I’ve been foreseeing the topic of ‘psychics’ being one of my posts for a long time now…
They are often labelled as “heathens”; “witches”, or more secularly, “crazies”. It seems to me, however, that these “crazies” (the ones that simply go against the grain of conventional thought) often contribute something extremely useful to the world.
For example, if you think about how Galileo Galilei, priests wanted to decapitate him for believing (and observing!) that the earth was not the centre of the universe and by far not the only planet with imperfections. People hated him. This often happens with people that have revolutionary ideas that don’t, at the time, make sense.
Before Galileo (who initially consulted Copernicus’ texts), people used to think that the planets revolved around the earth in a slinky-style fashion.
What if psychics actually had integral knowledge into the happenings of the future? What if it’s simply a skill that is more developed in certain people than in others?
I know that many of my friends do not really think about the future. Then only a day before the test they would start worrying. These friends of mine are not stupid – they can put forth solutions to some of the most complex social problems. Yet, they do not have they (learnt) skill of thinking about consequences.
What I’m implying is that perhaps psychics just have a knack for foreseeing certain most likely consequences. If it is possible to 90% accurately predict the future (such as that if you are not going to study, you are going to fail), why is it not possible that some people may be able to think about the likeliest consequences just a bit further in the future?
Basically, metacontextually, my point is that one should not judge people with alternative regimes as “crazies”. Yes, they might be wrong, but there’s a great chance that you’re also wrong [another philosophical question comes to mind: is there a right?]. And, what if, 1000 years from now, people look at your criticism of the “crazies” and label you as a nitwit?
I’m not saying you should accept everything willingly, but if there is even a slight support from rationality to a certain belief, how can you (at this limited point of time) determine whether it works or not?
*if anyone reading this blog is a psychic/ knows a psychic, please assist me in the understanding of your practice. I’m always eager to learn about alternative forms of knowledge. Remember, once Science was also seen as an evil witch craft – people were burned at the stakes for believing in it!
*if you want to watch a very interesting movie related to this topic, watch Mr Nobody 🙂
VACUUM! 
I think most psychics employ a technique that’s called cold reading. There’s quite a few books out there that could teach anybody to be quite convincing mind reader. Or you could look up Derren Brown, on youtube. If the professionals have to resort to that, it’s probably because they can’t really look into the future. There’s nothing wrong with your reasoning, though.
Cool, thanks for your input. My dad is actually reading quite a lot of books on conversational hypnosis (this is what Derren Brown employs).
It’s actually quite interesting how he ‘foresees’ the future: I think he inclines certain situations to head into the direction he wants them to. So he is in a way ‘controlling’ people’s behaviour (and thus ‘the future’) just through clever communication.
I will read up a bit on cold reading though. I’ve never heard of that 🙂