How do you set probability for precognition?

[Acronym1]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I precognised that my grade in my very first test would be E, despite the fact that I was aiming for a C or B. I have a probability of 1/6 to have the E flashing my mind correctly - not impossible at all. I really studied hard and expected a better grade, though, and was questioning why the E was "flashing". It did not make any sense at all.

What if I precognise specific events that are not numeric? How do I quantify such data in a probabilistic way?

For example meeting individuals with specific traits and doing certain things? Are they possible to quantify probabilistically?

 

[psych.meout]

What are you talking about?

 

[erg923]

I precognised that my grade in my very first test would be E, despite the fact that I was aiming for a C or B. I have a probability of 1/6 to have the E flashing my mind correctly - not impossible at all. I really studied hard and expected a better grade, though, and was questioning why the E was "flashing". It did not make any sense at all.

What if I precognise specific events that are not numeric? How do I quantify such data in a probabilistic way?

For example meeting individuals with specific traits and doing certain things? Are they possible to quantify probabilistically?

This post sounds psychotic.

 

[synesthetics]

This post sounds psychotic.

I was thinking it sounds high or merely overwrought. But it could be that!

 

[psych.meout]

This post sounds psychotic.

That was my thought exactly.

I was thinking it sounds high or merely overwrought. But it could be that!

Yeah, I could see that option, too, based on his other recent posts.

 

[Acronym1]

This post sounds psychotic.

Because you assume that precognitive abilities don't exist or because you are simply a jerk?

 

[Acronym1]

What are you talking about?

Parapsychology? Ever heard of that?

 

[erg923]

Because you assume that precognitive abilities don't exist or because you are simply a jerk?

yes

 

[AGallier]

Parapsychology? Ever heard of that?

I was interested because I had honestly no idea what you were talking about. I don't mean this in a confrontational way, but based on the definition I found for "parapsychology" wouldn't this technically be a contradiction? The definition basically states that the content of parapsychology cannot be scientifically investigated, but psychology by definition is a science.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Acronym1]

I was interested because I had honestly no idea what you were talking about. I don't mean this in a confrontational way, but based on the definition I found for "parapsychology" wouldn't this technically be a contradiction? The definition basically states that the content of parapsychology cannot be scientifically investigated, but psychology by definition is a science.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

No. Parapsychological research is accepted in American Psychological Association.

 

[WisNeuro]

Accepted and tolerated are two different things.

 

[psych.meout]

No. Parapsychological research is accepted in American Psychological Association.

It's entirely pseudoscience, but you're welcome to research it and provide the first evidence supporting it.

 

[WisNeuro]

It's entirely pseudoscience, but you're welcome to research it and provide the first evidence supporting it.

Well, it depends on how you define evidence. If poorly designed studies and reliance on small sample sizes to increase type I error count as evidence, then there is already plenty of it in the field of parapsychology.

 

[psych.meout]

Well, it depends on how you define evidence. If poorly designed studies and reliance on small sample sizes to increase type I error count as evidence, then there is already plenty of it in the field of parapsychology.

Sorry, I meant evidence, not "evidence."

 

[Acronym1]

It's entirely pseudoscience, but you're welcome to research it and provide the first evidence supporting it.

Not all of them. It's accepted publishing if one wishes to pursue the matter. The conclusions are so far not in accordance with the objectives, but the actual studies (exceptions exist) are scientifically done.

 

[psych.meout]

Not all of them. It's accepted publishing if one wishes to pursue the matter. The conclusions are so far not in accordance with the objectives, but the actual studies (exceptions exist) are scientifically done.

The studies leading to findings supporting parapsychology are invariably bastardizations of science. As WisNeuro pointed out, these "researchers" intentionally alter their design or otherwise bias the research to support their a priori conclusion that these parapsychology phenomena are real.

More fundamentally, parapsychological concepts violate known laws and theories of various branches of science.

 

[Acronym1]

The studies leading to findings supporting parapsychology are invariably bastardizations of science. As WisNeuro pointed out, these "researchers" intentionally alter their design or otherwise bias the research to support their a priori conclusion that these parapsychology phenomena are real.

More fundamentally, parapsychological concepts violate known laws and theories of various branches of science.

There are no studies indicating that precognition is scientific except for Daryl Bems: feeling the future (2010). All I said was that they were conducted scientifically, not that the phenomenon has been scientifically proven. Two separate things.

 

[psych.meout]

There are no studies indicating that precognition is scientific except for Daryl Bems: feeling the future (2010). All I said was that they were conducted scientifically, not that the phenomenon has been scientifically proven. Two separate things.

I think you're misunderstanding me. I wasn't saying that no scientific studies have ever investigated parapsychological phenomena, plenty of skeptics have done them to debunk parapsychology. I was talking about the studies which claim to have provided supporting evidence of parapsychology. As I said, they are invariably bastardizations of science.

 

[Jegg]

 

[deleted343839]

No. Parapsychological research is accepted in American Psychological Association.

I've been a member of APA for 15 years, and aside from that ridiculous Bem paper (the findings of which were never independently replicated), I've never observed anything that would support your claim.

 

[psych.meout]

I've been a member of APA for 15 years, and aside from that ridiculous Bem paper (the findings of which were never independently replicated), I've never observed anything that would support your claim.

What about the seminal findings of Venkman, Stantz, and Spengler, 1984?

 

[EmotRegulation]

Gilbert and Yates actually have a book: http://www.ghostsfromourpast.com/

 

[deleted343839]

What about the seminal findings of Venkman, Stantz, and Spengler, 1984?

Alas, they were before my time. But the stories I've heard, wow. You wouldn't believe me if I told you.

 

[Jegg]

I still think Philip K Dick is the God of precognitive research... lol