The Spiritualist experiences of clairvoyance and clairaudience – the experience of seeing or hearing something in the absence of an external stimulus, and attributed to the spirits of the dead – is of great scientific interest, both for anthropologists studying religious and spiritual experiences, and scientists studying pathological hallucinatory experiences.
In particular, researchers would like to better understand why some people with auditory experiences report a Spiritualist experience, while others find them more distressing, and receive a mental health diagnosis.
"Spiritualists tend to report unusual auditory experiences which are positive, start early in life and which they are often then able to control," explained psychologist Peter Moseley of Northumbria University in the UK when the study first came out.
"Understanding how these develop is important because it could help us understand more about distressing or non-controllable experiences of hearing voices too."
Researchers looking at mediumship as a way of addressing schizophrenia
Posts
Total:
10
Do you even realise that the researchers are treating the mediums as hallucinators that are enjoying their hallucination?
@Poly
Developmental irregularities will occur, which will inevitably lead to operational glitches.
Though I would suggest that spirituality as a physiological response is quite normal, but often misinterpreted and therefore exaggeratedly defined.
We experience, we respond, we read too much into the experience.
This is stupid.
-->
@coal
Your hatred for those suffering the mental illness of schizophrenia as duly noted.
There are few things worse than peddling crackpot nonsense based on the false illusion of an imaginary outcome of improvement. That is exactly what you article is, which is why it is stupid.
Your response to my comment is even stupider than the article you initially linked, too. This is because you purportedly believe that this particular approach to addressing a very complex psychiatric condition is at least a plausible means to manage the "suffering" you reference.
Turns out that in science and in life, it is results that matter. Not intentions or false hope, like that from snake oil sold to psychiatric patients.
But there is good news. You don't have to say stupid things or read stupid articles. That is a choice.
Say less stupid things and read less stupid articles.
-->
@coal
If you feel the article is stupid and you feel my response is stupid and you don't have to deal with stupid, fuck off.
Your article is stupid and your response to what I wrote is moreso.
These are choices on your part, and poor ones at that.
-->
@coal
Then fuck off.
Who gave Poly the thumb's up for "fuck off"?