Quote

....remember that pseudoscientific beliefs serve important motivational functions. Many paranormal claims, such as those concerning extrasensory perception, out-of-body experiences, and astrology, appeal to believers' deep-seated needs for hope and wonder, as well as their needs for a sense of control over the often uncontrollable realities of life and death. Most believers in the paranormal are searching for answers to profound existential questions, such as "Is there a soul?" and "Is there life after death?" As psychologist Barry Beyerstein (1999) noted (in a play on P.T. Barnum's famous quip), "there's a seeker born every minute" (p. 60). Therefore, in presenting students with scientific evidence that challenges their paranormal beliefs, we should not be surprised when many of them become defensive. In turn, defensiveness can engender an unwillingness to consider contrary evidence.

One of the two best means of lessening this defensiveness (the second is the Eighth Commandment below) is to gently challenge students' beliefs with sympathy and compassion, and with the understanding that students who are emotionally committed to paranormal beliefs will find these beliefs difficult to question, let alone relinquish. Ridiculing these beliefs can produce reactance (Brehm, 1966) and reinforce students' stereotypes of science teachers as close-minded and dismissive. In some cases, teachers who have an exceptionally good rapport with their class can make headway by challenging students' beliefs with good-natured humor (e.g., "I'd like to ask all of you who believe in psychokinesis to please raise my hand"). However, teachers must ensure that such humor is not perceived as demeaning or condescending.

and

"...we must distinguish pseudoscience from metaphysics. Unlike pseudoscientific claims, metaphysical claims (Popper, 1959) cannot be tested empirically and therefore lie outside the boundaries of science. In the domain of religion, these include claims regarding the existence of God, the soul, and the afterlife, none of which can be refuted by any conceivable body of scientific evidence. Nevertheless, certain religious or quasi-religious beliefs, such as those involving "intelligent design" theory, which is the newest incarnation of creationism (see Miller, 2000), the Shroud of Turin, and weeping statues of Mother Mary, are indeed testable and hence suitable for critical analysis alongside of other questionable naturalistic beliefs. By conflating pseudoscientific beliefs with religious beliefs that are strictly metaphysical, instructors risk (a) needlessly alienating a sizeable proportion of their students, many of whom may be profoundly religious; and (b) (paradoxically) undermining students' critical thinking skills, which require a clear understanding of the difference between testable and untestable claims.


(Corboy)

Metaphysical. There is no way to prove or disprove that Byron Katie 'woke up' and 'dropped her story' and was freed from suffering. We cannot prove or disprove that the incident occurred, nor that a cockroach actually ran over her foot while she was laying on the floor of a room in a halfway house. We cannot prove or disprove that. This part is metaphysical

Scientific: Does The Work work better than a placebo effect in 1) relieving major depression as DXed by tests, and given the expense of attending School for the Work, or 28 day Turn Around House, does this give better relief from depression than curren therapies that justify the financial expense, and are the benefits acceptably greater and longer lasting than the risks. (Risk benefit ratio)

These are the kinds of questions than CAN be proved or disproved--these kinds of questions are not metaphysical but scientfic and can be dealt with using research design.

Double blind testing by different research teams in different settings, can be used to determin whether BK's The Work actually works any better than a placebo in healing depression and whether, one year later, the persons still report relief. (Double blind means persons who test as depressed according to commonly accepted measures such as Hamilton Depression scale, MMPI, and more recent tests, and are assigned, randomly (coin toss) to a BK Work group or to a group where people just sit and talk (one has to find a way to ensure that the Work group is not in any way identified with Byron Katie which means her face, her name cannot in any way be mentioned--which would make this a very interesting matter. Real medical psychological methods are not usually tied to the personality of their proponent)

And the researchers and subjects would have no way to know which of them have been assigned to the Work group and which to the control group. (This would have to be done possibly within an inpatient setting so that friends of the subjects could be prevented from saying, "Hey, the stuff you are working on sounds just like Byron Katies Four Questions. Here, I ran a google search and its identical. Cool. I hear all these great things about Katie, she was on Oprah!!". Bang, the double blind study protocol would be shot to smithereens unless some way could be found to request and ensure that subjects not dicuss the materials outside of their group with anyone--part of the challenge of doing objective research on a fame/charisma driven venture)

Quote

Excerpted from Sleights of Mind: What the Neuroscience of Magic Reveals about Our Everyday Deceptions, by Stephen L. Macknik and Susana Martinez-Conde, with Sandra Blakeslee, by arrangement with Henry Holt and Company, LLC (US) and Profile Books (UK). Copyright © 2010 by Stephen L. Macknik and Susana Martinez-Conde.



Apollo Robbins, master pickpocket and celebrity magician, is sweeping his hands around the body of the fellow he has just chosen from the audience. “What I’m doing now is fanning you,” he informs his mark, “just checking to see what you have in your pockets.” Apollo’s hands move in a flurry of gentle strokes and pats over the man’s clothes. More than 200 scientists are watching him like hawks, trying to catch a glimpse of fingers trespassing into a pocket. But to all appearances this is a perfectly innocent and respectful frisking. “I have a lot of intel on you now,” Apollo continues. “You scientists carry a lot of things.”

(quoted in sidebar to this article)

Quote

In Brief

Humans have a hardwired process of attention and awareness that is hackable.

When people focus on one thing, their brains automatically suppress everything that happens around it. ­Magicians have devised many techniques that exploit this “tunnel vision.”

People can pay attention in various ways. Magicians exploit “top-down,” or deliberate, attention by, say, asking a person to scan a book. They capture “bottom-up” attention with distracting displays such as doves fluttering out of a hat.

Quote

http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=Mind+over+Magic%3f+Conjuring+Reveals+How+Our+Neural+Circuits+Can+Be+Hacked&d=1032342079247&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=cb513e93,b473c597

Quote

To disown our story, or attempt egolessness is a lot like trying to exercise some kind of option to become godlike. We then choose what is and is not relevant both within ourselves and with regard to others. This viewpoint allows morality, although relative, becomes passé.

And it leads to a certain kind of nihilistic perspective wherein nothing really matters. If we disown our story we also disown any and all social connections to it. That means no one else’s story is relevant or important or even to be acknowledged either. ....

There is an inability to distinguish in an specific situation what is and isn’t important to someone else.

This lack of discernment comes from a lack of empathy and compassion. For without the ego we cannot fully appreciate human experience. Discarding story or ego, that is remaining outside of it also causes us to remain outside of empathy. There is no place to connect with other human beings. There is only something of a bubble in which we then live. And we can’t even penetrate to the heart of that bubble for that would mean engaging in the aspects of the human story which we wish to discard.

So without entering our stories fully and working through them and understanding them we are left with a rather shallow existence and no way to make a deep connection with the rest of humanity.