Quacks or special talents?

[citizentwiglet]

Presumably churches and mosques synagogs etc will also need to have the warning presented clearly.

... can i just ask exactly what this warning would be?!

also... MKG, what is the legislation?

Just for the record, it looks as though I wrote the bit about churches etc....I didn't!!!

[AXJ]

really, no I hold my hand up for having that opinion... I take full responsibility... I have changed my mind, I have been persuaded by the clear thinking here that all people who claim magical powers (or even magickal powers) or belief in some spiritual system have complete right of way and should never be criticised or questioned, if they believe, we should all believe, because they are right, and we are just unenlightened ignoramuses who have not been blessed with their incalculable powers, skill and talents.

[MKG]

Hmmmm .... Before WW3 breaks out ...

Surely, we are discussing mere opinion here. My opinion is that there are quite a few people who have taken part in the discussion who have sincerely-held beliefs. I respect those beliefs, but I also respect (and share a lot of) those of AXJ. There are, indeed, serious mental health issues involved - not on the part of the honest practitioners but certainly on the part of SOME of the users of such services. Such users would naturally become the prey of the pariahs who also operate in the field alongside the caring and honest practitioners, and those people deserve (demand!) our protection. The proposed legislation is genuinely aimed at providing that protection but, unfortunately, catches other people in its net.

There are also, undoubtedly, sharks in the water, and my opinion is that they far outnumber honest practitioners (or, at least, they are much more visible in terms of advertising).

So it doesn't really matter whether I believe or not (or even whether it's true or not) that the dead can be raised or the future foretold or energy can be transferred. NOT introducing legislation means that we are ignoring the plight of people who need help and allowing crooks to operate openly. But introducing it (as it stands at the moment) will criminalise some innocent people. The only way, as far as I can see, out of the dilemma is to establish some method enabling anyone (no matter what their beliefs) to establish with a reasonable certainty that his/her money is going to be spent with an honest person who is NOT merely out for all he/she can rip out of you.

Whose responsibility is it to define that method (if, indeed, it is definable at all)? Should that task fall to the government or should it fall to those people who claim to be providing a meaningful and honest service?

I feel (and, once again, only my opinion) that it should really be the second of those options. Maybe the service itself cannot be proved one way or the other, but there are certainly ways of establishing the integrity of the service provider (real professional associations and professional qualifications) and such things must not be merely for sale to anyone who fancies a go. Take control of the professional market and there may be a chink of light shining through the gloom.

[DominicJ]

I agree with your opinion that it isnt real, but if someone disagrees, is that not their perogative?

I have but one question
Has anyone asked for your protection?

Because if not, you have stated your opinion, diagnosed anyone who disagreed with you as insane, and set about trying to protect them from themselves.

[MKG]

Well, not quite as black and white as that, Dominic. Does one really need to be asked to provide protection? Because, although I didn't for one moment imply that anyone who disagreed with me was insane, I believe that many people who suffer from any mental health problem, no matter how temporary that condition is (brought on, for instance, by the death of a loved one) will NEVER ask for protection. Lack of insight is, indeed, one of the things defining a psychosis. Are you saying that such people should, therefore, not be protected? (Rhetorical question, Dominic - I know that's not really what you mean). I firmly believe that all of the people who have stated on this thread that they provide "alternative" services are absolutely genuine in their beliefs, and that no-one would need to be protected from them.

That, though, still leaves the problem of the full-time fakers who are nothing more than bloodsuckers taking their sustenance from people who, either because of their mental state, or their beliefs, or their gullibility, or any other of a host of reasons, are vulnerable.

Do you really want to live in a world where that kind of activity is effectively sanctioned? That really would be open season on anyone's wallet or purse. So, I return to my question - how do we distinguish legitimate from illegitimate activity?

[DominicJ]

Well, we cant.
Which is why I have my opinion.

I think the "church" my partners mum goes to is nothing of the sort, I think the "psychic" who told her she's an outgoing party animal is a fraud, (and a bad one at that, mostly because the mum is fast asleep on the couch by 7.30 most evenings) and that my partners mum is exhibiting questionable judgement.

But, if she doesnt want my intervention, and she made it quite clear that she did not after I spent an hour shooting down everything she'd been told, what right do I have to force my "help" onto her?

At what point does forcibly preventing someone going to see a "psychic" for their own good, morph into locking children in a tiny cupboard "for their own good".

I suppose theres an arguement there that this effectivly provides redress after she comes to her senses, but if the shyster has already spent the money and is now using a different name in a different city, well, will anyone bother to chase him?

Personaly, I think more people are at greater risk of an empowered state than there are at risk on con artists.

Even if that were not the case, I just cant see this being effective, anyone who can con a grief stricken old dear out of £20k can probably can an old dear out £20k and get them to sign a legal document stating that its, just for entertainment purposes, without reading it.

[ocailleagh]

AXJ, you, as well as everyone else in the world, are entitled to your opinion. You are also entitled to give your opinion when and wherever you like. However, when you imply that I may have mental health issues because of what I do, then you are crossing a line. The point of my reply to you and Jandra was to show this, and also to show where your facts were wrong. That you have done little to defend your opinion-and by the way, sarcasm, IMO, is not an acceptable defence in a debate-says to me that you lack the courage of your convictions and therefore should maybe think twice before attempting to opine in the first place. With regards to your claim that God (I'm assuming here that you're referring to the God of the Middle-Eastern religions) is evoked as part of a Reiki session, I'm afraid that once again, you are wrong. As I have said, Reiki is non-religious. While religious people of many extractions (and of none) may practise it, generally speaking, deity is left out of it.

Reiki is definitely not a placebo. Placebos work on the basis that the recipient of it believes in it's power to heal them which then facilitates the healing. If this were the case then animals and plants would not be healed by it, which they are. And on the subject of placebos, do you believe that any doctor who gives them to his or her patients should also carry the 'for entertainment only' tag?

In my experience, which is much more extensive than you might imagine, Tarot Readers, Astrologers, Spiritualists, sooth Sayers, non-herbalist witches and all their friends and relations live in a fantasy world where they believe themselves to be above others, better informed and aim to enjoy the abeyance and unfounded respect of others. Essentially a power trip, where the gathering of 'disciples' 'Allumnos' or 'followers' is their secret goal. In a modern setting these gullible people are called customers or clients.

Again, you are welcome to your opinion. Sweeping generalisations though, are not so welcome. While its true that in the 'New-Age' sphere, for want of a better term, there are many who act as you describe, it is certainly not true for the majority. I have no desire to gain disciples and do not believe myself to be above anyone. I only have two reasons for wanting clients (not that I am currently working as a therapist anyway) and they are, first and foremost, to help people (using a variety of therapies including massage and aromatherapy-a form of herbalism), and secondly, to earn my living. I do enjoy the respect of others, as I believe most people do. But respect is something that should be earned, not given blindly.

On the issue of drug dealers, yes what you have left is the dregs of the herbalist surviving because prohibition has made it very profitable to trade in the most lucrative or effectatious of hallucogens, stimulants and narcotics.

The rulers of the day, who chased down 'witches' were merely wanting to monopolise the belief system, this moved on to Drug Companies wanting to have exclusive rights over distribution of medicines and remedies. Existing medications could not be exploited exclusively as they could not be patented, therefore people could self medicate or see their herbalist, now known as a drug dealer. The only way to ensure that this competition was ruled out was to lobby government to have all existing drugs outlawed, so that the new patented varieties could be marketed exclusively.

For the most part, I agree with you here. However, drug dealers are not the same thing as herbalists or Witches. Drug dealer is a relatively recent term, I believe, which refers to those selling illegal and often dangerous substances. At least one of which was created by the drug companies anyway (and is still referred to under its brand name).

It is generally accepted that the non-herbalist witches who were tried, were cases of misunderstood medical conditions, from epilepsy through to schizophrenia. The Inquisitors suffered no less from mental problems, they were most likely Sociopaths or psychopaths, certainly megalomaniacs. Clearly the already horribly abusive system was abused even further as you pointed out by using it to steal land or whatever under the pretext of getting a witch.

This is not generally accepted. While there may have been some cases of this, the majority of those tried in Britain and Europe were ordinary, mentally healthy people, like you or I. Though it does seem that a number of the Inquisitors, based on their practices, were indeed sociopathic. Extremely sadistic at the very least.

You could say the same about the suggested legislation, but as far as I can see the law is not trying to stop anyone from plying their trade, as MKG pointed out. However I don't think that having a warning that a 'skill' is for 'Entertainment purposes' cheapens anything, everyone knows that it is the law, those who believe it will ignore it, hand over their dosh, and the practitioner is protected by any clients who may be disappointed.

A public health warning does not seem to stop people from buying tobacco, how many units of alcohol you are supposed to limit yourself to each week does not stop people from drinking, and a speed limit sign does not stop people from driving dangerously.

The point is not that the law will stop people practising, but that it is insulting to be expected to say that what we do is not real. For someone such as myself, it would be going against my personal ethical code by being forced to lie. The public health warnings given on tobacco and alcohol are actually true, so not quite the same thing, but I take your point that it doesn't stop people from using them.

I made a general statement questioning the sanity of people who ply these various trades, it was suggested that I was guilty of liable. How interesting that someone who does not wish to give the option of legal recourse to people who may be swindled, so quickly tries to hide behind the law when someone does not agree. Catch22.

It may have been a general statement, but the context in which you placed it carried with it the implication that I am mentally ill. I wasn't hiding behind any law, just pointing out that it was dangerously close to being libel. For which you would have been liable.

(Edited for typos. Several times!)

[ocailleagh]

really, no I hold my hand up for having that opinion... I take full responsibility... I have changed my mind, I have been persuaded by the clear thinking here that all people who claim magical powers (or even magickal powers) or belief in some spiritual system have complete right of way and should never be criticised or questioned, if they believe, we should all believe, because they are right, and we are just unenlightened ignoramuses who have not been blessed with their incalculable powers, skill and talents.

This is an example of the sarcasm I referred to in my previous post.
Feel free to question my beliefs, I have no objection at all to that. After all, questioning is the best way to learn. Whether or not you believe the same as I do is of no concern whatsoever to me, I do not feel you to be unenlightened in the slightest, and also do not feel that I have been blessed with my abilities. They are open to everyone to learn and develop if they so choose and my possessing them does not in any way make me superior to those that don't. All I objected to was your somewhat closedminded attitude and your slightly insulting demeanour.

[ocailleagh]

MKG, I agree with pretty much all that you have to say on this, though obviously from the other side of the fence. Likewise, I agree that the fakes and charlatans should be weeded out, but not at the expense of the genuine practitioners. Like you say, the problem is that its very hard to distinguish, in a legal sense, between the two groups. I'm afraid I don't have a solution, but I don't think the answer lies in legislating as a matter of course. We do already have a law that deals with such things however, the Fraudulent Mediums Act of (I believe) 1951, brought in after the repeal of the old anti-Witchcraft laws. Again, it leaves us with the problem of proving it one way or another, and as the saying goes 'For those who believe, no proof is necessary, for those who don't believe, no proof is possible'.

Dominic, you're right that there is a risk of the goverment taking away our right to choose, though to say that all psychics are fake simply because you're not aware of any real ones is a tad unfair. Also, you were a little mistaken in assuming that I'm female. :-)

[DominicJ]

Really? I'm almost always right guessing genders, not that I take that as proof af psychic ability mind.

[AXJ]

It may have been a general statement, but the context in which you placed it carried with it the implication that I am mentally ill. I wasn't hiding behind any law, just pointing out that it was dangerously close to being libel. For which you would have been liable.

For me to liable you, I would need to know who you are. The mental health problems was referring to people who are deluded, be they clients or gurus. I don't believe that I was dangerously close to anything.

I must say one thing, that I used the word "you" when I should have used the word "one" "them" or "they". This was my mistake. It was never my intention to personally suggest that you are a nutcase, how can I know, I don't know who you are.

I stick by what I said in general terms.

I don't have weak argument, life is too short how ever to argue the toss with zealots and fundamentalists. One can't reason with the unreasonable.

I will give it a try though:

You (as in you personally) said that you know that you have the power, the gift etc. No doubt you've seen the tapestry etc.

Fair enough, don't expect me to believe it until you (and I mean you or people involved in your discipline) can offer proof of efficacy. So far for me you (as in the group) have not.

I have two close personal Friends who are Reiki practitioners, another two astrologers who can talk the hind leg off a donkey on the subject, and do a remarkable job of making their craft sound convincing, although of course we all know it is utter bullshit.

I lived with a christian clergyman. I have more experience of the "spiritual" department than you might think. I lived with a bonafide witch for 6 years... daft as a brush.

Of the people I know, they are nutters, lovable nutters, they are my friends when we get together we have a good time. They would read this and laugh.

So, I do apologise if you thought that I was having a go at YOU personally, I realise that it was poorly written from that perspective.

It is said that religion is the opium of the masses, it is my view that all of these quack medicines neuvo spiritual (is that new age?) stuff should be classified as class A drugs, as (in my humble opinion) they mess with peoples heads as much if not more than the chemicals.

Hey but that is just my opinion, I am sure that you do your (as in you personally) job very well for those who are interested and wish to engage you (as in you personally)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apothecary

[ocailleagh]

Personally, I couldn't care less if you believe I can channel energy, or that I'm psychic or any of the other things that I can do. I don't require external validation from you or anyone else. I could sit here and list my abilities and my experiences but that would be pointless as you wouldn't believe me, and to be honest, if someone else had been telling me about some of those experiences and I hadn't had them myself, I probably wouldn't believe them either.

I do accept that you weren't making a personal attack against me, though it was more than the way it was written that made me think that, it was the fact that it was in reply to a post of mine. And you're right, libel is probably too strong a word, defamation of character would have been better, had you actually been directing it at me. I accept your apology for your unintentional implication.

I'm quite sure that if you'd gotten talking to me under different circumstances you wouldn't think me unreasonable, in fact, I'm probably one of the most reasonable people I know. Being reasonable and easy-going is pretty much my thing. And I'm far from being a zealous fundamentalist. Perhaps if you'd paid closer attention to what I've actually been saying, you may have noticed that. I also stand by what I've said with regard to the strength of your argument. I have repeatedly, and reasonably countered your points, without resorting to sarcasm and avoidance of answers.

Your list of spiritually minded friends is interesting, its a shame you didn't consult with some of them before making inaccurate statements about subjects you don't seem to have much first hand knowledge of. I have several friends who are mechanics and musicians. Doesn't mean I can play the guitar or know a damn thing about cars.

Your linking to Wikipedia pages is a little baffling, though Wikipedia entries often make for a great read, they are hardly the most reliable source in the world.

I do hope this is now dealt with to your satisfaction, as frankly I'm getting a little bored of finding new ways to say the same things. I've obviously failed in my intention to show you where you were mistaken, and to try and encourage you to accept that your perception of reality is not the same as other people's. (This, of course not being a bad thing-if we all shared the same views the world would be far less interesting, no?)
And I do apologise for my delay in replying, I unfortunately had some real-world stuff to deal with. Yes, surprisingly I live there too.

[ocailleagh]

Really? I'm almost always right guessing genders, not that I take that as proof af psychic ability mind.

I should think not, a 50/50 chance hardly makes it a challenge
Though, to be fair, complementary therapies, psychism and Witchcraft are often more associated with women so your assumption was quite fair in that respect.

[andyt]

Hello everyone.
Having read all 3 pages of posts,have we,maybe, lost sight of the fact,that "one mans meat is another mans gravy"? My wife reads Tarot cards,for a few other people, 'cos they ask her to.They all believe in the power of these readings.Who am i to dismiss their beliefs.Live & let live.

[AXJ]

I have several friends who are mechanics and musicians. Doesn't mean I can play the guitar or know a damn thing about cars.

completely fair point, peace.