Design a simple experiment: Debunking Ouija

[Simon_Jester]

Don't you just love it when "single blind experiment" is literally true?

A more important question would be, if they can't see without the operator then how can they tell who the operator actually is?

Telepathy, the same way they can use the 'sensor footage' from your eyes when they're somehow tapped into your head (possessing you).

Yes, as an idea it's one that's totally lost the plot. But the entire concept is like that, and if one starts with the premise that spirit/soul/whatevers even exist, there's nothing unreasonable with the idea that they can only interact with the spirit/soul/whatevers of other beings, including living ones. In which case they can interact with your mind, and with your eyes and hands via your mind, but they can't manipulate or perceive physical objects directly... which is why they don't just pick up the damn pointer and move it around themselves.

If they could interact with concrete objects by more conventional means such as picking them up or intercepting light, they'd be trivially easy to detect. So obviously they must be invisible and intangible and therefore sightless and strengthless... right?

Of course, don't expect this kind of thinking out of the would-be mediums, but it's the closest to a coherent model I can come up with for how the universe could possibly work the way they think it does.

They should give every single criteria for summoning the spirit that they can think of so it can be tested, and then be made to agree on the conditions formally. It doesn't seem like this would get very far if they can backpedal their way out of it.

Good thinking.

Eh? Could you clarify? I think you and I are talking past eachother, but I'm not sure.

What I'm thinking is, even if the spirit can somehow detect the presence of humans (presumably they can sense other souls, and thus the souls of living humans) that does not translate into being able to see the board and thus even know that any given human is intent on channeling them. What do you mean?

Under the model I'm describing, they might be able to perceive the intent to channel without being able to perceive the board, or the crystal ball, or any other ordinary tangible object. They can hear someone loudly telepathy-sending "SPIRITS! OH SPIRITS! COME OVER HERE PLEASE!" though, because that's part of the world of thoughts and emotions and souls they exist in, so to speak.

Think of these spirits as blind deaf-mute telepaths and you're on the right track to what I'm talking about.

[Akhlut]

Think of these spirits as blind deaf-mute telepaths and you're on the right track to what I'm talking about.

Wouldn't you expect to see a lot more Ouija boards communicating things like "This is hell please destroy me please please please," then? I mean, I don't particularly relish the idea of being unable to interact with anything other than other people's thoughts and emotions for even a few minutes, much less decades and centuries of existence.


Also, for the OP: Could you use something like flash cards or something in different locations held by believers and have the "spirits" report back on what is being held? That'd be pretty "reliable," wouldn't it?

[Maj]

Just out of curiosity, has anyone in this thread actually ever used one?

[Oskuro]

Hard to pull off, but switching the authentic board with a replica might be interesting to see if they claim it works regardless.

[Sela]

@Maj:

I have not, though I would quite enjoy the experience. Fact of the matter is, you can know exactly how these things work and how they fail without ever using them. Quite like I know some of the operational details of a handgun despite never having operated one.


@OP:

No offense, but I think in your eagerness you've set yourself up for trouble. Especially with it recorded and with a bit of spin-doctoring, this could look bad to a neutral lay-person crowd with an ax to grind against the skeptic community.

You've had a good host of suggestions, but if you want my opinion I think the smartest, most straightforward way to go here is going to be the "Aunt Sally" approach. Wherein you trick them into answering a series of questions where they're wrong again and again and again. Done well it should be easy to trick them into affirming she's alive: (ie: "I've been worried about my Aunt Sally ever since her divorce last month. Is she going to die?") - and then more and more details.

On the one hand, they can't object to it on any spirit-related ground - the best they can pull is the mischievious lying devil (which again is great evidence that they are posessed by Satan and should burn themselves at the stake to purge the devil within them). Further, during the test they will have no reason to suspect a thing as it will all be going according to plan for them, and if you have them say enough they'll probably get *MORE* into it. Finally, at the end, when you produce brilliant counter-evidence it will be a huge selling moment from a layperson point of view.


All of this, of course, is if you can't use the blindfold effect which would be oodles more accurate.

[Maj]

@Maj:

I have not, though I would quite enjoy the experience. Fact of the matter is, you can know exactly how these things work and how they fail without ever using them. Quite like I know some of the operational details of a handgun despite never having operated one.

Hey... I'm not saying you can't. But perhaps the experience of using one will help create an experiment where you can better avoid the pitfalls of the ideomotor effect.

Personally, I have no idea how my subconscious managed to send me the message it did when I last used a Ouija board, and unfortunately for Science, I'm not planning on repeating the experience, thanks.

[Sela]

While it's true that experiential knowledge in some ways can be far more powerful than book-knowledge, I think the converse applies as well. If I wanted to learn how the 'saw the lady in half' trick works, watching it would tell me very little. I have a sister that was made to 'float on air' and -of course- being *in* the trick didn't really help understand it. The core of the ouija board trick relies on - as you said - the ideomotor effect. That's not something we'd percieve or realize that we were doing nearly as well as we'd understand from reading an analysis done by someone *ELSE* on how it works.

In that regard, i can think of no better source than "Tricks of the Mind" by Derren Brown. The atheist, mentalist, conjurer.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Ask the spirit a question with the interpreter out of the room, then have them come back in to give the answer. I mean, as long as the spirit's in the room, they'll hear the question just fine.

[mr friendly guy]

Could you pick someone who is illiterate, or a child who hasn't learnt to read yet. Although an illiterate adult might be hard to find in developed nations and children that young might not want to cooperate.

Or failing that, find someone who doesn't speak or read English. Preferably one whose native language doesn't use the latin alphabet so there is no chance they could come up with similar words. So some Asian languages like Korean or Chinese who have their own script. Since the spirit knows how to read English, and the person doesn't, it can't be the person rigging it.

So Lagmonster you're from Canada right? You might be able to find such a person in the China towns. Purely anecdotal evidence but last time I was in Canada I asked for directions in a suburb with a high proportion of Chinese immigrants. The lady I talked to didn't understand English, and she was most likely a Cantonese speaker or she didn't understand Mandarin. Obviously you will have to find such people from a mutual friend who is bilingual.

[Lagmonster]

As predicted, they are weaseling. They objected to being filmed (the reason: ghosts know when people are going to make fun of them, so they will refuse to participate out of disdain), being blindfolded, being given an improper board, having skeptics present in the room, having skeptics sending negative emotions to them from anywhere on earth, and of being told what they may and may not ask of the spirits.

At that point, it was fairly obvious that they are far less sure of themselves, but are holding their positions out of sheer stubbornness. Since all those involved have better things to do than play verbal tennis with these two, we agreed that the session will be unfilmed to preserve the dignity of those who are about to be embarrassed, but the understanding is that no more concessions will be made; they either operate under the conditions granted or they don't. The ball is now in their court to see whether or not they knuckle under or comply; my bet is on knuckle under.

Randomly insert a skeptic in their midst but don't tell them who it is until after the test is over. Have this person think about a specific subject, then see what gets written. Presumably, the spirits don't care whether or not someone believes in this hocus pocus or what they are thinking about at the time, right?

This is the danger of working with people who are basically making shit up as they go based on their 'feelings': anything which strikes them as potentially dangerous to their credibility can be attacked under the guise of 'the spirits don't like it'.

An even better test in a similar vein, but one which you probably don't have the resources to conduct, would be to get together several groups and conduct a proper psychology experiment.

I thought of something similar, but you're right - I don't have the committment level to be so thorough. This is a fairly informal exercise conducted between acquaintances, which is why I am hoping they let me get away with the 'easy version' of conducting four sessions, two sighted and two blindfolded, with the last involving the board being inverted or replaced without their knowledge.

For the same reasons, Alyrium's test - while ideal - represents more committment than I'm willing to give just to deflate two windbags.

You've had a good host of suggestions, but if you want my opinion I think the smartest, most straightforward way to go here is going to be the "Aunt Sally" approach. Wherein you trick them into answering a series of questions where they're wrong again and again and again. Done well it should be easy to trick them into affirming she's alive: (ie: "I've been worried about my Aunt Sally ever since her divorce last month. Is she going to die?") - and then more and more details.

They claimed that the spirit they conjure would only know about its own past life, and might not know the answers to the questions I ask if I'm allowed to make the board answer unusual questions.

I was contemplating writing a word on a whiteboard that the operators could not see, and asking them to have the spirits tell them the word via the board. If that didn't work, I was planning on having them give the board a world geography exam, or similar topic with verifiable answers that the operators might not know but that an incorporeal entity should be able to discern if it can actually percieve the physical world.

So Lagmonster you're from Canada right? You might be able to find such a person in the China towns. Purely anecdotal evidence but last time I was in Canada I asked for directions in a suburb with a high proportion of Chinese immigrants. The lady I talked to didn't understand English, and she was most likely a Cantonese speaker or she didn't understand Mandarin. Obviously you will have to find such people from a mutual friend who is bilingual.

I'm in Ottawa, the capital, which is located in the mid-east. While we have a healthy immigrant population, I'm not quite at the point of paying strangers to participate in such experiments. At any rate, the two claimants will be the operators (for at least one test). I could independantly test the board myself with a handful of non-committed people, but I run the risk of 'but they weren't doing it RIGHT' whining. By making the claimants do the operating, and by making them verbally verify when they have a 'contact', I'm hoping to eliminate any whining that the seance wasn't done properly.

I'm still pulling for blindfolding, because getting wrong - but coherent - answers leaves them a fall-back point: the mischevious devil. I'd rather they get pure gibberish, which is why what I wanted to do originally was have them use a board that had been written in some other alphabet, but that's somewhat hard to come by. However, if I could make them use an 'official' board that was printed in a different language, I would easily have their asses, because the two would have no choice but to write nonsense.

I'm almost certainly going to at least TRY the hidden whiteboard option to see what comes of it.

[General Zod]

Edit: Nevermind.

[Sela]

I don't like it; I'm sorry - but my impression is that when they've been doing nothing but weaseling and BSing that much they'll simply continue to do so. You won't win these people over, and since there's no recording or outside observers you won't win "the audience" over.

So the question quickly becomes - what's the point? What are you trying to do accomplish here?

Do you want them to have a bad Ouija session? They'll have one and quickly write it off by their own excuse (Maybe the October-gods were playing nine-pins with the ghosts of the hudson!).

Do you want to show them that you are more grounded than they are for disbelieving it? You've done that by dint of forcing them to backpedal THIS much. . . and for giving the excuse that they don't want to be made fun of. If they were at all confident in what they're doing they'd have no fear of spirits mocking them; but they lack that confidence and thus fear being recorded. If all you wanted was to demonstrate to them that yours was the more grounded opinion, mission accomplished already - why go through with any more?

Do you want to show the public how Ouija's don't work? Well that's not gonna happen here - since the only 'public' you reach are non-skeptic Ouija users who are hell-bent on believing it at all costs.

Do you want to debunk an Ouija board for your own satisfaction? Unfortunately the tests that would have been REALLY cool to do that with have all been ruled out... all that remains are the most basic tests (watch the whiteboard reader be illiterate).


Something sits wrong with me about this crowd, and I wouldn't want to find you being beaten out despite having truth on your side. After all, BSing idiots in crowds are often much louder than calm sensible rational folk. Especially when they get to choose all the terms and conditions.

[Blankman]

I'm curious, has this experiment (even limited) occurred? It has been a few days and a weekend since the last post. If not, my only suggestion would be to secretly record it and blur their faces before posting it online.

Also, this reminded me of a "session" with a friend's wife who claimed to read tarot cards. I knew she was full of shit, but it was my friend's wife and he insisted that she was "accurate", so I let her try.

This won't come as a surprise to anyone here, but she got everything wrong save for a few details my friend knew about me. Her "excuse" was that a spirit was blocking her from reading me.

[Lagmonster]

I don't like it; I'm sorry - but my impression is that when they've been doing nothing but weaseling and BSing that much they'll simply continue to do so. You won't win these people over, and since there's no recording or outside observers you won't win "the audience" over.

So the question quickly becomes - what's the point? What are you trying to do accomplish here?

It's personal, like a bar bet. I think it becomes easy to confuse science and skepticism with some great purpose, but I think we can enjoy them for our own personal reasons. Sometimes a pickup game is just that; it doesn't always have to be the Superbowl.

And besides which, each mind is valuable. Certainly, maybe the twits in question are untouchable, unassailable. But there are onlookers, however limited, who aren't. They have friends, spouses. Some have children. Any influence you have in solidifying the validity of scientific or skeptical practices has a chance to rub off on others, and onwards and downwards. It's not grand, but it's my little corner of the world, dammit, and I feel good about keeping it clean.

Something sits wrong with me about this crowd, and I wouldn't want to find you being beaten out despite having truth on your side. After all, BSing idiots in crowds are often much louder than calm sensible rational folk. Especially when they get to choose all the terms and conditions.

They're weasels, and frankly it's entirely likely that they may bow out altogether. That's disappointing, but fine; that too may have the desired effect of reducing the value of these two nitwits' opinions in the eyes of others.

[Lagmonster]

I'm curious, has this experiment (even limited) occurred? It has been a few days and a weekend since the last post. If not, my only suggestion would be to secretly record it and blur their faces before posting it online.

I'm sorry to disappoint, but everyone involved have work and families; we all move at a slower pace than youngsters.

There was a big re-org at work last week and frankly nobody had a free moment to say, "Hey, remember that thing we're planning to do?" As I've already said, however, they've been told to put up or shut up, so there's a reasonable chance they'll retreat. Rest assured that if it does happen, everyone here will get the update. I'm really very grateful for the input everyone's given to date.

Also, this reminded me of a "session" with a friend's wife who claimed to read tarot cards. I knew she was full of shit, but it was my friend's wife and he insisted that she was "accurate", so I let her try.

This won't come as a surprise to anyone here, but she got everything wrong save for a few details my friend knew about me. Her "excuse" was that a spirit was blocking her from reading me.

Woo-mongers are absolute masters of evasion. They're like stage magicians in the sense that they can divert attention, confuse people, prey on the weaknesses of our memories and instincts, and most know how to put on a good show with lots of hand-waving and language.

And they've had thousands of years to get it right; even a mediocre psychic knows that as long as you buy into the initial premise - that there *may be* supernatural entities or powers - that literally anything they can imagine is on the table to either justify or excuse their performances.

[sciguy]

Just out of curiosity, has anyone in this thread actually ever used one?

Some friends and I played around with one years ago. It was disappointing; the pointer thingy drifted around a fair bit, but never actually spelled out anything. The only interesting result was the discovery that we could make it move to a specific letter without deliberate effort if everyone focused their eyes on it.

Edit: None of us thought it would contact spirits, but we were hoping for an interesting demonstration of the ideomotor effect, and even that didn't happen...

[Rye]

Just out of curiosity, has anyone in this thread actually ever used one?

Yeah, I started a craze of them at my school when I was a teenager. It worked (when just me and my best friend were using one) and it scared the absolute shit out of me, lol.