Occam said it best so far, but I’m not sure about how he’s using “imagination”. I would include that skill in creative thinking. Imagining something that has not yet been demonstrated as true is needed in creative thinking. Believing in something that has been investigated and determined to be imaginary requires no thought at all. I’d even call it uncreative.
The problem is, there is no difference between the two as far as human perception is concerned. There are a lot of things we don’t know and according to philosophers, we can’t really know anything. Unfortunately this gets abused by people like RubyWoo who think that esoteric truism means everything is open to discussion and if you aren’t open to everything then you are closed minded. As Spinoza was fond of saying, “that’s absurd."
Lausten defined my view of imagination correctly. My problem with the use of the word is that it doesn’t differentiate between “Imagining something that has not yet been demonstrated as true” and imagining fire breathing dragons or Peter Pan flying fairies. Tthe latter in should not be included in creative thinking so I think we should avoid the use of the word because, again to quote Lausten, “there is no difference between the two as far as [common] human perception is concerned”.
Occam
Creative thinking means being heavily influenced by imagination, while creative thinking means analyzing information.Nope, you can solve a lot of problems with thinking outside of the box, and analyzing the solution. I'm siding with Occam on this one.
Hello DarronS and Lois, Ms. Browne certainly did no favors for those of us who have experienced the paranormal. I also think most people who have experienced paranormal events are not inclined to discuss with many people, as the norm is for people not to believe. As far as I know, none of my experiences could be controlled and that makes it very difficult to replicate and 'prove' that they were not just coincidence.If you ever find that you can be tested for and prove any paranormal experience there is a million dollars to be had at the James Randi Education Foundation. From Sean Carrol's presentation on YouTube - "Higgs Boson and the Fundamental Nature of Reality" 34:17 ish "The standard model of particle physics underlying everyday life is completely understood. Quantum field theory implies that any new kinds of matter (fermions) or forces (bosons) that would interact in noticeable ways with ordinary matter would already have been discovered. There are no new particles or forces that could be relative to your daily life that are not understood." This rules out the idea that there can be external forces or energies interacting with you. If you ever find that you can have a more testable paranormal experience then you will make history. Unfortunately, the easiest mind to fool is your own.
I shall be generous in giving you the benefit of doubt that you are speaking for yourself and not each living person. That is of course, unless you expect everyone thinks the same.There is no benefit in doubting scientific research and analysis. LoisI'm not sure that anyone could lessen the credibility of psychic phenomena. It already has none. Lois
Quoting M.A.Rational creative thinking includes understanding and accepting the parameters of known science. It's possible to think so far outside the box that you wind up in fantasyland. LoisCreative thinking and Critical thinking are very different. It would be counterproductive to be “creative" while engaged in critical thinking.Sorry, M.A., but that is dead wrong. Creative thinking is going beyond the boundaries of present awareness, not engaging in fantasy. Critical thinking helps one guide one's thinking along new, unexplored paths while preventing one from falling into the swamp of fairytales. Occam
CNN is reporting that self-styled psychic Sylvia Brown died earlier today at the age of 77. Hemant Mehta has a good essay about her on his blog]. The world is better off without her, but someone else will probably take her place soon.Nobody is 100% bad. She did provide a lot of laughs to many people. Lois Yeah, but apparently she swindled so many people that at one point she was raking in $3 million per year. I don't think she provided enough laughs to balance the damage she did. I've often thought that if I only lacked ethics I could be rich too. So could we all, but there's that little matter of diminishing returns. Lois
People who have unexplained experiences and believe that those experiences are paranormal are self deluded. That is only sad. Cold calculating people like Miss Brown make me ashamed to be a human being.
People who have unexplained experiences and believe that those experiences are paranormal are self deluded. That is only sad. Cold calculating people like Miss Brown make me ashamed to be a human being.Its not that sad, and there is no need to be ashamed. Unless, you're a psychic as well.
Hello DarronS and Lois, Ms. Browne certainly did no favors for those of us who have experienced the paranormal. I also think most people who have experienced paranormal events are not inclined to discuss with many people, as the norm is for people not to believe. As far as I know, none of my experiences could be controlled and that makes it very difficult to replicate and 'prove' that they were not just coincidence. Anyway, it's my opinion that people like Ms. Browne and those who run psychic hotlines are the least likely to have any psychic 'abilities' and serve to bring confusion and lessen the credibility of psychic phenomena.I know this is an old thread and RubyWoo is long gone from these forums (Last Visit: March 21, 2014]), but I'm amazed no one took him/her to task for the most obvious hole in his/her original comment:
As far as I know, none of my experiences could be controlled and that makes it very difficult to replicate and 'prove' that they were not just coincidence.If I'd been a member of these forums back then (and seen that comment), I would have asked: "RubyWoo]: If you can't prove to others that what you experienced "were not just coincidence", how did you 'prove' it to yourself? Or did you just believe it without proof, (without any effort to find an explanation not involving the supernatural)?" And yes, I know, the answer I would have probably received would have been without merit (and likely, just nonsense). But it still would be interesting (to me anyway) to see how he/she would try to address that one.
If I'd been a member of these forums back then (and seen that comment), I would have asked: "RubyWoo]: If you can't prove to others that what you experienced "were not just coincidence", how did you 'prove' it to yourself? Or did you just believe it without proof, (without any effort to find an explanation not involving the supernatural)?" And yes, I know, the answer I would have probably received would have been without merit (and likely, just nonsense). But it still would be interesting (to me anyway) to see how he/she would try to address that one.Those are good questions. I thought of that when RubyWoo posted, but frankly I've seen this kind of behavior so often I've quit trying. I had a similar discussion on FB recently when one of my cousins posted about buying tickets to see a psychic in an auditorium. When I linked an article discussing how many people have been tested for psychic abilities she replied that she did not read the article and she wanted me to stop trying to change her mind. She has had alleged psychic experiences and does not want to consider anything that might contradict her beliefs. I'll post my current sig line here just in case I change it in the future. You cannot have a rational discussion with someone who holds irrational beliefs.
Well DarrenS - my experiences are not imaginary. However, that brings up another observation... you and the other think alikes tend to lack any hint of imagination or creativity in your thought.How do you know your experiences are not imaginary? We have the typical amount of imagination and creativity. We simply apply the test of skepticism and rationality to it. Incidentally, have you ever noticed that you and others who believe in psychiic phenomena also think alike? People who believe in or who do not believe in any particular phenomena think in similar ways. If you think you psychic experiences are true you stand to win $1 million from the James Ramdi Foundation if you can prove it. Why not give it a try? You have nothing to lose you'll either learn something or prove something. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Million_Dollar_Paranormal_Challenge Lois
If I'd been a member of these forums back then (and seen that comment), I would have asked: "RubyWoo]: If you can't prove to others that what you experienced "were not just coincidence", how did you 'prove' it to yourself? Or did you just believe it without proof, (without any effort to find an explanation not involving the supernatural)?" And yes, I know, the answer I would have probably received would have been without merit (and likely, just nonsense). But it still would be interesting (to me anyway) to see how he/she would try to address that one.Those are good questions. I thought of that when RubyWoo posted, but frankly I've seen this kind of behavior so often I've quit trying. I had a similar discussion on FB recently when one of my cousins posted about buying tickets to see a psychic in an auditorium. When I linked an article discussing how many people have been tested for psychic abilities she replied that she did not read the article and she wanted me to stop trying to change her mind. She has had alleged psychic experiences and does not want to consider anything that might contradict her beliefs. I'll post my current sig line here just in case I change it in the future. You cannot have a rational discussion with someone who hold irrational beliefs. Indeed. i hadn't realized she had flown the coop so quickly. A sure sign of a hopeless troll. Unfortunately they're a dime a dozen. Lois