🚀 go-pugleaf

"Mike Duffy" <respond@invalid.invalid> wrote ...
> Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote in
> news:8ik7gpFj61U1@mid.individual.net:
>
>> On 25/10/2010 1:04 PM, Peter Bowditch wrote:
>>> Sylvia Else<sylvia@not.here.invalid>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 24/10/2010 9:18 AM, Peter Bowditch wrote:
>>>>> "|-|ercules"<radgray123@yahoo.com>   wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Peter Bowditch"<myfirstname@ratbags.com>   wrote ...
>>>>>>> "|-|ercules"<radgray123@yahoo.com>   wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Peter Bowditch"<myfirstname@ratbags.com>   wrote>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hmmm. A bit subjective, that. Can we have an objective,
>>>>>>>>> unambiguous answer please.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If she selects my answer, that's a HIT.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If she selects your answer that's a MISS.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Want me to rephrase it another 50 times until the ambiguity
>>>>>>>> goes away?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> She's a blind judge.  You're not supposed to let her know
>>>>>>>> which answer is yours (or mine).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Herc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So now it's Sylvia who's the psychic, not you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No she's a blind judge.  She doesn't know which is the
>>>>>> channeled quote and which is a control's purely random quote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Technically it's double blind since you are not present when
>>>>>> you give the 'tested quote' and the control's (your) 'placebo
>>>>>> quote' to her (shuffled).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *I* can do the "Answer the quiz" part if you prefer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm working on a claim with conditions as per your request.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Claimed power: mind reading
>>>>>
>>>>> Could you be a bit more specific? The claim has to say what you
>>>>> can do and under what conditions you can do it. Saying "mind
>>>>> reading" satisfies neither criteria.
>>>>>
>>>>> Example: On Tuesday afternoons between the times of 4:11pm and
>>>>> 4:41pm Australian Eastern Summer Time when the temperature in
>>>>> West Wyalong is between 32.4degC and 94.7degF I can state with
>>>>> 100% accuracy the word being pointed to on 50 randomly-selected
>>>>> pages of any of ten previously agreed novels. All books must
>>>>> have more than 120 pages and be published in English. Outside
>>>>> the specified time range my accuracy drops by 5%; outside the
>>>>> specified temperature range my accuracy drops by 5%; these
>>>>> drops are not cumulative, so the minimum level of accuracy is
>>>>> 95% at all times.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree that failing to achieve 95% accuracy over one hundred
>>>>> (100) trials will indicate that I have not demonstrated my
>>>>> claimed mind reading power. I also agree that any attempt by me
>>>>> to use post hoc semantic arguments to redefine any terms of
>>>>> this claim in order to claim success will be classed as
>>>>> weaseling and will result in immediate cessation of testing, be
>>>>> an overt admission that I have no psychic, supernatural or
>>>>> paranormal powers and expose me to public ridicule.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Claim: I can guess what question you are thinking of if you
>>>>>> tell me a random page number and line number of a novel, and
>>>>>> give me 3 options to choose from.
>>>>>
>>>>> See properly formed claim above.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why does it have to be questions, other than to add
>>>>> non-testability to the subjectivity already making the process
>>>>> useless in detecting mind-reading powers?
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can give you a list of say 22 questions rather than you
>>>>>> think up questions.
>>>>>
>>>>> How about I give you a list of 22 questions and you tell me the
>>>>> answers?
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then all you have to do is telepathically ask me 1 question at
>>>>>> a time, then give me 3 options to choose from.  Total 20
>>>>>> questions with 2 remaining options. The expected average score
>>>>>> would be 6.7 right out of 20.  Sound OK so far?
>>>>>
>>>>> No. It sound like a guessing game rather than any sort of test
>>>>> of paranormal powers.
>>>>
>>>> Most paranormal tests look like guessing games, and are not
>>>> considered the worse for that, as long as the probability of
>>>> guessing correctly by chance can be reliably calculated. The
>>>> paranormal element comes from guessing correctly at a
>>>> sufficiently higher rate than chance would predict.
>>>
>>> I agree. That is why pass and fail scores have to be agreed in
>>> advance and why an objective method of measuring the results must
>>> be used.
>>>
>>
>> I believe Herc is offering an objective method. Unseen by Herc,
>> the tester selects a card, notes the question, and thinks it. The
>> tester then takes two other cards, shuffles all three and passes
>> them to Herc. Herc hands one back. It is either the card showing
>> the question the tester noted, or it is not. No interpretation is
>> required. There are some extraneous bits that are required to
>> humour Herc, but they have no impact on the test.
>>
>> Herc appears to have a good handle on the probabilities (even
>> though I get the impression he's tried to pull the wool over my
>> eyes once or twice), so I don't think you'd have any difficulty
>> getting him to accept the proposed pass and fail scores.
>>
>> That said, I fully expect Herc would fail
>> ... Instead, he'd  blame the protocol, or claim the
>> tester was cheating, and want to do it again
>
> Let's try it and see what happens before guessing what Herc will do
> if he fails. (After all, he's the one who claims to be psychic.)
>
> But yes, before the tests start, let's define exactly how many rounds
> of questions and what are the minimum amounts of correct questions
> that must be picked in order to confirm his claim of being a psychic.
>
> And you all do understand my contention that even if he passes the
> test, it does not actually prove a psychic ability unless we have
> more details about the books he uses. I am not accusing him of
> memorizing them as the usual definition of the word is used. Rather,
> I propose that the unplumbed depths of the unconscious mind can
> easily memorize entire books with very scant effort. In some people,
> the conscious mind can access this information:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eidetic_memory
>
> Also, in some people the memories can manifest themselves as ideas
> that come from nowhere, and can be perceived as "channeled" material.
>
> That is why I want to know exactly when Herc chooses what book to use
> (i.e. before or after he sees the question) and whether or not he has
> previously read the books. (Or even just glanced at the pages.)
>


Makes no difference as YOU select the line number and I don't know the question
and I will use a single novel throughout the test.

Even if I could select a preferred quote it wouldn't do me any good.

Herc