Civility Out?

[BillyJoe]

Cosmophilosopher,

Also, they are NOT delusions.

A delusion is a false belief (strongly held in spite of a lack of evidence)

A delusion is a psychiatric illness.

A delusion can be a symptom of a psychiatric illness.

They are simply BELIEFS they have, no different than the beliefs that skeptics might have.

They are false beliefs strongly held in spite of a lack of evidence.
This is very different from a sceptic who believes only if there is validating evidence.

They are representations in their brain.....

Yes, they are representations in their brains, but these representations do not represent anything real (outside the brain)

.....and they are "real experiences" psychologically.....

Yes, they are real experiences, in the sense that they really do experience them. But it is all in their brains. There is nothing outside the brain that they represent or correlate to.

.....and they deserve respect.

In what sense do delusions deserve respect? I would say only in the sense that we need to understand and explain them.


regards,
BillyJoe

 

[Beth]

I'm curious as to why your tone has become so anti-JREF in the forums when you were (from my memory) treated fairly regarding your claim. I realise that memory can be faulty, so perhaps you can set me straight.

Generally, I don't like insults or rudeness, whether to me or other people. I try to avoid people who treat other people badly, even if they treat me decently.

I'm not going to provide any links to specific examples. As I said before, I think it simply leads to "yes it is"/"no it isn't" type aruments. Since it's a matter of opinion, those really aren't productive arguments. Further, my opinion is based not just on what is publically posted, but private correspondence as well.

I don't find JREF on the whole any worse than average. To me, it's just part of the human condition. Some people enjoy participating or watching such exchanges. No reason they can't have their fun, and the JREF challenge applicants provide lots of easy fodder for thier insults. But I didn't find it fun to participate.

In regard to the whole civility issue and how it affects the purpose of JREF, I'll quote a bit of a private correspondence from a different applicant, one who has never posted here, and let you draw your own conclusions.

With regard to the Randi Challenge, I do not trust their intentions, their integrity, and their motivation. Every correspondence with them thus far has resulted in pure rudeness

Is this really how the JREF challenge wants to be perceived by people outside the community?

Beth

 

[Darat]

...snip...

Is this really how the JREF challenge wants to be perceived by people outside the community?

Beth

Did your correspondent trust the JREF before the alleged rudeness?

 

[Beth]

Did your correspondent trust the JREF before the alleged rudeness?

No opinion one way or the other prior to the experience.

Beth

 

[Darat]

No opinion one way or the other prior to the experience.

Beth

That's quite strange then, after all why would rudeness make you doubt someone’s integrity etc.? (Especially when you consider the fact the JREF is a an organisation that by law is open to public inspection.) Doesn’t seem a very rational response to me.

 

[crimresearch]

You know, everytime I go to the bank, and demand that they give me a million dollars, without bothering to complete any of their silly forms, or jump through their silly hoops, they are quite rude to me.

Should I quit trusting in their integrity?

 

[sphenisc]

Darat said
QUOTE]That's quite strange then, after all why would rudeness make you doubt someone’s integrity etc.? (Especially when you consider the fact the JREF is a an organisation that by law is open to public inspection.) Doesn’t seem a very rational response to me.[/QUOTE]

People who are inconsiderate of other's feelings in their manner of speech, are more like to be inconsiderate of others in their manner of action. They are therefore more likely to be less than scrupulous in their dealings with you.

You know, everytime I go to the bank, and demand that they give me a million dollars, without bothering to complete any of their silly forms, or jump through their silly hoops, they are quite rude to me.

Should I quit trusting in their integrity?

Yes... on second thoughts you should never have had any in the first place.

 

[dann]

In regard to the whole civility issue and how it affects the purpose of JREF, I'll quote a bit of a private correspondence from a different applicant, one who has never posted here, and let you draw your own conclusions.
"With regard to the Randi Challenge, I do not trust their intentions, their integrity, and their motivation. Every correspondence with them thus far has resulted in pure rudeness?"
Is this really how the JREF challenge wants to be perceived by people outside the community?

No, this is probably not how the JREF challenge wants to be perceived by people outside the community. I'm sure that they would prefer to hear something along these lines:

'With regard to the Randi Challenge they completely took me in with their kindness, their intgrety and their courteous way of treating my application. Every correspondence with them so far has resulted in a step closer to clarity and enlightenment, I and couldn't have been happier if I had actually won the one million dollars.
However, since I couldn't prove that my kind of dowsing actually works, something that my self-delusion and the ideomotor effect made me think, I, of course, didn't win the money. Instead I gained valuable insights into both nature and my way of perceiving the world.
I may have been disappointed at not winning the money, but I left the experience as an enriched and entirely happy person.'

This is an (unfortunately imaginary) reaction that I would find very natural, but I don't expect to hear of many cases ending this way, primarily because you are not in control of the way people react!
However, you assume that an anonymous quotation that doesn't mention a single example of bad behaviour is supposed to make people at the JREF Challenge change their minds ...
I won't call you delusional, but you ought to consider giving us a little proof of the accusations we have heard in this thread so far.

 

[Beth]

No, this is probably not how the JREF challenge wants to be perceived by people outside the community. I'm sure that they would prefer to hear something along these lines:

because you are not in control of the way people react!

No one is in control of how other people react, but we can all control our own actions. If JREF does not want to be percieved in this manner, they can change they way they treat applicants. Since they choose to treat people in the manner they do, it's perfectly understandable (at least to me) why those outside of the community doubt the integrity and honesty of the challenge.

Beth

edited to correct spelling error

 

[Beth]

That's quite strange then, after all why would rudeness make you doubt someone’s integrity etc.? (Especially when you consider the fact the JREF is a an organisation that by law is open to public inspection.) Doesn’t seem a very rational response to me.

Whether it's rational or not, it is a common response and it does affect how people perceive you and/or your organization.

Beth

 

[jmercer]

Darat said

That's quite strange then, after all why would rudeness make you doubt someone’s integrity etc.? (Especially when you consider the fact the JREF is a an organisation that by law is open to public inspection.) Doesn’t seem a very rational response to me.

People who are inconsiderate of other's feelings in their manner of speech, are more like to be inconsiderate of others in their manner of action. They are therefore more likely to be less than scrupulous in their dealings with you.

I'll be sure to tell that to my endocrinologist. He's rude, arrogant, and painfully blunt - a real character. A lot of patients won't stay with him because his bedside manner is reminiscent of the Spanish Inquisition.

He's also's considered the top doctor in his field on the east coast, and he's incredibly competent. I could give a rat's anus about his interactions with me other than the correctness of his diagnosis and treatment.

Many politicians are (or were) reportedly exquisitely courteous in person when meeting strangers - among them George Bush (both of them); Bill Clinton; Richard Nixon; etc. Does that make them more "trustworthy"?

I might also add that many serial killers have been described as "charming" or "polite and well-mannered" by their friends, neighbors and associates. Finally, the most effective con artists are the ones who are the most personable. They work very hard at gaining your trust by appearing to be trustworthy. Both of these criminal types count on the appearance of courtesy and "being a considerate person" as camoflage.

I'm not debating the fact that people equate being treated with courtesy as also indicating trustworthiness - I am, however, supporting Darat's contention that such a reaction is emotional and not rational.

 

[jmercer]

Whether it's rational or not, it is a common response and it does affect how people perceive you and/or your organization.

Beth

True.

 

[crimresearch]

Whether it's rational or not, it is a common response and it does affect how people perceive you and/or your organization.

Beth

As in my bank analogy, rudeness itself is a common reaction, often driven by perceptions, such as the perception that someone who asks for a million dollars is jerking you around by not following the process in a straightforward manner...
and both JREF and banks have a very clear process that needs to be followed when asking for a million dollars.

In other words, what line does someone have to cross in order to be treated rudely by JREF?

 

[Beth]

In other words, what line does someone have to cross in order to be treated rudely by JREF?

Judging by the posted JREF correspondence, simply inquiring about the challenge is sufficient to merit being treated rudely.



Okay, that's tongue in cheek, but clearly many people reading the correspondence are left with the impression that JREF is unjustifiably rude to potential applicants. There are, after all, not just one but several recent threads regarding that perception in both this area and the challenge application section.

Beth

 

[crimresearch]

Judging by the posted JREF correspondence, simply inquiring about the challenge is sufficient to merit being treated rudely.



Okay, that's tongue in cheek, but clearly many people reading the correspondence are left with the impression that JREF is unjustifiably rude to potential applicants. There are, after all, not just one but several recent threads regarding that perception in both this area and the challenge application section.

Beth

I agree...but I am struck by the fact that many of the posts Kramer has shared seem to start off politely enough on the JREF end and then switch to a tone that might seem to someone as unjustifiably rude.

I'm in no position to decide for other people what is unjustifiable about JREF's reasons for being brusque dismissive or offputting...

I'm just asking if we can define the *point* at which it goes from
'Thank you for your interest in the JREF challenge...'
to 'There is nothing more to be gained from further correspondence...'.

 

[dann]

No one is in control of how other people react, but we can all control our own actions. If JREF does not want to be perceived in this manner, they can change the way they treat applicants. Since they choose to treat people in the manner they do, it's perfectly understandable (at least to me) why those outside of the community doubt the integrity and honesty of the challenge.

I'm happy for you since you appear to be so perceptive. It's not understandable to me why the outsiders mentioned by you doubt the integrety and honesty of the challenge, so could you show me some of the facts that make their doubt so understandable to you? Quoting the accusations from an anonymous guy who claims that it is so, but doesn't present the evidence, just doesn't do it for me!

With regard to the Randi Challenge, I do not trust their intentions, their integrity, and their motivation. Every correspondence with them thus far has resulted in pure rudeness

Why don't you ask this guy to control his own actions and either shut up or, better still, prove that "every correspondence with them thus far has resulted in pure rudeness." I find his accusations very hard to believe without a shred of evidence!
Won't you, please?!
I would also like you to consider this: The woowoos control their own actions, right? So if they don't want me to perceive them as delusional, why don't they simply stop behaving as if they are? Isn't it perfectly understandable that those outside of the woowoo community sometimes tend to doubt their sanity?

 

[jmercer]

Judging by the posted JREF correspondence, simply inquiring about the challenge is sufficient to merit being treated rudely.



Okay, that's tongue in cheek, but clearly many people reading the correspondence are left with the impression that JREF is unjustifiably rude to potential applicants. There are, after all, not just one but several recent threads regarding that perception in both this area and the challenge application section.

Beth

True. And I'd be a complete fool (instead of a partial one) if I tried to suggest it isn't true that some people find the JREF unjustifiably rude. Further, I'll also admit that there are times when I read an exchange and thought that it was unnecessarily rude. "Many" might be pushing it - there are a lot more readers of these threads than writers, and there's really no way to accurately tell if it's many, or just a vocal minority.

But that's my personal preferences being imposed on someone else's responsiblity. It's JREF's million, so they can pretty much deal with the applicants any way they want. (And frankly, they STILL treat the applicants with more respect than many so-called "Reality TV" shows treat their contestants!)

Of course, all this rudeness and controversy generates a nice "buzz" - which in turn generates interest, so there's an upside to this as well.

 

[Beth]

True. And I'd be a complete fool (instead of a partial one) if I tried to suggest it isn't true that some people find the JREF unjustifiably rude. Further, I'll also admit that there are times when I read an exchange and thought that it was unnecessarily rude. "Many" might be pushing it - there are a lot more readers of these threads than writers, and there's really no way to accurately tell if it's many, or just a vocal minority.

But that's my personal preferences being imposed on someone else's responsiblity. It's JREF's million, so they can pretty much deal with the applicants any way they want. (And frankly, they STILL treat the applicants with more respect than many so-called "Reality TV" shows treat their contestants!)

You are quite right of course. They can treat their applicants any way they like. I don't watch any of reality TV shows myself, but I'll take your word for how they treat their contestants.

Of course, all this rudeness and controversy generates a nice "buzz" - which in turn generates interest, so there's an upside to this as well.

I agree. After watching and participating in threads for the past several months, I am now convinced that the challenge is simply a publicity stunt and nothing more.

 

[Beth]

I'm happy for you since you appear to be so perceptive. It's not understandable to me why the outsiders mentioned by you doubt the integrety and honesty of the challenge, so could you show me some of the facts that make their doubt so understandable to you? Quoting the accusations from an anonymous guy who claims that it is so, but doesn't present the evidence, just doesn't do it for me!

Okay. Don't be convinced. Go right on believing that JREF is never unjustiably rude or mean to applicants or potential applicants. Because if what's posted on the challenge application section doesn't convince you, I don't think I can. But clearly, many other people feel differently, including potential applicants who then never become actual applicants. Is that a problem? Apparently not.

Why don't you ask this guy to control his own actions

Because I try to control my own actions, not those of other people. And because my correspondent didn't do anything that I considered impolite. S/he only tried to engage JREF in a dialog about the challenge. In response, s/he was treated much as the EFT guy in Randi's commentary was treated. The result of the exchange - s/he now has the impression of JREF that I posted.

 

[dann]

After watching and participating in threads for the past several months, I am now convinced that the challenge is simply a publicity stunt and nothing more.

Yes, and if you are convinced, you are convinced, and that, apparently, is all the convincing you need.
So you can fall back on your being convinced as the argument in this debate: The challenge is simply a publicity stunt!
Very convincing!