I personally think most of it is woo, but have pondered the usefulness on different levels behind what you're saying, specifically:
* keeping a prophesy completely and utterly concealed so as not to effect the "event" at all
* figuring out how feasible it might be to measure the free-will verses self-fulfilling factor, etc
* the usefullness of a prophesy after the fact, even vague ones that are open to interpretation
I think if someone were able to prove prophetic ability beyond the shadow of a doubt (using the concealment method to limit the amount of manipulation on an event), that would more or less speak for itself and provide a means for further study of the phenomena from a more scientific pov.
However, since we mostly have "prophecy" that is often vague or open to interpretation ... or retro-fitted after the fact, the free-will verses the self-fulfilling aspect is very difficult to establish if you have a pov that the prophecy was possibly legitimate at all.
But what I think is interesting, is the overall effect prophecy has, REGARDLESS of whether or not it's verifiably true. By this I mean, perhaps prophecy isn't meant to be validated, rather it is a way to effect and manipulate events in a subtle way, more or less like marketing.
I'm reminded of the Matrix where the "oracle" reveals to Neo that "he isn't the one", only later Neo finds out that he is the one. Thus Morpheus reveals to Neo, "the oracle told you what you needed to hear, that was all,". So did the oracle manipulate Neo to fulfill her own motives, or did Neo "choose" to do what he wanted anyway, or are both answers correct, or are neither answer correct?
In the above example, it's almost irrelevant whether or not the oracle was "real" or "true". She was merely a moment in Neo's history, a sort of catalyst. And regardless of whether or not she was legit, Neo's actions after the fact could be examined and measured somehow, to see an overall trend. After a given amount of time, did the oracles words seem to have an impact at all? They most certainly did. Were they true? Perhaps yes, perhaps no. Who all was effected as a result of the oracles words? Well, Morpheus, Neo, Trinity, etc and so forth.
What's interesting to note, is that Neo didn't believe the oracle originally. One could say this gives more validity to her words. But realistically, how do we know Neo's overall psyche and motives? How do we know he didn't "want" to believe in her or not?
In some ways (continuing with the oracle example) ... some of her words were meant for a few and had limited impact, while other times her words had more of a corporate effect (a larger group).
From this angle, a prophet/seer/oracle is really no different from any other person then. It's all a "butterfly effect". The only thing that really makes a prophet/sser stand out from the rest, is that their words are usually predicting a future event .... and at some point in time, people will see events happening and compare them to that prophet who spoke them previously. When that happens, the prophet becomes a relevant part of the history of that event, regardless of whether or not the prophecy was even true or not. I think the validity of the prophet him/herself and their words is almost moot at that point .... what is more relevant is "what do we do now that we have looked back and matched the words to the now".
In the case of, say, the Seventh Day Adventists ... examining much of their failed prophecies should, imo, lead them to disband their denomination and realize the events didn't come to pass and let it go. It could be argued, in that case, that the purpose of the prophet was to "Deceive" in order to save ... to disband a group of delusional people. Since they didn't disband, and still justify the prophecies as valid somehow .... one could also argue that the purpose of the prophet was thwarted by free-will, etc and so forth. And thus they should stay banded together as a denom and not "fail the test of their faith" or whatever.
But since much time has passed, The prophecies themselves have proven untrustworthy, and thus the group should disband in my opinion (for example). Thus the prophet was a catalyst, and the change he/she provided could be "positive" if "only the Adventists would listen."
Also, I think the usefullness of prophecy could be examined from a "what lesson did this teach me or others" pov, when examining an overall picture.
Finally, I think prophecy is extremely relevant to both those who "believe" and those who dont. Take this forum for example. There are many who claim pre-cog abilities and prophetic type of knowledge, etc etc. Even the "everyday" believer who spouts out the bible is more or less spouting out prophecy when they talk about what happens when we die, etc and so forth. Now, to the skeptic, they want to see evidence. As such there hasn't been proof provided by the claimants. The claimants continue to bring up the same old broken records with the same results as well. Looking at the overall outcome of the "prophetic" aspect in regards to this forum, I see a positive impact on the skeptic in the sense that it keeps them from delusions and "woo" that is, usually, harmful to society in some form or fashion on varying levels. And I see the believers often getting worked up and further distancing themselves from those who disagree with them. This is something I would consider to be a "negative" consequence.
And so the usefulness of prophecy seems more divisive, practically, in this type of environment. But it is positive in the sense that it keeps the critical thinker from falling into woo and going down a path that could potentially cause them unncessary stress and hardship by believing in fantasy, magic, and other unprovable things.
So is the prophetic aspect doing it's job then? I think there is a corporate and individual effect both that should be examined overall. But the point is, I think we often look to the validity of the actual words of the prophetic, rather than the overall effect/result the prophetic had. And when a prophecy can be referenced, it had an impact regardless ---- to the individual who mentioned it and referenced it at the bare minimum level.
Now --- true pre-cog (i.e. ----- John Smith will get hit by a red corvette crossing blah blah Street at 11:23 this afternoon and nothing will change that) is a different thing perhaps all together and then takes into account both overall effect and detail.
Just my 2 cents
