This person sounds ridiculous because they use this as the "turning point" sentence for why they were convinced by this queen character, "She could tell some people their secret weaknesses, such as undue pride". When someone is charming, their charisma can convince of you of anything. As a psych professional trained from yale and columbia I would expect more w.r.t training for checking one's own cognitive biases.
Yep nope. Play crazy games win crazy prizes. Every one of these cases is the church’s fault to begin with for encouraging their followers to believe in superstitious nonsense. Causes psychogenic diseases in your population every time. Keeping a bunch of dead popes on display and other premodern necrophiliac bullshit, what do you expect? Totally irresponsible use of their authority. Thank Christ for the reformation.. at the very least an opportunity to make the same mistakes over again.
Again: if your religion has demons, you might want to check and see if it’s a bit evil actually. And if you hear a catholic try to talk out of the other side of their mouth about how modern and progressive their religion is, don’t forget to nail them to the wall about this one. And the communion of saints. Bunch of gross Pauline bullshit. Actually if you hear a new testament verse and it sounds stupid as hell you can bet it's Paul talking. But hey a roman military/corporate man can win a lot of souls, right?
In The Manufacture of Madness: A comparative Study of The Inquisition and The Mental Health Movement (1970), Dr. Thomas Szasz reveals how psychiatry is historically related to the Inquisition. In fact, the founding fathers of psychiatry claimed that the people targeted by the Inquisition as being possessed by demons were actually just mentally ill.
I always find it amusing how (outside of those with something like schizophrenia) that demons only attack those who are highly religious. I've yet to see an epidemic of atheists being possessed by demons, which is a bit ironic: you'd think they'd be easy pickings. But somehow not. Hmmm.
In my experience people who concretely believe in demons are often attributing other people's behavior to demonic influence or possession. I have heard mental illness, addiction, abuse, violence, antisocial behavior, and of course any sort of queer identity or behavior attested to "actually" be possession.
I find it rather amusing how people who attended educational institutions teaching the scientific method that were setup by the Church go on to criticize Church views that don't agree with an outlook arising from their education.
Don't they believe that the same officials of the religious institutions which setup the educational institutions they attend were and still are perspicacious enough to judge whether demonic possession is real or not?
> But what am I supposed to make of patients who unexpectedly start speaking perfect Latin?
That a person who is a self-styled "witch" and "queen of satan" has a big incentive to learn latin and deny that she ever did. Just a few phrases would probably suffice. BTW how good is your latin that you can judge "perfect one" from "passable"?
> He or she might demonstrate “hidden knowledge” of all sorts of things — like how a stranger’s loved ones died, what secret sins she has committed, even where people are at a given moment. These are skills that cannot be explained except by special psychic or preternatural ability
Or, you know, cold reading.
> I have not witnessed a levitation myself, but half a dozen people I work with vow that they’ve seen it in the course of their exorcisms
Yeah, must be true then. Most likely explanation.
> One cannot force these creatures to undergo lab studies or submit to scientific manipulation; they will also hardly allow themselves to be easily recorded by video equipment, as skeptics sometimes demand.
Convenient, isn't it? On the other hand they don't care that you see them and write your book about them. They are only camera-shy.
Banachek, one of the best mentalists in the art of magical entertainment will tell people before a show, "This isn't real. I'm not actually reading anyone's mind." Yet he has said that after that same show, people will come up to him and tell him that he is, in fact, reading people's mind.
The human capacity for self-delusion knows no bounds, it seems.
What reason do you have to believe that the author was not rigorous in coming to his conclusions?
What "peer-reviewed" journals or publications of you read which have made a serious investigation into "demonic possession" to convince you that the author has no idea of what he is talking about?
You sound like "authoritative" government institutions stating that "UFOs don't exist". Forgetting the fact of "how can they be authorities on a phenomenon that doesn't exist"?
I can only link you to my earlier comment which isn't going down too well here.
> I find it rather amusing how people who attend educational institutions teaching the scientific method that were setup by the Church go on to criticize Church views that don't agree with an outlook arising from their education.
>Don't they believe that the same officials of the religious institutions which setup the educational institutions they attend were and still are perspicacious enough to judge whether demonic possession is real or not?
Mentalism as an explanation of how someone could demonstrate "hidden knowledge" is well-known enough that they appear at least a little foolish ending their paragraph with, "These are skills that cannot be explained except by special psychic or preternatural ability."
They could at least be kind enough to go on to explain why they discount cold reading as a possibility. I'd personally be interested to see a trained mentalist interview these people because it would be much more telling if they arrived at the same conclusions. But I'm also thinking there's a likely reason that such possessed people avoid allowing themselves to be filmed.
> What reason do you have to believe that the author was not rigorous in coming to his conclusions?
The arguments provided in the article. I quoted them for your convenience.
> What "peer-reviewed"
Why the quotes? I haven't mentioned peer review once.
> You sound like "authoritative" government institutions stating that "UFOs don't exist"
UFOs as in "unidentified flying objects" obviously exist. Nobody denies that. What people deny is aliens visiting Earth and us either not noticing, or covering it up.
> I can only link you to my earlier comment which isn't going down too well here.
Your comment makes no sense. There's attacking the person, there's attacking the person's family, and then there's this. I'd call this "argument from institutional multi-generational hypocrisy". If your country was created by people who believed in slavery - you can't be against slavery. I can't even.
Fascinating POV.
BTW many universities weren't even set up by church. For example the one I graduated (UMCS in Poland).
> BTW many universities weren't even set up by church. For example the one I graduated (UMCS in Poland).
Oh yes. The one you graduated from was setup by the Church, or founded by people whose educational lineage goes back to the Church. Communism doesn't change the fact that all educational institutions from the Middle Ages were setup by the Church.
"Is it possible to be a sophisticated psychiatrist and believe that evil spirits are, however seldom, assailing humans? Most of my scientific colleagues and friends say no, because of their frequent contact with patients who are deluded about demons, their general skepticism of the supernatural, and their commitment to employ only standard, peer-reviewed treatments that do not potentially mislead (a definite risk) or harm vulnerable patients. But careful observation of the evidence presented to me in my career has led me to believe that certain extremely uncommon cases can be explained no other way."
It's curious how we humans fail to remember that we're not able to generate all explanations just by thinking about them. Getting to explanations requires experiments. But spirits and demons are so vaguely defined that we just can't test their existence empirically.
Hence, in my mind, this should be in the realm of metaphor, not science. Let spirits and demons live in the humanities, so they can continue to inspire art, books, games, and much thought. They're about the internal human experience, not external reality.
The author claims to be rational, but they don’t volunteer any alternative hypotheses to demonic possession that they’ve considered, eg speaking ‘unknown’ languages could be exposure that they had as a child and had since forgot (still pretty remarkable, but less remarkable than paranormal entity), ‘knowing’ facts about strangers could be just a guess and there’s a sort of survivorship bias where only the correct guesses are documented.
Levitation is harder to explain, but also the author does not claim to have witnessed that themselves so the easier explanation is that it’s not an accurate report of whatever occurred.
Having said that, I think it’s important to stay curious about these claims. A close friend and myself experienced a physical phenomenon, and many years later I’m still don’t have any plausible explanation for what it might have been.
This exact career is that of the protagonist in Evil, my wife and I's favorite show. The show is led by a Catholic priest and an atheist psychiatrist (possibly a -gist in the show) tasked with investigating demon possessions.
Highly recommend it. It is written by a married couple, one Catholic and one atheist. It takes the supernatural seriously without getting hokey or dismissive.
29 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 77.2 ms ] threadAgain: if your religion has demons, you might want to check and see if it’s a bit evil actually. And if you hear a catholic try to talk out of the other side of their mouth about how modern and progressive their religion is, don’t forget to nail them to the wall about this one. And the communion of saints. Bunch of gross Pauline bullshit. Actually if you hear a new testament verse and it sounds stupid as hell you can bet it's Paul talking. But hey a roman military/corporate man can win a lot of souls, right?
To which I reply, "No, you were just being a dick."
Strangely, they don't find that as funny as I do.
"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."
Don't they believe that the same officials of the religious institutions which setup the educational institutions they attend were and still are perspicacious enough to judge whether demonic possession is real or not?
EDIT: Apparently this was written before that movie started filming so, I guess not.
That a person who is a self-styled "witch" and "queen of satan" has a big incentive to learn latin and deny that she ever did. Just a few phrases would probably suffice. BTW how good is your latin that you can judge "perfect one" from "passable"?
> He or she might demonstrate “hidden knowledge” of all sorts of things — like how a stranger’s loved ones died, what secret sins she has committed, even where people are at a given moment. These are skills that cannot be explained except by special psychic or preternatural ability
Or, you know, cold reading.
> I have not witnessed a levitation myself, but half a dozen people I work with vow that they’ve seen it in the course of their exorcisms
Yeah, must be true then. Most likely explanation.
> One cannot force these creatures to undergo lab studies or submit to scientific manipulation; they will also hardly allow themselves to be easily recorded by video equipment, as skeptics sometimes demand.
Convenient, isn't it? On the other hand they don't care that you see them and write your book about them. They are only camera-shy.
> professor of clinical psychiatry
...
The human capacity for self-delusion knows no bounds, it seems.
What "peer-reviewed" journals or publications of you read which have made a serious investigation into "demonic possession" to convince you that the author has no idea of what he is talking about?
You sound like "authoritative" government institutions stating that "UFOs don't exist". Forgetting the fact of "how can they be authorities on a phenomenon that doesn't exist"?
I can only link you to my earlier comment which isn't going down too well here.
> I find it rather amusing how people who attend educational institutions teaching the scientific method that were setup by the Church go on to criticize Church views that don't agree with an outlook arising from their education.
>Don't they believe that the same officials of the religious institutions which setup the educational institutions they attend were and still are perspicacious enough to judge whether demonic possession is real or not?
They could at least be kind enough to go on to explain why they discount cold reading as a possibility. I'd personally be interested to see a trained mentalist interview these people because it would be much more telling if they arrived at the same conclusions. But I'm also thinking there's a likely reason that such possessed people avoid allowing themselves to be filmed.
The arguments provided in the article. I quoted them for your convenience.
> What "peer-reviewed"
Why the quotes? I haven't mentioned peer review once.
> You sound like "authoritative" government institutions stating that "UFOs don't exist"
UFOs as in "unidentified flying objects" obviously exist. Nobody denies that. What people deny is aliens visiting Earth and us either not noticing, or covering it up.
> I can only link you to my earlier comment which isn't going down too well here.
Your comment makes no sense. There's attacking the person, there's attacking the person's family, and then there's this. I'd call this "argument from institutional multi-generational hypocrisy". If your country was created by people who believed in slavery - you can't be against slavery. I can't even.
Fascinating POV.
BTW many universities weren't even set up by church. For example the one I graduated (UMCS in Poland).
Oh yes. The one you graduated from was setup by the Church, or founded by people whose educational lineage goes back to the Church. Communism doesn't change the fact that all educational institutions from the Middle Ages were setup by the Church.
It's curious how we humans fail to remember that we're not able to generate all explanations just by thinking about them. Getting to explanations requires experiments. But spirits and demons are so vaguely defined that we just can't test their existence empirically.
Hence, in my mind, this should be in the realm of metaphor, not science. Let spirits and demons live in the humanities, so they can continue to inspire art, books, games, and much thought. They're about the internal human experience, not external reality.
Levitation is harder to explain, but also the author does not claim to have witnessed that themselves so the easier explanation is that it’s not an accurate report of whatever occurred.
Having said that, I think it’s important to stay curious about these claims. A close friend and myself experienced a physical phenomenon, and many years later I’m still don’t have any plausible explanation for what it might have been.
Highly recommend it. It is written by a married couple, one Catholic and one atheist. It takes the supernatural seriously without getting hokey or dismissive.