I had been banging on about Deb Webber, and her impending visit to Alice Springs, while at work. One of my colleagues is shall we say a “little alternative” in the spiritual sense. She performs some sort of spiritual therapeutic service (though not at work, because we are an evidence based provider of health care). She offered to perform a session with me but mentioned that I had to be open minded.
Now why is it that because I am a Skeptic, that she felt the need to reinforce that I need be open minded. Was she really asking me to be open minded, or is she asking me not to be critical? Is being open minded accepting that there are many equal, valid, contradictory “truths” out there and we need to back of and respect peoples “truths” even when we don’t believe them, because the evidence is non-conclusive or non-existent?
If you have not seen the video below, take the time to watch it. I think it should be compulsory viewing for all who demand open mindedness.
I do consider myself open minded, I am willing to let people prove their claims or provide evidence. I will change my views if I can be convinced. To me open mindedness is not dismissing things out of hand(this gets harder to do with the mounting evidence of psychic fraud) but being willing to say “Let’s hear you out”.
Perhaps I should have turned the situation around and asked if my colleague was prepared to be open minded, prepared to be open to the idea that her viewpoint has no basis in reality, and that she has fallen prey to her own imagination?
H/T to Bruce for the video
Related posts:
- Welcome Open Parachute to the ANZAB Crew Open Parachute has joined ANZAB (Australian and New Zealand Atheist...
- New Template I decided to change the template as the background was...
- Doesn’t Atheism require as much faith as belief in god? Donna, has pondered: “I wondered to myself this weekend if,...
Loading ...
I agree. I love being proved wrong – it means I have learnt something. However I will demand that there is actual evidence for the claims being made, we are not witnessing a placebo effect, and we are not subject to confirmation bias. This approach has built the technological marvel of the western world. It is a proven method in itself, so any true claim should be able to pass the test.
I don't know if I luv being proved wrong
, perhaps appreciate is a better fit 
Another common phrase I come across is " I was Skeptical too until…"
Quite a few people are small "s" skeptic (especially when you get telemarketers on the phone), not too many people take the time to school themselves in critical thinking and in psychology/science nor take the time to understand how easily we can be decieved, manipulated.
it's that old saying "I'm open minded, but not so open my brains fall out".
My experience with the more spiritual side of "alternative" treatments has been with Reiki (& similar therapies). I have heard many alternative therapists tell all their clients to have an open mind … meaning to relax, and let the "energy" flow in.
Rather than some miraculous cure-all, I tend to see Reiki more as a power of positive thinking exercise, mixed with deep relaxation or meditation. For me, that is not something that requires proof, it's merely a technique.
I was thinking more the astral travelling stuff.
I don't know if you have had a good long chat with the person I was referring to 
.
Reiki as a metaphor, as a visualisation I don't have an issue with it's the other claims that some practitioners make and the pseudo spiritual history of its origin. The same with yoga. There are substantiated physical and metal benefits from practsing, the religious/mystical stuff is fine if not taken literally( I find it unecessary). Much the same with Martial arts as well, chi etc all well and good for explaining concepts or for getting the student to understand some technique or movement its when it goes beyond this that have objections.
I just find it depressing that people even need that explained. Although personal experience clearly indicates that many of them do.
We are all generally skeptical, about some things usually as a result of being cheated or manipulated by our fellow man(or woman). That sort of common sense skepticism is easy because its obvious I suppose. There is not too much difficult thinking that has to take place. Ask the average man what the placebo effect is and they will likely stare blankly at you, confirmation bias no chance. So I think that's why it needs to be spelled out. We are lazy (economical?) creatures at heart. If we can get away without too much effort we will.
Here's something I wrote a little over a year ago:
"In the world of the true believers – astrologers, psychics, clairvoyants, faith healers and those with other paranormal specialties, or "gifts" – anyone who dares to consider evidence and search for truth is closed-minded while anyone who unquestionably accepts that what they are witnessing is beyond natural explanation is considered open-minded.
I'm not sure how this ever came about. It's difficult to see how something which is locked tight is actually open while that which is awaiting input is irreversibly closed."
Cartoon at: open-minded
As for the power of positive thinking, that has today been dealt a blow with research suggesting it doesn't work when you could really use it.
I love Nash's comment at the cartoon Andy linked to:
Your mind should be like your intestines. Take in everything at one end, absorb any goodness and dispose of the waste out of the other end.
Its a nice way of looking at it- I think=/