originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: neoholographic
First of all, a psychiatrist cannot validate claims of psychic capability. Why? Because psychiatry is a science in the same way that pop music is a
concerto. It is soft edged, imprecise, and experimental doctrine in that field is about as rigorous as the much famed "man look" when a fellow has
misplaced his keys.
I wouldn't even call it science, because it is based on observations and opinions. Now surely if I see a star somewhere, someone else can observe it
too and that's all fine. But if I look at a woman, I may find her attractive, while another man might find her repulsive or vice versa. Psychiatry has
something similar. It's not like there is a suspect of psychosis and then they put them in a room with 9 others and the psychiatrist has to guess who
the patient might be. No, they get reports and their views are all colored before they even see a patient.
Furthermore, I am surprised to see this distinction made between individuals who have negative or positive experiences with the voices in their
heads, because as far as I was aware, the polarity of ones experiences do not have any effect on the diagnosis. If you hear voices, absent a speaker
to speak them, then you have schizophrenia, not superpowers, regardless of whether they are telling you to eat the flesh of the innocent, or make sure
that you tell the next person you meet that everything will be ok, and not to forget to pick up the laundry.
Now I believe in an afterlife and also spirits but that there shouldn't be contact else it's bad. But there is no proof, it's just my belief I chose
more or less. So that is the only correct response to hearing voices; it's a defect or schizophrenia, I would say it's bad spirits because they have
no place in the world of the living with some exceptions. But no one can say it's a physical defect since there are no means to proof it (there are no
DNA tests, no brainscans even though the public usually believes there is).
So as to your surprise, it's all about appearances. Psychics are usually stronger as a person and able to defend themselves and their lifestyle in
court while psychiatrists usually go after the mentally weak who are not.
There's also another thing, usually people spread fear about people who hear voices but again a psychic might be convincing in their denial of being a
threat and reassure they are not while schizophrenics (weaker-minded) can't. It's all a game based on willpower since there is no physical proof. Some
psychiatrists can say someone is a danger to themselves or others with such conviction the listener might assume there's been a long trial of tests
and it's the same as the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the sun.
Now, scientifically speaking, showing a difference between these two is actually impossible, leading the critical thinker to believe that they are
indeed, identical conditions which present differently depending on the particular mind in which they occur. However, you posted a list of supposed
On that list, there are some capabilities which can be tested very easily, with a great deal of scientific methodology.
These, and probably ONLY these can be studied in a truly scientific fashion, with any hope of successful or useful result. Levitation, Pyrokinesis,
and Telekinesis all have visible effects on solid matter, which can be recorded using a plethora of apparatus, in multiple spectra, without reliance
on taking anyone at their word. Precognition could also be tested in a scientifically valid manner, by simply blindfolding an adept of the talent, and
putting them in a room with fifty or so dodgeball launchers.
But testing one of the many supposed expressions of psychic powers, which are entirely internal in their outworking, seems a bloody stupid thing to
do, if what you are after doing, is using ACTUAL science to study the claim that people walking the world, have psychic abilities.