due to her ability and willingness to cooperate but rather to the powers of astrology, palmistry, tarot, or mediumship.