The Fraudulent Mediums Act - Repealled

(Reprinted and Adapted from My Enigmatist Blog 28th May 2008)

Ok, so here's the deal...

Spiritual Healers, Psychics, Mediums, Astrologers, Complementary Practitioners are now all bound by the same consumer legislation that covers double glazing salespeople, builders, plumbers, electricians and so forth.

On first sight not a bad thing as it's about protecting the public from fraudlent practices.

The new legislation replaces the Fraudulent Mediums Act of 1953 which protected the public against, not suprisingly, fraudulent mediums. If you could prove your psychic was fraudulent then you could sue.

The Rational Mystic in me is really interested and intrigued by this whole thing.

Firstly, going back to the 1953 law...

By definition if there can be fraudulent mediums/psychics then, there must be 'real' psychics/mediums....

I wonder about the process by which this distinction could be made and defended in law.

Many 'fraudlent' methods involve psychological as well as mechanical techniques. So in one respect if you caught your medium (for example) moving the planchette on a Quija board then fair game but how could you prove that your medium was actually Cold Reading and not speaking to Great Uncle Cyril? Moreover since most psychics and mediums make claims which are in and of themselves non-falsifiable it's difficult to apply any scientific methodology to the investigation of what they do or say they do!

Scientists aren't that much better at seeing through 'fraud' in this area of human experience either. One has only got to look at Project Alpha and what Steve Shaw was able to present under 'test conditions' to fool the 'scientists' he was working with. In these infamous experiments Steve Shaw (who was a magician) used trickery to create a wide range of psychic effects for scientists who were observing under 'controlled conditions'. At NO point was he asked if he was using trickery and the scientists involved were completely taken in by the 'fraud'. Project Alpha was set up to 'prove' that even without the correct protocols the most respected of scientists could be fooled. Indeed it can be suggested that for any tests of psychic or paranormal abilities it is the expertise of a magician you need in your scientific team.

Secondly, the new legislation...

Psychics, Mediums, Complementary Health Practitioners and so forth now have to base their claims on what is scientifically demonstrable. If they cannot do this then a standard disclaimer to the effect that the service is provided for 'entertainment' is expected. This is moreso the case if there is any financial exchange for services. (OK, I know I'm generalising the legal side of things here but I think the point is valid).

So how will this work and how are we going to apply it?

Say an Astrologer casts a horoscope for a client and his 'predictions' don't pan out.

Can they be sued?

Well apparently so IF they haven't said that what they were selling was something intended to 'entertain'.

A Complementary Therapy friend uses Homeopathy (which actually according to the letter of the law cannot be conisdered as a scientifically demonstrable approach) and her client doesn't get better.... can she be sued? Certainly IF the service was 'sold' with the implication that there would be a cure or reduction in symptoms.

What if the Astrologers predictions are correct and the Homeopathy works?

Can we claim that both proceedures worked because 'self-fulfulling prophecies' and the placebo effect are demonstrable scientifically?

And that's just for starters...

As I see it it's not just the 'woo woo' community that this legislation effects but its also the Christian Church.

I go to a service at my local church where prayers are offered to God for comfort and piece of mind.

I leave feeling no better DESPITE the church having taken some money off me in the form of a donation.

Can I sue?

I mean God is not scientifically demonstrable is He (She)?

AND God is the basis of the Churches claims about redemption, salvation, comfort - and healing!

I can see it now....

Outside every church a sign which says...

This service and everything that goes on within these walls is for entertainment puproses only!

AND.....

ANY disclaimer which mentions the notion of FREE WILL and a choice to engage/purchase/employ the services of the likes of the 'spiritual bunch' is flawed scientifically anyway since recent studies in neurology fundamentally question the reality of free will!

No doubt as I research, listen and see more about this issue my initial opinions will change - maybe.

For now...

Well, as many of you know I am interested in the mystical (that includes Tarot, Astrology, Palmistry) so what am I doing?

I'm kinda covered because I do call myself a psychic entertainer (must have foreseen the problem coming!) BUT more to the point psychologically I see these ancient (unscientific) approaches as metaphors and not as statements about the material nature of the universe.

For now you'll see this disclaimer on some of my work:-

In accordance with recent legislation we must point out that these statements and opinions are offered for personal entertainment and reflection. In all cases you, as an individual, need to exercise your own judgement in terms of personal actions.

Astrology (or what ever aspect of my mystical work I'm exploring) is NOT scientifically demonstrable. It is best considered as an approach which uses metaphor and dialogue to create a framework for personal reflection, entertainment and solutions oriented thinking.

Originally published as Alan's Ramblings 28/05/08

Since I wrote this piece we there have been few, if any, reported court cases where individuals have sued 'psychics' or complementary therapy practitioners.

It is interesting, in terms of Complementary Therapy, as to what approaches are scientifically demonstrable. The fact is that few if any have a 'clean' sheet in this regard. The list of scientifically questionable common alternative therapies include:

• Reiki
• Crystal Healing
• Iridology
• Reflexology
• Metamorphic Technique
• Homeopathy
• Chiropractic (in terms of subluxation theory)
• Acupuncture
• Hypnotherapy (in terms of its broad usage as a 'cure all')
• NLP (in terms of its broad usages as a 'magic solution to problems')
• Naturopathy (as it's a vague term covering a myriad of approaches)
• Colonic Irrigation
• Chelation Therapy

And so on...

The scientific objections fall into three key areas:

The lack of clinical evidence

The lack of any meaningful theory underpinning the practice

The breadth of the claims being made

In terms of Acupuncture, Homeopathy, Reflexology, Energy Healing (in it's various forms), there is no consistent clinical evidence for their effectiveness.

In terms of Energy Healing, Homeopathy, Reflexology, Acupuncture, Chiropractic (traditional or straight forms) the theoretical underpinning of these techniques is either unscientific or relies on 'magic' in some form or another.

In terms of Hypnosis, NLP some practitioners make claims for the approaches which lie far outside the psychological, emotional coaching arenas where they are of benefit.

The issue really is that some Complementary Therapy Practitioners fail to apply rigorous standards of professional development in their work. It can be suggested in the worst cases such therapists are scientifically illiterate and have not really bothered to question the basis for their therapeutic approach. Even the best of such therapists may fall victim of 'confirmation bias' when reviewing their work.

Without a critical eye and questioning mindset it is easy to assume that people 'get better' because of the therapeutic intervention 'we' believe in.

Currently the Courts are trying a case between the journalist Simon Singh and the British Chiropractic Association.

In an article Singh called an aspect of Chiropractic practice BOGUS and they have sued him.

From what I have read he was saying that a specific application of Chiropractic was bogus. This application was being promoted on several BCA member websites. In the strict terms of the medical evidence he was right. There is NO medical evidence for what was being claimed.

Unfortunately the use of the word BOGUS seemed to imply deliberate con - and that I think is now the basis of the case.

Interestingly the BCA's response initially was to ask members to remove claims from their websites - an interesting step.

Recently they have responded by producing 'evidence' which supports the 'science' behind their claims.

It seems that this 'evidence' is not totally related to the specifics of the case and more importantly it has been 'cherry picked' in the sense that only certain 'positive' studies have been shared and larger, more robust studies which did not support their position, have been left out.

Obviously there is more to come from this case and of course opinions are divided.

Here are some links related to the Simon Singh Thing

Quakometer

Gimpys Blog

The Guardian

British Chiropractic Association

What's in YOUR Name?

Let's face it of all the things that you have no choice over, the name you are given is perhaps (along with gender) one of the most defining aspects of 'self'.

When something has a 'name' it has an identity.

Many religious re-births begin with the formalisation of YOUR name. Baptisms and Christenings are examples of initiations in which 'you', the person, is presented to your 'God' and your Community.

I have always been interested by the fact there are people who come through some personal trauma or 'negative' period in their lives and then seek to re-brand themselves often choosing a different appelation or form of address.

The Mystic in me is aware of the spurious applications of 'numerology' which uses your 'given name' to generate 'personal numbers' which hint at your personality.

Numerology as it exists today is a pale reflection of its origins. In Qabbalistic tradition the study of Gematria (the numbers derived from the names of things) is an important art. The idea that once you know the 'number' of a 'thing' you can compare it to other things which have the same number. In essence the study of Gematria is about looking for the inner significance of words.

This makes sense within the context of Judaism where the name of God is powerful in and of itself. We can speculate that the naming of things and the use of those names in order to gain 'power' or invoke the 'qualities' represented by that name is a very ancient 'magical' tradition.

For me the metaphorical nature of this area of study is interesting and can prove to be a fun exercise for personal reflection. This is the way of the Mystic - the symbolism is a way of playing and exploring.

The Rationalist in me sees how such a playfully reflective pastime can quickly become its own form of New Age Space Cadet insanity where numerology not only informs (playfully) but defines - and potentially limits.

Take for example the person who might believe that their name defines them numerologically as 'lacking control' or being 'inconsistent' will they behave in a way that is expected?

If numerologically their name reduces to 11 or 22 (the MASTER numbers - only used in 'special cases' where further reduction to the 'root' is not applied... i.e 11 should become 1 + 1 = 2 and 22 shoild become 2 + 2 = 4) will the individual believe in their 'masterful' status and thus become 'masterly'?

What if your first name reduces to 6, your second to 6 and your birtdate to 6 (666) do you suddenly become the 'antichrist'?

Psychologically there is a very real phenomenon known as a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy - people can, and do live up to (or down to) the expectations and labels of self and others. In education the belief that a child will achieve a low grade may actually 'cause' that child to receive a low grade. There is a complex neurological-behavioural link between beliefs, attitudes, perecptions and behaviours which can be suggested to cause the 'self-fulfilling prophecy' and maybe that can be the topic for a later blog post. Suffice it to say the 'self fulling prophecys' is a testable idea (hypothesis) with a good deal of psychological research behind it.

An interesting study published in 2007 reported that peoples initials actually effected performance, success and other aspects of their lives!

The study by Lief Nelson (University of California) and Joseph Simmons (Yale University) found that people with initials that seemed to reflect achievement did better than those whose initials were assocaited with 'failure'

In one of their studies they looked at the letter grades which were  commonly used to measure students’ performance. In the educational world the letters ‘A,’ ‘B,’ ‘C’ and ‘D’  are used to denote different levels of performance.

Nelson and Simmons reviewed 15 years of grade point averages (GPAs) for M.B.A. students graduating from a large private American university.

Students whose names began with ‘C’ or ‘D’ earned lower GPAs than students whose names began with ‘A’ or ‘B.’

They suggested that this might be due to fact that students with "C" or "D" initails had an unconscious fondness for these letters and so were slightly less successful at achieving their conscious academic goals.

In another part of the same study the authors looked at 93 years of baseball batting averages. In baseball the a 'strike' or 'no score' is represented by a "K". Nelson and Simmons hypothesised that IF this unconscious association between initials and performance was a 'genuine' phenomena they should see a statistical correlation between the letter "K" as an initial in a baters name and lower batting averages. This is exactly what they found!

Notice here the difference between 'scientific method' and the approach often used by 'pseudoscience'.

In this study the authors set out with an idea, an hypothesis which they then tested. Far too many pseudoscientists and 'parapsychologists' go looking for an anomaly and then try to explain it.

This is fascinating stuff and I feel can remind us how powerful the unconscious associations we make between objects, beliefs, attitudes,values and 'spurious' associations really are.

Taking this a step further...

If someone believes in Astrology do they behave as an Aries because they were born in March/April or do they become Aries like when they know what the characteristics are. OF course this specualtive idea presupposes that there is an Aries-type - an idea that is desputed by researchers of the rational kind and supported by mystics of the irrational type.

Here's a link to an outline of the Nelson and Simmons research

Technorati Tags: numerology, initials, success, achievement, Gematria, Yale, University California, Nelson, Simmons, Christening, Baptrism, Self Fulfilling Prophecy, Psychology

Celebrities and Their Opinions No.1

In keeping with the general theme of this blog I thought it would be interesting to look at the way celebrities seem to be able to become messengers for causes and ideas that are beyond their area of expertise.

Let's face it we all hold opinions and have beliefs which help us frame our experience and guide our behaviours. Few of us, however, have the platform that many celebrities do to announce, share, promote and, in some cases, impose our values.

Celebrities have, I believe, a responsibility that comes with the fame and recognition they have. That responsibility is about being honest about their opinions and recognising the limits of their experience, knowledge and understanding.

Here's a clip from the US TV show The View. In the UK we have the show 'Loose Women' and The View appears to follow a similar format. Well known, celebrity women, talk about and share opinions on a variety of topical issues.

In this clip, Sherri Shepherd is talking about The Bible and how, for her , it is a way to happiness. Firstly her fellow panelist makes the very valid comment that 'religion is faith' and not about rational thought.

What follows is an example of intellectual woolly thinking, namely that there were Christians before Jesus!

The emotional need to defend a personal belief really does get in the way of rational thinking. Does Sherri Shepherd really believe what she is saying, or is she simply not thinking?

In another show the same panelist, defending her belief in Creation and, clear denial of evolution, is asked if she thinks the world is flat. Her response perhaps indicates the depth to which she has thought about some very basic science.

Entertaining though this is, and perhaps from a 'rationalist' viewpoint a sad reflection on the state of scientific education, it doesn't really cause harm.

HOWEVER, some celebrity opinions and 'causes' do have a 'body count' attached to them. More importantly the emotional nature of their position and arguments seem to sway public opinion in their favour.

Jenny McCarthy (the wife of Jim Carey) is a particular case in point. Whilst every sympathy can be extended to her (and Jim) for having an autistic child, her current crusade is anti-scientific, poorly argued and relies soley upon the emotional connection she makes with her audience.

Technorati Tags: autism, jenny mccarthy, vaccines, MMR, rationalism, celebrity endorsements, celebrity causes, scientific method, critical thinking, beliefs, values, opinions, science, medicine

Gaps in the Synapse

Time to redefine:

RATIONAL MYSTIC - a person who approaches the natural world with scientific scepticism (which in and of itslef promotes 'awe' and 'wonder' whilst recognising the abstract and personal nature of reality. Hence a Rational Mystic approaches 'mysteries' with the tools and mindset of a scientist whilst being able to celebrate the fact that personal metaphors and mythologies have meaning and value.

Rationalist Language is the DAY TIME language of rational thought, consensus reality and empiricism.

Mystical Langauge is the NIGHT TIME language of metaphor, symbolism and personal, spiritual beliefs.

We are all Rational Mystics - but sometimes we forget what langauge we are speaking!

So - Gaps in the Synape?

Well as some of you will know I am a Mentalist (Magician) as well as a lecturer and educator. I enjoy presenting psychological distractions with a 'night time' theme and feel. Magic does have the potential to create questions; produce those mental discointinuities which encourage people to question their own perceptions.

After performances I do like to 'hang around', time and situation permiting, and talk to the people who have seen my performance. Of course as performer I may allude to psychic or psychological explanations for what I do - BUT the focus is entertainment; my purpose to raise questions and my disclaimer is that I use a range of psychological, theatrical and magical techniques to create the illusion of reality I do.

Nevertheless the after-show conversations often turn to talk of the paranormal, the mystical and the 'unknown'. At such times I am happy to accept the language of the mystic but will want to explore the rationale behind what is being said. More often than not even though I may have explained a neurological process such as the ideomotor response or paraiedolia, in the after show discussions people seem to find it difficult to bridge the gap between what I have demonstrated and what they (want) to believe.

Last weeks round of shows were no different to many of the others I have performed.

During the show I performed a pendulum effect and explained the ideomotor mechanism behind the 'trick'. Afte the show a discussion with a science teacher revolved around dowsing (a logical extension) and the rambled onto "earth energies", 'ley lines' and 'earth lights'.

Now putting aside the fact that I was talking to a science educator, what was fascinating was the way in which any rational discussion of these 'pheneomena' was curtailed by his (the teachers) inability to stay focussed on one point at a time. Comments made by me which challenged some of the psuedoscientific generalisations that were being made were dismissed and the conversation diverted to another train of thought.

For example when I suggested that "dowsing" was in fact the ideomotor response; the conversation turned to Ley Lines. When the nature of Ley Lines was challenged by reference to "The Old Stright Track" and ideas that lines of connection between 'sacre sites' could be fitted retrospectively... the conversation was diverted to Druids and the fact that they built Stonehenge based upon 'earth energy'.

At no poiint could we debate the specifics of any claim, nor explore the logic behind the claims because of the diverse thinking of the person I was talking with. Remeber this was a science educator!

It strikes me as both interesting and as a cause for concern that this synapse gap which exists between 'beliefs' and 'rationality' is so prevalent in someone teaching scientific method to children.

I ended the conversation by referring this teacher to two invaluable resources to help him get a check on his thinking..

The Skeptics Guide to the Universe and Skeptoid

Alan

Technorati Tags: rational mystic, mentalism, skeptics guide, skeptoid, sciencel critical thinking