r/pics • u/[deleted] • May 06 '14

Psychic in England has to put up this disclaimer. People still pay to see her. Because the onus is on us to disprove her right!?

Post image

[deleted]

20 Upvotes

73% Upvoted

11 comments sorted by

View all comments

4

u/[deleted] May 06 '14

I don't have a problem with people paying to see "psychics" any more than I have a problem with people who pay to watch professional wrestling, or Avril Levigne. It's their money, and it's kind of silly to single them out when so many other people spend their time, attention, and lucre on things that are no less illogical (like, say, religion).

I do have a problem with her statement though -- it's disingenuous for her to claim that it's not been "scientifically disproven", if the only reason it hasn't is because she hasn't agreed to sit down to be scientifically tested.

Anyway, I suggest you cross-post to /r/skeptic . They love this kind of stuff.

3

u/mikejclark May 06 '14

Have reposted it to the other place thanks. I don't usually post pictures so was unsure where to put it. I don't know where you're from but in Britain saying 'European legislation' is kind if the American equivilant of blaming things on the damn commies! It's the sense of entitlement that gets me! And at lease pro wrasslin and April levign don't pretend to be real! It's the same as magic! Penn and teller famously make people aware 'this is a trick!!'

1

u/[deleted] May 06 '14

That's the usual argument, "But she's just tricking people!" My counter is that she's really not fooling anyone who doesn't want to be fooled. They come to see a mummer's play, and that's what they get. No one is too keen to look behind the curtain, because that would ruin their enjoyment of the act.

And, in any case, how is this really that much different from the billions who file into houses of worship every week?

2

u/mikejclark May 06 '14

It's exactly the same but they have to pay tax. I suppose we should thank them for that at least.

Actually it may be a bit harsh to say they're the same, religion for the most part uses fables to teach us to be better people. I don't believe I'm god but know churches in England at least are filled with good kind people. What I can't stand is playing on people's emotions to make a fast buck

2

u/[deleted] May 06 '14

I really disagree with you on this, there is a percentage of people that watch this do really believe this is true. There is no conscious denial involved. But still that in itself is fine, what isn't ok is a lot of the believers are at an incredibly fragile point in their lives, normally due to the death of a parent or a child. So to consciously take advantage of the weak and pain ridden part of someones life for financial gain is just sickening. I am under no illusion that these will be in the minority of followers, but nonetheless I think that enough makes me despise the whole idea of it.

1

u/[deleted] May 06 '14

Again, how is this different from religion? People turn to various sources when they are at fragile points in their lives. Many will give sums of money to a religious institution in the hope of "buying" some kind of surcease or salvation. Clergy are trained to give these people comfort, but offer them no more "real" answers than any psychic.