Double posting

Originally posted by bogomil
Neither have I seen anyone fall over in a christian context, but I HAVE seen theatrics in our local pentacostal congregation.

I debated mentioning Pentecostals, because they definitely have an aspect of the theatrical in them, but I have a couple of friends who were raised Pentecostal (though are now Methodist) and I've talked to them about the whole "speaking in tongues" bit and they seemed rather sincere in their belief that it was on the up and up. Having never witnessed it, I have no opinion, but without my friends' testimony, I'd be rather skeptical.

I heard recently that the Pentecostals are the fastest growing denomination, particularly in Latin America. I suspect that speaking in tongues plays no small part in that.

Originally posted by bogomil
For me the direct experience was authentic (as compared to many other 'initiations' I've had, which seemed fakes). I e.g. also tried the pentacostal version of holy spirit: Nothing. This is ofcourse not a conclusive validation of the pentacostal claims.

I agree that experiences such as yours and my Pentecostal friends are interesting, probably because I have nothing to compare it to. Methodists are a pretty staid bunch -- apart from a lot of singing and potlucks, the experience lacks the fervour of the more charismatic groups. When I go to Catholic Mass, it's even less so, since no one sings.

So I always took the speaking in tongues thing with a grain of salt, because it seemed a bit... well, opportunistic... that it happened with regularity in some congregations, and never in others. But after talking to my friends, I give it a bit more credibility, because their description of the experience, not only being the one speaking, but being one who interprets, leaves me with the impression that it's not just people making noise for attention. Even if it's not something supernatural, they're convinced that it is.

Of course, Brown demonstrates that you can convince someone of anything with the proper set up and act, but one of the two is a preacher's kid, and she never mentioned her father having special training in duping his flock.

But, like I said, it's not my background, and I doubt that I'll ever experience it, so I'll just take my friends' word (and yours) that such experiences can happen, and feel very real, and not worry about it. Thanks for sharing that.

adjensen

Of course, Brown demonstrates that you can convince someone of anything with the proper set up and act, but one of the two is a preacher's kid, and she never mentioned her father having special training in duping his flock.

Lol. How much "special training" do you think it takes ?

Brown's performance is based on managing several "little things" to accomplish an effect that he can pass off as a "big thing." That's not a criticism of him, it's his job, and he does it well.

(In fact, Brown's signature is the true simplicity of his tricks, much as Penn & Teller's signature is that they tell you how the trick works, and it still works anyway. Brown's "explanations" alternate between his basking in that true simplicity and, especially in his elaborate pseudo-psychology monologues, simply being patter that is "part of the act.")

There is probably not one of those "little things" that you don't know, it's just that maybe you don't know you know it, or you don't notice it being used, or don't recognize its importance to the overall effect when you see it being used.

For example, and I am working from the Youtube version, we can probably agree that the first subject, the woman, is a paid confederate. If you have had any experience in the theater at all, then you recognize their little set-piece as the sort of thing that is done by actors in workshops and classes all the time. OK, so the audience who is on to it leaves (which Brown will announce as being because of their discomfort with that happened... yeah, discomfort is one word for having any background at all in theater).

So what did Brown pay her for? To influence the other subjects? Yes, everyone is on notice what is expected of them. But she is also there for our benefit, isn't she? Brown doesn't tell us that he paid her, so she's a "hit." More important for the overall effect, I think, she has provided the ingredient that is missing from the rest of the performance: some connection, any explicit connection at all, to religious belief and belief change.

OK, of the "genuine" subjects, the ones who stay after the intermission, what is the single most important thing Brown says to them, to all of them? You know the answer, but I'll bet you don't know you know.

Stand up and put your feet together.

We need hardly invoke either woo-woo psychology or charisms of the Holy Spirit to predict that people typically will, when asked, stand up and put their feet together. And they will keep standing with their feet together indefinitely. And from that fact alone, their eventual falling over is inevitable.

Brown need only communicate to them that he prefers them to fall backward rather than forward. Having a chair behind them, or standing behind the first subject after a quick word about what a good falling-person-catcher Brown is, suffices.

That's it. That's the "trick." Everything else is stagey window dressing.

Well, one of the "else's" is something that you might pick up in law school, instead of the theater:

Brown: What are you feeling now? Be honest.

Subject (having just toppled onto the floor): Wow, I feel so weird, so different inside....

Brown: You felt God, then? I'm not trying to put words into your mouth... but you're trying to say it was like some, as if something religious...

Subject: Maybe it was something like that, like what the girl said, I....

Brown: Thank you very much.

Give me a break.

So, on to what I quoted of yours. Your friend's father could do this and not know he is doing it. That's how simple it is. He could blunder into doing it.

Intentional deception is not the issue. Unintentional deception is easy, reliable, and even more likely to avoid detection indefinitely than the intentional variety. I mean a preacher's kid, talking about her dad? It's the Protestant equivalent of a car full of nuns. Of course they are being truthful. These are women of God!

Derren Brown uses a system called nuro-linguistic programming (NLP) which includes Ericksonian hypnosis, there a ton of books on it that are well worth reading, once you know how its done it can no longer be easily done to you

Religions use many of these tricks, for example closing your eyes (which put you into a suggestible alpha state) and then listening to some programmer instructions – this trick is sometimes called prayer has been used for years

Another example, a Jehovah’s Witness asked me “what do I think will happen when Jesus returns?”
Note: this is a simple ploy, the ideas is to frame the question in such a way as to get the answer you want, so I would have to buy into his “Jesus returns” thing to answer him

My response was to ask him what specifically makes you believe in this proposition that Jesus might return?

Originally posted by eight bits
Intentional deception is not the issue. Unintentional deception is easy, reliable, and even more likely to avoid detection indefinitely than the intentional variety. I mean a preacher's kid, talking about her dad? It's the Protestant equivalent of a car full of nuns. Of course they are being truthful. These are women of God!

lol, good point, and, truth be told, I never asked her about it, so maybe he did have special training in psychological manipulation

I don't really have an issue with Derren Brown, apart from what I've noted, nor with similar acts like Penn and Teller (whom I personally don't like, because often they are intentionally cruel,) because they are entertainment, and so long as it's viewed as such, that's fine.

It's when said entertainment is promoted as "How to convert an Atheist into a Christian", when the video neither shows "how", nor does it show anyone being converted into a Christian, that it becomes baseless propaganda, and that's what I have a problem with.

I enjoy Derren Brown's performances, but he is just another magician. His other shows have him pretend that his heartbeat can be stopped for minutes at a time whilst he walks over glass and has assistants step on his head and back whilst his face is pushed to the glass that he just walked through ([pulse-less - as it were] after just having a plastic bag put over his head to help stop his heart.)
You do simply have to realize that it's a show people. An invitation to the suspension of disbelief which you allow.

e.g. Does anyone actually believe that David Copperfield can make a space shuttle disappear from behind a curtain WITHOUT the use of a revolving stage and a host of 30 or so amazed looking accomplices as audience?

Bottom line is it's just a show.