|
FUNDING CLOSED-MINDED SKEPTICS IS LIKE POURING MONEY DOWN THE DRAIN
Closed-minded skeptics don't get results
It is universally established that historically, closed-minded skeptics
have never ever found anything genuinely positive in psychic phenomena.
Even if one produces tons of evidence for the absolute validity of psychic
phenomena, it is now sadly irrevocably established that the closed-minded
skeptic does not have the intrinsic capacity and the equanimity to accept
the evidence of valid psychic phenomena.
As you will see hereunder, pouring money onto these said skeptics -
as happened in England-in an endeavor to find some positive evidence
of psychic phenomena is like foolishly, negligently, wastefully and
irresponsibly pouring precious money, energy and time down the drain.
Why?
1. Psychology: Rationalization through Cognitive Dissonance
Let's borrow a page from traditional psychology. When a skeptic receives
information - say, scientific proof for the afterlife - which is fundamentally
inconsistent with his or her entrenched cherished beliefs, the skeptic
tries to rationalize his/her beliefs to reduce and to offset the intense
biological, emotional and mental anxiety. The intense anxiety is created
by the information that the afterlife exists.
The skeptic's mind tries to resist and reject this new information
(even if the information is the absolute truth) - hence the cognitive
(the mind) 'dissonance' - between the new information - (i.e., the positive
evidence for the afterlife) and the skeptic's own personal beliefs that
the afterlife cannot exist.
Closed-minded skepticism is extremely difficult to shift because his/her
skepticism is 'electrically wired' into the skeptic's neurological,
psychological, intellectual and emotional belief system. Thus with absolute
certainty, this skeptic inexorably loses all sense of empirical equanimity.
Then the skeptic tries to rationalize his/her own personal beliefs
and will try to rubbish, denigrate, dismiss and destroy the new information
(including scientific proof of some psychic phenomenon) which gives
the skeptic a lot of intense anxiety. This skeptic cannot allow his
lifelong deeply cherished beliefs against an afterlife to be proved
wrong, to be totally incorrect. So this skeptic will use every trick,
every bit of energy and every means to try to rationales i.e., to reduce
cognitive dissonance. She will defend her skepticism and ridicule and
viciously attack any positive evidence for the afterlife - which is
causing the anxiety to the skeptic. I repeat, all sense of scientific
objectivity will be lost.
2. Neurolinguistic Programming (NLP)
Deletions, generalizations and distortions. A professional NLP practitioner
would view closed-minded skeptics as willfully and/or unconsciously
using a series of filters to delete all critical information
inconsistent with their existing 'map of reality'. Thus the tendency
for modern skeptics in parapsychology is to ignore or to unconsciously
censor or filter survival research (the afterlife is impossible so why
investigate it?) and concentrate on the ancillary aspects of psychic
phenomena - e.g. psychokinesis, cards, etc.
Skeptics can be seen to overgeneralize saying for instance that
because some mediums are fraudulent therefore all mediums are fraudulent.
Further, skeptics distort information saying that because it
may be possible to reproduce certain phenomena by fraud - even
at odds of one billion to one - that they have proven that fraud took
place. In this sense, the skeptics find it impossible to transcend their
'metaprogram' (their overriding world view of reality) of materialistic
beliefs.
3. Self promotion
One reason why some skeptics, especially psychologists at university,
become crusading anti-psychics is to promote their own careers. Academics
who are ambitious and want promotion have to publish, have to be seen
to be making some noise in society to be noticed. There is an adage
applied to university lecturers - "publish or perish". These academics
know that there is still some hostility towards psychic phenomena by
some powerful recalcitrant members of the establishment - and these
academics become sycophantic and play up to this for some immediate
or long term personal favors and career incentives.
-- Victor Zammit (May 2001)
<< Return to
|
