Rebutting a medium and spiritual healer

farmchoice

Hi folks
Over the weekend I may well find myself in a position where I will be asked to put forward the case against the veracity of ( I don’t know if this is the right term to use but you know hat I mean) a medium/spiritual healer.

This will be in a very public forum and while I am well able to speak in public I want to have my arguments honed.
While I understand the concept of cold reading and how these people use vague generalities I would be grateful if you could put forward the arguments that you would use in this situation so that I will be well versed in the case against.

My atheism will be declared before I speak and I assume will be used as a stick to beat me with but good luck to them with that.

So any tips people

Dades

I wouldn't go too far without mentioning the complete lack of any empirical evidence of their success, or even for the very basis of their methodology!

It's a tough one, however. Like the "god" question, how do you disprove that something has benefit? You could simply end up in a statistic-war, or with a smorgasbord of anecdotal evidence to rebut.

The best approach might be to suggest that no proper scientific study has ever shown "energy" type healing to be of medical benefit, with the exception of some placebo effect that would be present with any such study.

Also that it is almost certainly harmless unless used as a substitute for actual medical treatment. This way at least you don't come across as the militant atheist and fence-sitters might be inclined to listen.

Genghiz Cohen

Will there be a Medium / healer in the room?

farmchoice

there will indeed, preforming reading on a few chumps.

pH

Don't envy you OP - a debate is all about quick concise emotional points, they'll have plenty and you have nothing but boring stats and science, in a debate format it's nearly impossible.

They say "X from Ballina had her cancer cured when doctors said she was going to die" - what can you say? "No she didn't"?

If you try talking about evidential studies, placebo controlled trials, natural remission, cold reading etc the audience will glaze over and well "OMG HER BREAST CANCER WAS CURED BY GOD".

I've always thought the only way to go into a debate like this was to throw them completely by lying and hitting them with equally ludicrous "made up" claims that they have to try and debunk on the fly, but that would be dishonest I guess - dishonest but fun.

If I were you, I would start by asking the audience whether or not they'd agree that fake psychics and healers exist. Then point out that there are people who genuinely believe these people, even after the psychic had been totally exposed and debunked. So use this to help them conclude that a fake psychic could be quite convincing.
Then ask them how do they know that this psychic is not a fake. Remind them that anecdotes of impossible insights can't be good reasons as many people claim the exact same thing about fake psychics. Similarly point out that him healing stuff isn't convincing because people say the same about all manner of far fetched and even debunked alternative medicines.

I would use plenty of examples of faith healers, as most people have copped on that these guys are always fake and the word is nearly synonymous with con artist now.
Unless of course this debate is with a faith healer type guy.

Also bring up the Million Dollar challenge. Ask him why not try to win it. Remind the audience that such a test would totally eliminate the possiblity that the psychic is lying, cheating or deluded. And should he try to wiggle out, inform him that the test is only conducted when both parties agree on a fair, unambiguous test.

MagicMarker

Just ask the medium to do a reading on you, and even if they get everything right tell them they couldn't be more wrong!!

celticcrash

If its to stressfull for you, skip it.

Joe1919

I would have to argue that religion/spirituality/superstitution can be a placebo and agree that it can help. But the power is in the belief.
Best of luck.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo

Dave!

Ask them has a healer ever healed an amputee?

Maybe point out some of the well-known frauds and the kind of tactics they were using (having the audience fill out forms at the start, having researchers mingle beforehand and chat to people, having people backstage feed them information through an earpiece, inviting people along whose story you know and then pretending you've only met them, giving crutches or wheelchairs to people who don't need them and then 'curing' them of the 'need' for it.... etc)

al28283

No matter what your argument is, they should see it coming. Best to go in blind and make it up on the spot

magicbastarder

best bet is to quickly learn the tricks and use them, to show how easy it is.
no better way to debunk them to show that there's nothing special at play.

ShooterSF

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22Tj_l4PcPs

It'll be much more fun and you'll probably change as many minds (unfortunately)

legspin

Allow folk to overhear the mocking conversation of spot-ops and have them mistake it for promts.

coadyd

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCNUvA1wQTU

will they be like this

scuba8

How many missing persons are there in Ireland. Many healers/mediums claim to be able to make contact with spirits. Is it not strange that none have ever been able to find, Mary Boyle missing from Ballyshannon in the early seventies. Robert Nirac. Any of the the others. In the early eighties two men went missing of the pier in Howth. A psychic used a admiralty chart to pinpoint where the bodies were. He actually placed them on the top of howth head. He insisted that they were there not realising he had them on dry land.

robindch

farmchoice wrote: »

I understand the concept of cold reading and how these people use vague generalities I would be grateful if you could put forward the arguments that you would use in this situation

Try "Is there a Mary in the room, or somebody connected with a Mary. Jane. Or Susan. Maybe Patricia. I'm feeling pain. Maybe something in the back or the head or the leg. Unhappiness that has to be resolved. Is there a John or maybe a Michael here? Somebody connected with a John or a Michael or an Patrick. Anybody? I'm getting Andrew or Tom. Anybody. Please, anybody? Pain in the arms or the chest or the bottom. I'm getting head".

Animord

robindch wrote: »

Try "Is there a Mary in the room, or somebody connected with a Mary. Jane. Or Susan. Maybe Patricia. I'm feeling pain. Maybe something in the back or the head or the leg. Unhappiness that has to be resolved. Is there a John or maybe a Michael here? Somebody connected with a John or a Michael or an Patrick. Anybody? I'm getting Andrew or Tom. Anybody. Please, anybody? Pain in the arms or the chest or the bottom. I'm getting head".

OHMIGOD, that's me! I have a pain in my leg, my neighbour's name is Mary and my middle name is Jane - my now deceased brother's name was John.

And worse still there is no alcohol in the house and that is a source of unhappiness that has to be resolved.

Any chance you could tell me if tonight's date is 'the one'?

(sorry for off topic):pac:

Edit: except for the head bit. That's not me.

magicbastarder

robindch wrote: »

I'm getting head

lucky you. your typing is very controlled.

b318isp

Ask how many mediums and faith healers work in the health service, counselling/psychiatry, legal profession, archaeology or IT (let alone the sciences).

Ask them to predict with colour underwear you have on or how much is in your wallet.

Point out that chance events can be incorrectly be attributed to prediction (e.g. weather). If I say there will be 3 days of rain next week and there IS three days of rain - does that mean I can predict the weather accurately?

Point out the that there are many unexplained things in the world, but the vast majority of things we do now about with confidence have being found through evidence and peer review, of which there is a distinct absence of when we talk about mediums and faith healers.

Talk about courts rather than science. Criminal court cases rule based on the principle of beyond reasonable doubt. It would make decisions based on evidence, knowing that there is always an sliver of doubt - the point being that the evidence must significantly outweigh the doubt.

The audience may well be sensitive to people who have died, so little point banging on about the lack of evidence that any living things continue to exist after bodily death. I 'd suggest a sympathetic response about people getting comfort about the afterlife, but not loosing track of what is happening here and now. Perhaps a reference to the grieving and letting go process would help.

EKClarke

Ask them would they like Keith Barry to heal them. There are people who can do exactly the same things as mediums and healers but they just don't claim to have 'special' powers and we call those people magicians.

Dave!

^ +1

Derren Brown is another one, and Banachek

UDP

Ideally the best way to rebutt a medium is to show people how it is done but without experience that would be very difficult to do since it is a performance art in itself. Your only option then is to show other people like derren browne etc showing it as a scam. Not sure how you can do that without showing video etc. since it would be very difficult to verbally describe what they did to debunk the psychics etc when this "psychic" will be doing an actual demonstration of it actually working.

Let us know how you get on.

robindch

magicbastarder wrote: »

robindch wrote: »

I'm getting head

lucky you. your typing is very controlled.

Years of practice