The resistance to studies seems, on this board at least, to emmanate from the skeptics, not from those who are open to the idea of AC.
[QUOTE=Guilherme;8901511]
I believe you have slipped into an Ad Hominem logical fallacy. My own beliefs, or their lack, has nothing to do with an observation that a physical phenomenon is not supported by any observable and verifiable evidence.
G.[/QUOTE]
Oh, puhhhlleeezze… of COURSE your belief system plays into this. It does for everyone.
My analogy about religious beliefs giving comfort, and a reading from an animal communicator doing the same thing doesn’t sit well with you? OK.
But taking comfort from something that cannot be proven isn’t a bad thing. Either way.
Denying others that right? That IS not a good things.
[QUOTE=ASB Stars;8901626]
Oh, puhhhlleeezze… of COURSE your belief system plays into this. It does for everyone.
My analogy about religious beliefs giving comfort, and a reading from an animal communicator doing the same thing doesn’t sit well with you? OK.
But taking comfort from something that cannot be proven isn’t a bad thing. Either way.
Denying others that right? That IS not a good things.[/QUOTE]
Again, see the bolded, why is discussing the merits and demerits of a topic is “denying others that right”?
[QUOTE=ASB Stars;8901626]
Oh, puhhhlleeezze… of COURSE your belief system plays into this. It does for everyone.
My analogy about religious beliefs giving comfort, and a reading from an animal communicator doing the same thing doesn’t sit well with you? OK.
But taking comfort from something that cannot be proven isn’t a bad thing. Either way.
Denying others that right? That IS not a good things.[/QUOTE]
Who’s denying anything to anybody?
G.
[QUOTE=Guilherme;8901654]
Who’s denying anything to anybody?
G.[/QUOTE]
Quite simply? You are denying that there might be something to their belief system, which allows for Animal Communicators to have some benefit and merit.
Just because it doesn’t pass the tests that you feel it should, doesn’t mean that it might have some actual truth to it, as well. I haven’t found an A/C who I was impressed with, as of yet, but I do think that there are people out there with great gifts- I just haven’t found that one yet.
My point in all of this is that we are too quick to require a level of proof of what we do not, ourselves believe, without requiring it of ourselves.
Or, in other words, if this is what they like to believe, let them do so without feeling the need to castigate them.
[QUOTE=ASB Stars;8901667]
Quite simply? You are denying that there might be something to their belief system, which allows for Animal Communicators to have some benefit and merit.
Just because it doesn’t pass the tests that you feel it should, doesn’t mean that it might have some actual truth to it, as well. I haven’t found an A/C who I was impressed with, as of yet, but I do think that there are people out there with great gifts- I just haven’t found that one yet.
My point in all of this is that we are too quick to require a level of proof of what we do not, ourselves believe, without requiring it of ourselves.
Or, in other words, if this is what they like to believe, let them do so without feeling the need to castigate them.[/QUOTE]
Who is “castigating” anyone?
Why should anyone that doesn’t think there is current definitive facts supporting those kinds of animal communicators presented in anecdote here not be permitted to say that, but those that believe in those say they exist, when the data is truly not there?
Why ask some to let others carry their unproven beliefs as proven science, but not those that ask for real proven data?
Then we quit having a discussion about any topic if only one side gets to have a voice, discussing topics being what we are here for.
[QUOTE=ASB Stars;8901626]
Oh, puhhhlleeezze… of COURSE your belief system plays into this. It does for everyone.
My analogy about religious beliefs giving comfort, and a reading from an animal communicator doing the same thing doesn’t sit well with you? OK.
But taking comfort from something that cannot be proven isn’t a bad thing. Either way.
Denying others that right? That IS not a good things.[/QUOTE]
Anyone out there has a perfect right to “take comfort” from a belief in the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, their own personal Guardian Angel or the rabbit’s foot in their pocket. Granted!
But the discussion wasn’t about what beliefs “give you comfort,” it was about whether or not consulting a self-declared AC is a valid way of solving equine problems. When people start “augmenting” the reality every else lives in, they can usually expect a few questions about the claims to unusual phenomena that most people have never experienced.
There was a big surge of this kind of stuff back in the late 19th century–mediums, seances, spiritism and self-proclaimed “mystics,” a lot of whom were taking people’s money including “horse whisperers.” Seems to happen when social mores are in transition, and people are feeling insecure and looking for something to cling to for that “comfort” you mentioned. Things like “religion and guns,” like Mr. President said. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=ASB Stars;8901667]
Quite simply? You are denying that there might be something to their belief system, which allows for Animal Communicators to have some benefit and merit.
Indeed I am.
Just because it doesn’t pass the tests that you feel it should, doesn’t mean that it might have some actual truth to it, as well. I haven’t found an A/C who I was impressed with, as of yet, but I do think that there are people out there with great gifts- I just haven’t found that one yet.
Sort of like the search for a white Crow?
My point in all of this is that we are too quick to require a level of proof of what we do not, ourselves believe, without requiring it of ourselves.
I’m not doing that.
Or, in other words, if this is what they like to believe, let them do so without feeling the need to castigate them.[/QUOTE]
I’ve not “castigated” anyone. I’ve expressed deep misgivings about the entire process. I’ve also explained, in some detail, those misgivings.
To claim I’ve “denied” a belief would be correct. To claim that I’ve “denied something to someone” would be a gross misstatement of fact.
G.
[QUOTE=Fleurdelis;8891058]
Not sure how to feel about this, one way or another, but as a horse owner couldn’t help but think ‘I wonder what my mare would tell a complete stranger.’ Low and behold, I stuck with the article long enough to read the last question, a horse owner wanting to know why her horse stopped eating and drinking all of a sudden.
Has anyone ever gotten someone to communicate with their horse? If so, do share your experience. What beans did your horse spill? I must say that, even as a skeptical person, I’m jealous of the thought of anyone being able to communicate with animals as this article describes.
article[/QUOTE]
Here is the original post- she wants to know about others experiences. She isn’t asking for this in lieu of calling a Vet. She simply wants to know if people have found anyone who could communicate with their animals…
So let’s ask a different question: Why do people have this NEED to believe?
Why not believe the opinions of vet, BM, farrier, saddle fitter, etc. who are standing right in front of the horse over a phone psychic in a distant state?
Is it because they’re not telling you what you want to hear?
Putting animal communicators (particularly of the “professional” sort) on a par with religious beliefs will get you no argument at all from me. Both rely on belief in the absence of proof–isn’t that pretty much the definition of faith?
[QUOTE=Ghazzu;8901822]
Putting animal communicators (particularly of the “professional” sort) on a par with religious beliefs will get you no argument at all from me. Both rely on belief in the absence of proof–isn’t that pretty much the definition of faith?[/QUOTE]
Thank you! Your kindness and wisdom always shine through…
[QUOTE=Lady Eboshi;8901773]
So let’s ask a different question: Why do people have this NEED to believe?
Why not believe the opinions of vet, BM, farrier, saddle fitter, etc. who are standing right in front of the horse over a phone psychic in a distant state?
Is it because they’re not telling you what you want to hear?[/QUOTE]
I dunno. I’ve never called an AC about the care of any of my animals. I can’t imagine that I would. However, if someone wants to reach out, to see what an animal is feeling, and that helps them, then I would enjoy hearing about those experiences.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1409.1570.pdf
This does a rather good job of summarizing the debate of belief vs reality in quantum physics terms.
And this article series is also very informative.
http://www.jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/439
I find peer reviewed research articles of more value for information than someone trying to be snarky on an internet forum, but of course, others may be persuaded otherwise.
…
[QUOTE=Bluey;8901634]
Again, see the bolded, why is discussing the merits and demerits of a topic is “denying others that right”?[/QUOTE]
This thread is an excellent example of a sort of passive-aggressive denial. Also, in Transactional Analysis “Game Theory”, I think I’d call it a “game”-a variation of IRYW (I’m Right You’re Wrong), and that Eric Berne might just agree with me if he were still alive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Berne
There is a profound disrespect by some on CoTH of any opinion that may admit even the possibility of animal communication. Let’s look at the OP’s original post and think about what the post was requesting, shall we?
[QUOTE=Fleurdelis;8891058]Not sure how to feel about this, one way or another, but as a horse owner couldn’t help but think ‘I wonder what my mare would tell a complete stranger.’ Low and behold, I stuck with the article long enough to read the last question, a horse owner wanting to know why her horse stopped eating and drinking all of a sudden.
Has anyone ever gotten someone to communicate with their horse? If so, do share your experience. What beans did your horse spill? I must say that, even as a skeptical person, I’m jealous of the thought of anyone being able to communicate with animals as this article describes.
article[/QUOTE]
Now, what did the OP want?
As I read, it sounds to me that the OP wanted a light-hearted discussion with others of like mind, sharing experiences in the area of animal communication. Please note the EXPLICIT REQUEST in the 2nd paragraph (Bolded).
What did the OP get? The thread was hijacked into discussions of everything BUT what the OP wanted. On CoTH boards, it is simply not possible for a thread like the one requested to exist, because those who are “anti” can’t resist coming over, hijacking the thread and playing their TA their game of IRYW.
This happens every.single.time animal communication is mentioned.
Now you game-players will come back at me and call me whatever you can think of. Please proceed.
May I request that those of us who are interested in the possibility of this phenomena just ignore the game-players and not allow these sorts of threads to be hijacked? After all, the hijacker’s only goal here is to be “right”.
Bravo, Sparrowette, great explication of the posting dynamics on AC threads!
[QUOTE=Sparrowette;8904867]
This thread is an excellent example of a sort of passive-aggressive denial. Also, in Transactional Analysis “Game Theory”, I think I’d call it a “game”-a variation of IRYW (I’m Right You’re Wrong), and that Eric Berne might just agree with me if he were still alive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Berne
There is a profound disrespect by some on CoTH of any opinion that may admit even the possibility of animal communication. Let’s look at the OP’s original post and think about what the post was requesting, shall we?
Now, what did the OP want?
As I read, it sounds to me that the OP wanted a light-hearted discussion with others of like mind, sharing experiences in the area of animal communication. Please note the EXPLICIT REQUEST in the 2nd paragraph (Bolded).
What did the OP get? The thread was hijacked into discussions of everything BUT what the OP wanted. On CoTH boards, it is simply not possible for a thread like the one requested to exist, because those who are “anti” can’t resist coming over, hijacking the thread and playing their TA their game of IRYW.
This happens every.single.time animal communication is mentioned.
Now you game-players will come back at me and call me whatever you can think of. Please proceed.
May I request that those of us who are interested in the possibility of this phenomena just ignore the game-players and not allow these sorts of threads to be hijacked? After all, the hijacker’s only goal here is to be “right”.[/QUOTE]
This is so true of so many threads.
In this case, the one poster who has admitted that they are an atheist comes around to tell everyone that they can’t believe in anything, and the one who admittedly was educated by Jesuits shows up to tell them that they cannot believe in THIS (whatever is outside of their belief system).
You don’t believe in this- fine- I am a skeptic, as well. But to parachute in, every. single. time. and redirect the thread for your bully pulpit? Not OK.
I was very thankful when ever a bud said a prayer for a sick horse in my behalf. I don’t know of any paid AC but those that stepped forward to lend me a hand with a sick horse sure came to me in a time of need.
[QUOTE=ASB Stars;8904945]
This is so true of so many threads.
In this case, the one poster who has admitted that they are an atheist comes around to tell everyone that they can’t believe in anything, and the one who admittedly was educated by Jesuits shows up to tell them that they cannot believe in THIS (whatever is outside of their belief system).
You don’t believe in this- fine- I am a skeptic, as well. But to parachute in, every. single. time. and redirect the thread for your bully pulpit? Not OK.[/QUOTE]
Not really true, by dismissing the opinions of those that are asked to believe and present why they don’t, is that not also, as you call it, a “bully pulpit”?
Why does who someone believes the posters be, “atheist”, “Jesuit educated” matter, other than presented as some kind of personal dig and why go there at all?
What does any of that have to do with animal communicators?
Fine to believe what anyone wants to believe, but when asking others for opinions, as here, well, there will be all kind of those offered and, we should think, every one valid on their own.
