Psi and hierarchical complexity of reality

#1
In my opinion psi is in an field with so many variables that we can not wait univocal and entirely reproducible results. It is the hierarchical complexity of reality: from the physical and chemical field, the biological field through to the psychological field where parapsychology is, there is a spectrum of difficulty in obtaining more or less definitive evidence.
 
#2
I always wonder, why there is no one else thinking in the same way as me.

The reason why I (as a true skeptic) do not put weights on paranormal phenomenon accounts, is not they are univocal or not reproducible, rather, is whether they present "content full of details", that is also to say, whether they provide abundant information.

Univocal or irreproducible are not the problem, the problem is that paranormal phenomenon accounts provide no sufficient information, no "content full of details", no new insight, whereas academic science always provides new theory, new discoveries, new insight, new information.

Sure, we can't 100% prove paranormal believes are all incorrect, as well as we can't 100% prove science is always correct.
But the "100% prove" is not the most important for us to concern right now. The most important thing is that we need information to further investigate.

Paranormal explanations always camouflage or disguise as if they know a lot of knowledges from the vast higher dimension, but they actually tell us almost nothing! On the other side, science is super abundant and complex and it is evolving everyday!

If there is a God, or there is existence in higher dimension, when they wish to tell us something, they tell us straightly and directly, they don't need to be shy or play game of "you guess".
They do not tell us many things. So it is easy to deduce either they do not exist at all, or they are not interested in communicating with us.

The things are not that simple. Reality is always super complex. Science tells me something very very complex, so I believe science.
Religions, paranormal explanations, superstitious traditions, they tell me very very little, so I do not believe them.

Someone would tell me, no! they do not tell us very very little, there are plethora of evidences of paranormal here and there, everywhere.
Ha ha, hi, man, check them again and you will find those are all disguise! They never tell us many things, especially when compared with the science (which is already sufficiently complex), but they always pretend as if they are profound or mysterious.

I do not believe them, this is the stance of a true skeptic, and I have presented my reasons, in short, the "information" of the truth.
 
#3
@tarantulanebula
If there is a God, or there is existence in higher dimension, when they wish to tell us something, they tell us straightly and directly, they don't need to be shy or play game of "you guess".
They do not tell us many things. So it is easy to deduce either they do not exist at all, or they are not interested in communicating with us.
This form of reasoning seems backward.
You don't decide how a phenomenon *should behave* and then investigate it. You observe it and see if and how you can learn more about it.

The things are not that simple. Reality is always super complex. Science tells me something very very complex, so I believe science.
Religions, paranormal explanations, superstitious traditions, they tell me very very little, so I do not believe them.
Also... the subject in the OP is psi phenomena. So why are you addressing God, religion, superstitious traditions et al?
Are we celebrating straw man day, today? :)
 
#4
I always wonder, why there is no one else thinking in the same way as me.

The reason why I (as a true skeptic) do not put weights on paranormal phenomenon accounts, is not they are univocal or not reproducible, rather, is whether they present "content full of details", that is also to say, whether they provide abundant information.

Univocal or irreproducible are not the problem, the problem is that paranormal phenomenon accounts provide no sufficient information, no "content full of details", no new insight, whereas academic science always provides new theory, new discoveries, new insight, new information.

Sure, we can't 100% prove paranormal believes are all incorrect, as well as we can't 100% prove science is always correct.
But the "100% prove" is not the most important for us to concern right now. The most important thing is that we need information to further investigate.

Paranormal explanations always camouflage or disguise as if they know a lot of knowledges from the vast higher dimension, but they actually tell us almost nothing! On the other side, science is super abundant and complex and it is evolving everyday!

If there is a God, or there is existence in higher dimension, when they wish to tell us something, they tell us straightly and directly, they don't need to be shy or play game of "you guess".
They do not tell us many things. So it is easy to deduce either they do not exist at all, or they are not interested in communicating with us.

The things are not that simple. Reality is always super complex. Science tells me something very very complex, so I believe science.
Religions, paranormal explanations, superstitious traditions, they tell me very very little, so I do not believe them.

Someone would tell me, no! they do not tell us very very little, there are plethora of evidences of paranormal here and there, everywhere.
Ha ha, hi, man, check them again and you will find those are all disguise! They never tell us many things, especially when compared with the science (which is already sufficiently complex), but they always pretend as if they are profound or mysterious.

I do not believe them, this is the stance of a true skeptic, and I have presented my reasons, in short, the "information" of the truth.
Since one of the defining characteristics of psi phenomena is that they are almost always meaningful, relevant and important to people as well as provide the most necessary details, and you seemed to have missed this aspect of psi, I'm not so sure that you can call yourself a true skeptic yet. I think you have a tad more investigating to do.
 
#5
The reason why I (as a true skeptic) do not put weights on paranormal phenomenon accounts, is not they are univocal or not reproducible, rather, is whether they present "content full of details", that is also to say, whether they provide abundant information.
There are cases of NDEs and mediums that present "content full of details".

Paranormal explanations always camouflage or disguise as if they know a lot of knowledges from the vast higher dimension, but they actually tell us almost nothing! On the other side, science is super abundant and complex and it is evolving everyday!
You assume a dichotomy between paranormal and science. No, the paranormal is studied by some scientists.

If there is a God, or there is existence in higher dimension, when they wish to tell us something, they tell us straightly and directly, they don't need to be shy or play game of "you guess".
They do not tell us many things. So it is easy to deduce either they do not exist at all, or they are not interested in communicating with us.
The paranormal is not necessarily about God. And there is another possibility: postmortem communication is possible but much harder than some believe.

Religions, paranormal explanations, superstitious traditions, they tell me very very little, so I do not believe them.
I do not know that you have knowledge about parapsychology, but put in the same bag parapsychology with religions and superstitious traditions is typical of pseudoskeptics.

They never tell us many things, especially when compared with the science (which is already sufficiently complex), but they always pretend as if they are profound or mysterious.
Which is comparing a part of a whole with the whole.
 
Top