45. Researching Psychic Mediums (Podcast)

[alextsakiris]

Guest: Dr. Julie Beischel, on the survival of consciousness and her proof-focused studies on psychic mediums.



The Windbridge Institute for Applied Research in Human Potential

Click here to read more ...

[Larry Boy]

I have to say that the comment about what's more important between cancer or survival research left quite a bitter taste in my mouth. Cancer research has saved enormous amounts of lives around the world!

Also, I think you could be more nuanced in your discussion of skeptics.

Keep up the good work with your research projects though!

[DavidRavenMoon]

This was a really good show! I thoroughly enjoyed it from start to finish!

I thought Dr. Beischel's comments on the state of science research were right on the money.

I also agreed with everything said about "professional" skeptics. Debunking is not science.

[LeoM]

Originally Posted by Larry Boy

I have to say that the comment about what's more important between cancer or survival research left quite a bitter taste in my mouth. Cancer research has saved enormous amounts of lives around the world!

Also, I think you could be more nuanced in your discussion of skeptics.

Keep up the good work with your research projects though!

True but if we survive death and so does other animals then it's very important.

[mcairo]

The most interesting part of the interview to me was to hear a young researcher who has refused to surrender or be jaded by the rock she is rolling up that hill.

Julie Beischel's sense of humor and optimism, plus her ability to actually communicate in English without resorting to science speak, is totally refreshing. Contrast that to Dr. Steven Novella, who, whether he has done the research or not, always tries to high brow his way into a position of authority by sounding, "oh so IV League."

[Open Mind]

For a nice person like Julie Beischel who doesn't debate with skeptics ..... I thought her comment on Michael Shermer's motives was soo cruel........
... and probably true

Come on Michael, prove the lady wrong, a donation towards research from your magazine would be very cool

Originally Posted by Larry Boy

I have to say that the comment about what's more important between cancer or survival research left quite a bitter taste in my mouth. Cancer research has saved enormous amounts of lives around the world!

I think both are important, probably health is No.1 priority though. Surivival evidence would change peoples viewpoint in this world too before an afterlife

In materialism we are puppets of chance. Nor can ethics in materialism be based upon any solid scientific foundation. There is also no such thing as a harmful thought (if telepathy doesn't exist) only harmful action when caught. There is no real 'free will' to choose right from wrong either, in materialism beneath all conscious decisions lies just unconscious responses. Add to that the fear of dying, depression when this life goes wrong beyond repair and pressure to be greedy because we think we only have one chance at life.

If survival is true, I just hope we can avoid making more organized religions out of it

[Chris Noble]

Originally Posted by Open Mind

For a nice person like Julie Beischel who doesn't debate with skeptics ..... I thought her comment on Michael Shermer's motives was soo cruel........
... and probably true

The ad hominem argument was additionally based on faulty premisses. If some mediums could demonstrate that they indeed do communicate with the dead this does not mean that we are going to run out of things to skeptical of. Homeopathy is still going to be bullshit. Intelligent design is still going to be bullshit. Pyramid power is still going to be bullshit. I hope that nobody here thinks that all paranormal and pseudoscientific claims are all true. I somehow doubt that Shermer will be out of a job.

On the other hand Julie Beischel is a professional mediumship researcher. She abandoned her scientific career to which she said there's no turning back. Perhaps Beischel should have thought through her argument a bit more.

[alextsakiris]

Originally Posted by Larry Boy

I have to say that the comment about what's more important between cancer or survival research left quite a bitter taste in my mouth. Cancer research has saved enormous amounts of lives around the world!

Also, I think you could be more nuanced in your discussion of skeptics.

Keep up the good work with your research projects though!

Cancer has touched my family... I know scientific progress towards cures and treatments are very important... and I think we need to find some sort of balance/proportionality -- how about $1B for survival and then we can re-evaluate and re-prioritize.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Open Mind

In materialism we are puppets of chance. Nor can ethics in materialism be based upon any solid scientific foundation.

Hang on ... what are ethics based on under other metaphysics?

There is no real 'free will' to choose right from wrong either, in materialism beneath all conscious decisions lies just unconscious responses.

Hang on ... how does free will work under other metaphysics?

~~ Paul

[Open Mind]

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Hang on ... what are ethics based on under other metaphysics?

Paul I am more talking about accepting the consequences of psi, if true.

Telepathy (even as a brain function) would imply how we think can affect others, whether the person is consciously aware or unconsciously of it. For example as in DMILS experiments. Thinking badly of people becomes unethical? In current materialism there is no such thing as a harmful thought, only harmful action.

Resonance theories If something like 'formative causation' or 'presence of the past' or 'morphic resonance' is found true .... .doesn't that it resemble karmic consequences in ways?

Cosmic Memory Theories usually offered by super-psi theorists (more so than survivalists) . If psychics are only reading information from the past stored in some sort of akashic record stored in time, then all actions are stored in time? In current materialism a harmful act not detectable by another person, can never be found out later.

Let us move to survival now, the effects of action would survive death. For example if one murders someone and consciousness (and memory) survive death, the person isn't dead, the crime is still known, if not in this world.

If the *only* definition of 'objective' reality is matching of subjective thoughts via physical measurement, then if telepathy is being filtered out by the brain and telepathy increases upon brain death, thought created virtual realities may exist, which may be either pleasant or unpleasant?

But hey this is wild speculation

Now Paul, you will argue that similar ethics can merge from materialism, many yes but it is less clear. For example is adultery wrong, if the wife doesn't know and can't find out? In materialism it doesn't mentally hurt her because she doesn't know and never finds out. You can say a promise is broken but that is mental subjective thing not based upon matter.

That is what I mean when I say ethics can have no solid base in materialism, it is social construct. Materialists use term like 'what is best for the whole' .... whereas it is more direct in other metaphysics because all minds are supposedly linked at some deeper level. In fact there could be such things as mental laws