Skip to main content

Sally Morgan



Genuine or hot/cold reader (and selective editing)? You can probably guess what I think. Derren Brown recently said in passing it's a shame we cannot imprison psychic fakes and charlatans like in the old days. Let's bring those days back, I say. The "Luke" example at 3min 30 secs looks to me like a really excellent bit of cold reading. Worth replaying to see exactly what she does...

Here's some hot reading...



Thanks to Skeptic's Dictionary - which provides excellent resources on hot and cold reading.

Comments

Hannah Nichol said…
I love James Randi, the way he examines and explains things so simply and carefully in his videos!

Also, that Popoff guy seemed quite terrifying--I think if I met him in the flesh I would run and hide from him, though I suppose it must help to hype up the audience!

I felt very sorry for the lady who suffered arthritis; there must have been so much pressure on her to do that walk, and she clearly was having some trouble!

It's a good job that honest peoples like Derren Brown and James Randi are out there!!!

Stephen, have you ever seen the Derren Brown clip with the voodoo doll and the spiritualist? I can't seem to find the video on the internet (probably because of copyright), but he takes a ring from the woman, and puts it in a voodoo doll. He then proceeds to do things to the voodoo doll (I'm not sure that she can even actually see what he is doing), but he succeeds in making her unable to talk or move in any way. He then reveals that he never actually took the ring in the first place--it was just slight of hand and it is still on her finger! It's only short, but a really good example of how easily people can be drawn into beliefs and the power that these then have over them.
Stephen Law said…
Yes the voodoo thing was freaky.
pascal said…
'Derren Brown recently said in passing it's a shame we cannot imprison psychic fakes and charlatans like in the old days. Let's bring those days back, I say.'

Well, in the really old days the Scythians burned alive failed soothsayers (Herodotus via Montaigne), but you and Derren Brown appear to be unfamiliar with the extraordinary magical powers of google.

If you had essayed them you would have discovered the Consumer Protection Regulations, introduced in 2008, where errant psychics, along with double glazing salespeople, can face fines of up to £5,000, if their case is heard in a magistrates’ courts, or a fine and up to two years in jail if the case is severe enough to be heard in the Crown Court.

As Frances Gibb said in the Times, the fortune tellers must have have seen it coming; you and Derren should at least have realised it had arrived...

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen

What is Humanism?

What is Humanism? “Humanism” is a word that has had and continues to have a number of meanings. The focus here is on kind of atheistic world-view espoused by those who organize and campaign under that banner in the UK and abroad. We should acknowledge that there remain other uses of term. In one of the loosest senses of the expression, a “Humanist” is someone whose world-view gives special importance to human concerns, values and dignity. If that is what a Humanist is, then of course most of us qualify as Humanists, including many religious theists. But the fact remains that, around the world, those who organize under the label “Humanism” tend to sign up to a narrower, atheistic view. What does Humanism, understood in this narrower way, involve? The boundaries of the concept remain somewhat vague and ambiguous. However, most of those who organize under the banner of Humanism would accept the following minimal seven-point characterization of their world-view.

Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism refuted

Here's my central criticism of Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN). It's novel and was published in Analysis last year. Here's the gist. Plantinga argues that if naturalism and evolution are true, then semantic epiphenomenalism is very probably true - that's to say, the content of our beliefs does not causally impinge on our behaviour. And if semantic properties such as having such-and-such content or being true cannot causally impinge on behaviour, then they cannot be selected for by unguided evolution. Plantinga's argument requires, crucially, that there be no conceptual links between belief content and behaviour of a sort that it's actually very plausible to suppose exist (note that to suppose there are such conceptual links is not necessarily to suppose that content can be exhaustively captured in terms of behaviour or functional role, etc. in the way logical behaviourists or functionalists suppose). It turns o