Is There a Standard Method for Debunking Paranormal Claims?

  • Thread starter _Mayday_
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Method
In summary, there is no set procedure for debunking paranormal abilities, as it often involves a subjective evaluation of evidence and motives. Debunking is not a scientific method and is more of a fringe notion. It is important to approach claims with objectivity and not biased motives, and to evaluate evidence carefully before attempting to debunk a claim. In some cases, claims may not be scientifically testable and should be rejected without prejudice until sufficient evidence becomes available.
  • #36
H8wm4m said:
my_wan,
I have attempted to summarize the argument you are opposing.


1. Anecdotes are a form of evidence.
2. Anecdotes are always or nearly always provided in support of paranormal claims.
3. Some debunkers say there is no evidence for such claims.
Therefore, some debunkers lie.

Are either of the 3 premises invalid?
If so, then the argument is unsound.

Does the conclusion follow logically from the premises?
If not, then the argument is unsound.

What do you think?

1. makes the logical error of being true by definition yet failing to provide evidence for that which is being claimed. You then specify the evidence as pertaining to claims in 3, a specification not contained in 1.

The logic in 1. requires the law of the excluded middle, i.e., it excludes a third possibility, yet you include the "middle" in 3. when you say "evidence for such claims". "Evidence" and "evidence of X" are not even the same logical category.

CEL said:
The truth about the report of an event needs two conditions:
1. The event must be true.
2. The person reporting it must believe it is true.

Even in the rarer situations where the witness outright lies about the event the anecdote is still evidence of 'something'. The belief of the witness has nothing to do with the truth of what occurred, it is still evidence of 'something'. Courts know that eyewitnesses are 'the most' unreliable form of evidence. It is so easy it is trivial to convince people they said things they didn't say and seen things they didn't see. I do it all the time.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
Debunking in graphics.

I've mentioned this guy previously, he's expert in debunking. Why did he take "3 man and baby"? Cause...oh, just look and answer yourself. Somewhere on Youtube)
 
  • #38
drakkar said:
I've mentioned this guy previously, he's expert in debunking. Why did he take "3 man and baby"? Cause...oh, just look and answer yourself. Somewhere on Youtube)

?
Who?
 
  • #39
Captain Disillusion

Sorry, missed his name. Captain Disillusion!
 
  • #40
I was impressed with the idea that if there is in fact a viable form of psychic ability, the ability to see images and events of the future, then there would indeed have been an influx of these known persons gifted in the ability spewing warnings and dangers and other actions of the like before the destruction on the world trade centers. How many persons took up a space on the street corners around these now destroyed buildings, to warn of the dangers ahead? Surly if the ability exists in any way, the visions would have run rampant through the cerebral cortex`s of the gifted beforehand.

For me, this is an acceptable form of evidence that the ability of fortune telling has no merit to it.
But I was never one to consider it a verified gift anyways.
I believe this method of observation and questioning the results of an event is a simple form of dubunking in everyday life
that can be accomplished by anybody and if things were more often approached in this manner, could make a more realistic and peaceful world without the notions of mystic oppurtunities and our everyday happenings controlled by good or bad influences. Way off topic.

Serine
 
Last edited:
  • #41
serine said:
I was impressed with the idea that if there is in fact a viable form of psychic ability, the ability to see images and events of the future, then there would indeed have been an influx of these known persons gifted in the ability spewing warnings and dangers and other actions of the like before the destruction on the world trade centers. How many persons took up a space on the street corners around these now destroyed buildings, to warn of the dangers ahead? Surly if the ability exists in any way, the visions would have run rampant through the cerebral cortex`s of the gifted beforehand.

For me, this is an acceptable form of evidence that the ability of fortune telling has no merit to it.
But I was never one to consider it a verified gift anyways.
I believe this method of observation and questioning the results of an event is a simple form of dubunking in everyday life
that can be accomplished by anybody and if things were more often approached in this manner, could make a more realistic and peaceful world without the notions of mystic oppurtunities and our everyday happenings controlled by good or bad influences. Way off topic.

Serine

Not that I'm defending the claims of "psychics", but I wanted to address the logic used: If ESP existed, it would manifest itself for what we consider to be significant events, but since that didn't seem to happen, there are no psychics.

Please provide supporting evidence for your theory that if it existed, ESP would be event-significance dependent.
 
Last edited:
  • #42
Evidence of theory? A simple hypothesis at most, and referring to the methods used in questioning the existence of (ESP) not in any way defending the existence or non existence as this is not the discussion of the topic in which the issue is catagorized under. Would not like to discuss validity of ESP as it is not my fortay. Just wanted to note that I liked how the thought and method of questioning the existence of the stimulation of visions within the said groups were apparent in the times before impending disaster, and if not I (I) (I) would consider it a benifitial way of bearing witness to whether or not the gift of fortunetelling is indeed real. For me, that would be a good basis for a building hypothesis.
 
  • #43
You are suggesting that something can be judged based on an assumption that has no supporting evidence or logical motivation.

Given that we don't know if psychic events occur, we certainly can't say how it might work [the characteristics of the phenomenon] if they did.
 
Last edited:
  • #44
I am stating that had there been people standing on the corners warning of impending disaster, I would consider that a sign that there might be something to the whole idea of psychics. Evidence. If there had been any form of seeing that people were indeed picking up images of great flying objects with stiff unmoving wings flying into the two tallest towers of the world, if there HAD been people, then I surley would reconsider psychic ability. Real people. Camped out. Being arrested. Many of them, so as not to consider it a coin flip chance, conventions of them, as many psychics that can fit hand to hand surrounding the two buildings. Evidence. Blood samples to see if they are really human.

Like that answer better? Maybe you didnt understand me the first two times.
 

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • New Member Introductions
Replies
4
Views
324
Replies
34
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
682
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
980
Replies
15
Views
683
Replies
14
Views
934
Replies
5
Views
628
Replies
7
Views
757
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top