Misplaced Pages

Talk:Psychic: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:12, 11 September 2024 editLetoDidac (talk | contribs)23 edits Change subject to psychic phenomena - LetoDidac (talk) 07:12, 10 September 2024 (UTC): ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit Latest revision as of 04:25, 11 September 2024 edit undoRandomstaplers (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers6,088 edits Change subject to psychic phenomena - LetoDidac (talk) 07:12, 10 September 2024 (UTC): ReplyTag: Reply 
Line 65: Line 65:
::Explanation for changes to body text: ::Explanation for changes to body text:
::'''1''' Psychic phenomena need to be defined before their practitioners. '''2''' examples should prioritize phenomena most under active research, such as precognition, in favor of those that have not been actively studied such as teleportation. '''3''' the applied practice of psychic phenomena, e.g. chakras, mediumship, can be considered pseudoscience due to lack of scientific method and rigour (I don't think anyone would debate this). '''4''' the scientific enquiry and debate into psi phenomena as a whole cannot be considered pseudoscience, as this would imply that both critics and proponents are unscientific and not open to debate and improving studies, and that there is therefore no scientific field of study for investigating the purported phenomena despite them being widely believed by the general public; That some scientists have characterised an entire field of study as pseudoscience does not justify such a claim in a wiki page; methodological flaws, mistakes and incorrect conclusions can be seen in all fields of study (e.g. quantum physics), but this does not make those entire fields of study pseudoscience, as this would create closed-mindedness to further research and strongly discourage scientific enquiry. The AAAS recognised parapsychology as a legitimate science due to consistent use of scientific methods. '''5''' concluding with a link to the mainstream organisation that debates and discusses the issues of psi research will be useful for interested readers. ] (]) 04:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC) ::'''1''' Psychic phenomena need to be defined before their practitioners. '''2''' examples should prioritize phenomena most under active research, such as precognition, in favor of those that have not been actively studied such as teleportation. '''3''' the applied practice of psychic phenomena, e.g. chakras, mediumship, can be considered pseudoscience due to lack of scientific method and rigour (I don't think anyone would debate this). '''4''' the scientific enquiry and debate into psi phenomena as a whole cannot be considered pseudoscience, as this would imply that both critics and proponents are unscientific and not open to debate and improving studies, and that there is therefore no scientific field of study for investigating the purported phenomena despite them being widely believed by the general public; That some scientists have characterised an entire field of study as pseudoscience does not justify such a claim in a wiki page; methodological flaws, mistakes and incorrect conclusions can be seen in all fields of study (e.g. quantum physics), but this does not make those entire fields of study pseudoscience, as this would create closed-mindedness to further research and strongly discourage scientific enquiry. The AAAS recognised parapsychology as a legitimate science due to consistent use of scientific methods. '''5''' concluding with a link to the mainstream organisation that debates and discusses the issues of psi research will be useful for interested readers. ] (]) 04:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
:::@] You're making a substantial change to the lead, which is supposed to summarize the article. This means you'll have to (effectively) change the '''entire''' article. And you're going to have to find references that prove, specifically, that psychic phenomena are effective (and not just from an advocate's homepage).
:::By the way, I did not revert your other edit I warned you about. You'll have to talk to that other editor.⸺(])] 04:25, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 04:25, 11 September 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Psychic article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
Peace dove with olive branch in its beakPlease stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconParanormal Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSkepticism Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconWomen's History Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to pseudoscience and fringe science, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.


"A psychic is a person..."

This introductory phrase is biased because assumes an individual or solely acting person. Firstly, 'psychic' is also an adjective that denotes a phenomenon. Secondly, for there to be psychic relies, by definition, on at least two entities, whereby only one of them is visible in the flesh. Stjohn1970 (talk) 05:49, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I think a more glaring mistake is found in the fact that the word, "claim," is being used in the definition. You can't be something by claiming it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:268:9650:13E4:BC76:420C:687C:DA5A (talk) 02:31, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

True. I can say I'm a fish. But if you look up fish it doesn't say people who claim they is fish. Nonsense. 106.128.97.210 (talk) 05:37, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Typo in Criticism and Research Section: "Investigator Ben Radford stats that..." change stats to states. 140.109.103.218 (talk) 02:17, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

 Done 💜  melecie  talk - 02:21, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 May 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Under 'Fraud', there is some issue with the html

alling for a psychic scam can result in a loss of one's entire life savings. In an example given in article by Rob Palmer, a woman gave a psychic $41,642 over a period of 10 weeks.

please fix this :) thanks Jarviscockerslongthumbnail (talk) 04:52, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

actually, sorry, my copy and paste didnt reveal the error
it is there in the article Jarviscockerslongthumbnail (talk) 04:55, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 Done --Pinchme123 (talk) 05:20, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
  1. Palmer, Rob. "Belief in Psychics: What's the Harm and Who's to Blame?". Skeptical Inquirer. Retrieved 17 November 2022.

Semi-protected edit request on 27 July 2024

Would someone please add this book to the external links or elsewhere if you think it appropriate? Also this book?

Change subject to psychic phenomena - LetoDidac (talk) 07:12, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change short description to:

Alleged phenomena whereby the mind perceives information beyond the ordinary senses or interacts with the environment in ways that defy conventional understanding


Change first paragraph of body text to:

Psychic (or psi) phenomena refer to alleged human faculties that allow individuals to perceive or interact with the world beyond the normal physical means, supposedly through mental processes. Alleged psychic abilities are generally categorised into two types; extrasensory perception (ESP), which involves accessing information hidden from the ordinary senses, through means such as telepathy, remote viewing, precognition or clairvoyance; and abilities relating to mental-physical manipulation, such as psychokinesis and energy medicine. While the application of psychic phenomena by practitioners (such as mediums, clairvoyants and energy healers) is widely considered to be pseudoscience, efforts to investigate these claims in controlled conditions are part of the field of parapsychology (or psi research). The Parapsychological Association, an affiliate of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, is the leading international organization for scientists and scholars exploring psi phenomena.


Change - Please create new subsection for ‘Modern day psychic practitioners’ to include the rest of the introductory section focusing on the role of psychic practitioners. LetoDidac (talk) 07:12, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: See WP:Undue and WP:NPOV. ⸺(Random)staplers 19:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Would appreciate an explanation from @Randomstaplers on reasons for undue. For other user's interest, here are the editorial explanations I included in the submission:
Explanation for change in short description: 1 'Psychic' is not defined by its practitioners, but rather by the phenomena under consideration(practitioners simply take the name of the phenomena); 2 psychic covers both perception (ESP) but also allged mind-matter interaction.
Explanation for changes to body text:
1 Psychic phenomena need to be defined before their practitioners. 2 examples should prioritize phenomena most under active research, such as precognition, in favor of those that have not been actively studied such as teleportation. 3 the applied practice of psychic phenomena, e.g. chakras, mediumship, can be considered pseudoscience due to lack of scientific method and rigour (I don't think anyone would debate this). 4 the scientific enquiry and debate into psi phenomena as a whole cannot be considered pseudoscience, as this would imply that both critics and proponents are unscientific and not open to debate and improving studies, and that there is therefore no scientific field of study for investigating the purported phenomena despite them being widely believed by the general public; That some scientists have characterised an entire field of study as pseudoscience does not justify such a claim in a wiki page; methodological flaws, mistakes and incorrect conclusions can be seen in all fields of study (e.g. quantum physics), but this does not make those entire fields of study pseudoscience, as this would create closed-mindedness to further research and strongly discourage scientific enquiry. The AAAS recognised parapsychology as a legitimate science due to consistent use of scientific methods. 5 concluding with a link to the mainstream organisation that debates and discusses the issues of psi research will be useful for interested readers. LetoDidac (talk) 04:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
@LetoDidac You're making a substantial change to the lead, which is supposed to summarize the article. This means you'll have to (effectively) change the entire article. And you're going to have to find references that prove, specifically, that psychic phenomena are effective (and not just from an advocate's homepage).
By the way, I did not revert your other edit I warned you about. You'll have to talk to that other editor.⸺(Random)staplers 04:25, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Categories: