I was hoping for responses on Ortho C, rather than the Bates Method, which I'm not particularly interested in at this time, but it doesn't look like I'm going to get receive much on the thread topic, so I'll respond to this tangent at least one more time and hope that someone will eventually contribute something more on Ortho C. At least this bumps the thread
and I thank you, Al, for at least trying to help.
I have some sympathy for James Randi given psychic frauds, but I still think he is at the other extreme, a total sceptic who will never be convinced by things that aren't covered by mainstream science.
Sure, it's possible that he and his organization may go overboard, which is a natural failing of human beings, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they have never revealed any frauds or bogus claims. There are countless hoaxes in the world and new ones devised seemingly every day. I myself have encountered con artists and know friends who were either conned or luckily avoided being conned by scammers.
We should be skeptical of the skeptics too and I encourage that, but we shouldn't accept everything without evidence. Scammers cause enormous incalcuable damage and suffering across the globe. We should be skeptical of BOTH those making extraordinary claims and those testing the claims. The difference is, psychics tend to discourage skeptical inquiry, whereas Randi welcomes it. That doesn't mean Randi is always right, and I doubt he is, but it does mean he's giving us some credit and appealing to our reason rather than our naivete.
Problem with Bates Method is that it requires effort, which most people balk at.
Insufficient effort or imperfect application is a common excuse made for therapies that don't work. For example, it is an excuse frequently made for vegetarianism/veganism and I suspect the same is true for the Bates Method. If it really works marvelously it would seem likely that it shouldn't require extreme effort to get the slightest improvement.
If people have success with the Bates Method then they are free to report it here (despite it being slightly off topic) and report how they accomplished it, the diopter improvments (preferably with images uploaded of the before and after diopter findings), and the amount of effort involved. Surely you'll agree that we shouldn't criticize or silence people who report less than stunning success? After all, as Nation rather graphically but wisely pointed out, we don't want this forum becoming a circle jerk.
Everybody wants a pill or a knife to make problems go away.
I think you mean many people as you obviously don't want that, nor do I. I agree that it is a common problem, but it doesn't apply in my or your case and so is irrelevant to this discussion.
You have to persist and do it regularly.
Some people report rapid and effortless improvements from it, yet if anyone doesn't get improvements then proponents claim that extraordinary persistence is required, and as I mentioned, it's a common excuse made for bogus therapies, along with "You must not have done it right" and so forth. Again, no disrespect is intended, but this serves to increase, rather than diminish, my skepticism. If more people reported small improvments even with just small effort, as was reported with Ortho C, this would increase my interest (though it still wouldn't prove anything, of course).
Regarding the psychic surgery, the proof was in the individual whom I witnessed reading without glasses. It was done to him by a friend and required the exchange of no money and indeed his friend was not interested in doing it for others.
I highly doubt that the fellow wouldn't want $1 million dollars. I doubt even more that all psychic surgeons in the world would forego a million dollars if they really had the ability. It doesn't matter to me whether
they think they have the ability. It only affects my life if
I think they have the ability and to convince me of that they'll need to produce evidence rather than just make claims or have others who make claims for them. Besides, if they refuse to demonstrate their ability they have already conceded the issue for all practical purposes.
It is not important if you feel that you are a superior scientist and all this is hooey. It either occurred or it didn't. I witnessed it.
It doesn't require me or anyone to feel superior to not adopt a belief in an extraordinary claim and your witnessing is not hard evidence any more than my witnessing to the existence of the Celestial Teapot (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot) is evidence. When it comes to real, knowable matters that could negatively affect real people, then "the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims rather than shifting the burden of proof to others" (whether this applies to unknowable Black Swans is another matter). To insist that other people believe something simply because you claim to have witnessed it and to suggest that they feel superior if they don't accept your claim at face value is unreasonable and impolite.
As far as a practitioner being interested in impressing anyone...
Where did I write that someone was trying to impress anyone? I don't recall that. If the psychic surgeon doesn't want to impress anyone he could win the prize anonymously. If he doesn't want the money he could donate it or just refuse it. The point is that I'm not going to believe something just because someone tells me to. There's no harm in evidence and a little evidence goes a long way in improving credibility. You can try all sorts of arguments to try to convince me of this person's paranormal abilities, but they won't work without evidence.
A friend of mine is capable of this stuff...
Another unsupported claim. If he's capable of it then I'm happy for him and if he doesn't want the million dollars, he can donate it to the charity of his choice or I'll gladly take it.
If the Amazing Randi's organization is misguided or malevolent then surely the money would be put to better use with a good charity? Heck, if your friend can prove his ability, I'll make a donation to his favored charity myself. It would be the first proof of a human with paranormal powers and a world-shaking event that would likely inspire millions.
and he made the mistake of doing it for some people with a sob story. He regretted it as people started nagging him. They want an even easier solution than a pill or a knife.
A little nagging is hardly the end of the world, especially when his powers have such enormous potential to do good, if they are real.
BTW I hope that I do not sound snotty as it not my intention, I was just relating a story.
You didn't sound snotty, but I don't appreciate the comment about my feeling superior, as it is untrue and unkind, though I'll give the benefit of the doubt that it was not intentionally so. If you believe that of me then you don't understand the philosophy of skeptical empiricism, which is pretty much the opposite of feeling superior. It means that all I know for certain is that I know nothing. One of the things I don't know for certain is the factualness of your claim re: psychic surgery.
If there are people in larger cities who claim to do these things I would be wary.
I would be skeptical of all who make such extraordinary claims, particularly if they charge any money for their services. Since the person you're referring to apparently didn't charge anything then he sounds largely harmless, though it's possible that someone might forego necessary therapeutic treatment, such as improvement in diet to a raw Paleo diet, if they are convinced that psychic surgery is all they need and have an issue which the psychic surgery doesn't fix but they believe it has.
Re the book, "Ayurveda Mother And Child" by Vaidya Bhagwan Dash. Probably in the first couple of chapters.
Thanks for the citation.
Topic: Ortho C: vision correction without surgery? (Read 17474 times)