PsiPog.net

Science is EvolvingHomeArticlesQ&AArchiveMediaLinksSearch

View topic - Ethics of psionics

PsiPog.net Forum Index » Psychokinesis » Ethics of psionics

Goto page Previous  1, 2

Ethics of psionics
Poll: Ethical or Unethical?
Ethical
86%
86% [ 25 ]
Unethical
13%
13% [ 4 ]
Total Votes : 29
Author Message
Posted on Wed Sep 06, 2006 2:07 am

Roy

Joined: 27 Nov 2005
Posts: 416

Ivan wrote:
Is it ethical to use "enhancments" to compete athletically? I'm not making a point, only asking the question. Some would say it's ethical and some would say it isn't.

The same people would have a similar opinion about using tk, or whatever. The purpose of gambling is to the element of chance. Remove it and you aren't gambling anymore (look it up in the dictionary). Weather it's a contest of strength or stratagy, the rules of the game are set up before the game. If some one were to use tp to determine weather or not they had a winning hand they would be making choices based on exact knowledge. Players can use fake tells to through off opponents. More than that, the tell they are reading is based on their opponents beleif in what his cards mean. They have no actual knowledge of what the cards in the other players hands are. The point is playing from the point of being able to be wrong. Gambling is risk, you would make vastly different choices if you knew what your opponents actually had.

This question is slightly different than the other issue you pose. Is a seen future "supposed" to happen or can/should you alter it? That's a different debate.

There is no slope really, only were you choose to draw your line in relation to where those around you draw theirs. Some are more extreme than others. Personally, I don't usually do things the easy way. I perfer the challange of dealing from uncertainty. I don't use video game cheats and the like. When I win, I personally want to know I did it without taking the easy way.

Let me put it this way. I dare you to prove to a casino that you used TK ot TP. If you aren't banned I'll be very surprised. It's not about what I think is ethical, it's about what the people you choose to play with think is ethical. Laughing


Last time I checked, the purpose of gambling was the win money, and the odds be damned. If everyone gambled because they have this fascination with throwing themselves at the mercy of the laws of probability, it's news to me.

There are no rules in the game of craps or roulette or other games of chance that say you're not allowed to use psychic ability to influence outcomes. If there are, again, it's news to me. Also, you can't assume that psychic ability will be correct 100% of the time and therefore you do not eliminate all risk.

You sir can have fun with your uncertainty, and I'm sure your sense of danger will quickly lose it's novelty when you walk out of a casino minus the money and confidence you walked in with. I like the feeling of sitting at a poker table, being able to tell what cards are going to be dealt, and being able to read my opponent like a large-print book.

I'm not quite sure why you think using a psychic ability is easy in a casino or for any gambling related purpose. I wrote another post, I think in the skepticism subforum, about how difficult it is to use psionics in a casino. Take a gander at it and then you come back and tell me if you still think it'd be easier to use psionics rather than sit back and hope the odds go your way.

Regardless, the difficulty of using psionics has no bearing on ethics. That's just a matter of personal preference (or stupidity). What truly determines how ethical this is would be: 1) Who Benefits?, 2) Who does it injure?, 3) Is there any detriment in the Process?, and 4) Does it more closely resemble other ethical principles, or resemble other non-ethical principles?

1) The people who benefit are the people who are able to use psionics to influence games of chance.
2) The people who are injured are those who you take money from. The problem with this is you're not just "agreeing" to the probability within the game that you play, but moreso the probability of the probabilities. This is kind of a fuzzy concept, but basically, you accept the probability that you will have horrible odds at the gambling table. You are consenting to lose all your money if you lose FOR ANY REASON, whether it is because of bad odds or a wayward psychic that happened to waltz into the casino and sit at the same table as you. Since this "injury" is not forced upon everyone, only those who consent to lose their money, then you are not acting out of accordance with other gambling ethics.
3) There's no detriment I can think of besides a really bad headache if you have a rough day. However, that is something that the individual takes upon themself.
4) I would say that it mirrors ethical principles of gambling. Most gamblers practice for many years honing their ability, their betting strategies, their attitudes, and dare I say it: their intuition! It's just another mental tool that can be developed to give you an edge.
Back to top
Posted on Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:52 am

Heolstor

Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 56

it's ethical... when using micro-pk you just merely have the advantage in the game...
Back to top
Posted on Fri Sep 08, 2006 5:58 pm

neveza

Joined: 12 Jan 2006
Posts: 1147

Heolstor wrote:
it's ethical... when using micro-pk you just merely have the advantage in the game...


Not true, You're not the only psychic in the world.
Back to top
Posted on Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:14 am

Ivan

Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 15

Last time I checked the purpose of gambling was to make money. Yes, I am mimicing you, but only because you said something as silly as "last time I checked the sky was blue," or "grass is green." Odds are what makes gambling, gambling. If your messing with the odds with TK to make it easier or certain, it's not actually gambling (I'll say it one more time, look it up). However, people with money to spare often do gamble that money just for fun. Getting it back is great, but if they don't they still have enough left to pay the bills. Not everyone likes throwing themselves at the mercy of probability, some do, some don't. Like most things, it takes all kinds.

There are rules that state you aren't allowed to rig a table. You can't weight dice, you can't put magnets in a wheel and it's ball, and you can't mark cards. A rule book that went to the trouble of listing every possible method of rigging a table would be just a bit thick. So what rules usually state, is that the game has to be fair. The game isn't "fair" if it's weighted in some one's favour because they are making it easier for themselves to win. No one's said it's 100%, probably isn't. But any weighting in one person's favour is still "rigging".

I "sir" don't gamble with my money and have no intention of entering a casino. For one, I like my random chance in small doses and with other than financial risk. That is my personal view, weather you think it's stupid or not is yours. I won't waste my time commenting on what I think of yours, because it's just that, a waste. Btw, I think that baby outside your window has a lollypop (or maybe I will comment but in a sarcastic way, whatever).

Did I say it was easy? No, i don't seem to be able to find me saying it was easy. I did say possible, and I commented on the ethics of doing it under any level of success, but I can't seem to find me saying it was super easy/ How about you don't put text in my dialog box (yes, I do think that's clever, lol). I don't remember anyone ASKING weather it was easy, only ethical. Maybe, just maybe, and I think I may be going out on a limb, no one but you has mentioned it? Maybe, just maybe, I'm not going to bother debating anything you said about ease, purely because it's off topic.

Topic not being limited to casinos;
1) Duh
2) Again, Duh. Of course the people loosing their money are the ones being injured. Do they agree to loose their money? Duh, ya. Do they know and agree to some one influancing card draws? Well now, curious imho, you don't touch on that since I'm pretty sure they wouldn't agree if they were told up front. "Oh yes, I want to go through the formality of pretending this is a game before I give you my money" LMAO
3) Who cares, original poster didn't ask if there was a risk? But to humour you. I too see no obvious reason anyone would be physically harmed (unless of course they are accused of cheating because they are winning WAY more times than normal random chance would allow and some one desides to kick their bum).
4) I can understand why you would see it as being like just another "tool" for winning at the table, or whatever environment the games takes place in. However (if you wish to debate it from that perspective), professional gamblers, who's skills are that well developed, are not allowed to enter casinos. Casino owners don't feel it is ethical for professionals to be fleecing their other patrons, and they certainly don't feel it's ethical (financially) for the casino to loose money to them. When they are discovered they are banned, and their picture and name are put into a shared database to prevent them from entering any other casino again. People who's skills are that well developed usually have only professional contests that will accept them. Investigate if you like, but what you'll find are lawsuits where "sharks" must return what they took, and this is the case more often when it is clear they intentinally withheld their level of skill (some, in the private arena can't walk anymore). Messing with probability would definitly fall under the "rigged table" catagory in gambling books. But, why? Because it makes things certain that are supposed to be random.

Again, the question being, "is it in your opinion ethical to use micro-tk manipulate games of chance?" No, because imho it's just another way to rig a table. And AGAIN, it's not really about my opinion when some one tries to do it. It's really about what the people they are playing with beleive is ethical. I'm not gon't to be gambling with you, so you don't have to worry about me kicking your bum when you tell me you bent the odds in the game. If you don't like my opinion, fine. If you want a right to your opinion bugger the heck off and leave mine alone. I'm not going to change it because you call me stupid and make long posts. I could do both too, but long posts are satisfying enough for me, and believe me if you want a novel contest I'm up to the challange.
Back to top
Posted on Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:17 am

Roy

Joined: 27 Nov 2005
Posts: 416

Ivan wrote:
Last time I checked the purpose of gambling was to make money. Yes, I am mimicing you, but only because you said something as silly as "last time I checked the sky was blue," or "grass is green." Odds are what makes gambling, gambling. If your messing with the odds with TK to make it easier or certain, it's not actually gambling (I'll say it one more time, look it up). However, people with money to spare often do gamble that money just for fun. Getting it back is great, but if they don't they still have enough left to pay the bills. Not everyone likes throwing themselves at the mercy of probability, some do, some don't. Like most things, it takes all kinds.

There are rules that state you aren't allowed to rig a table. You can't weight dice, you can't put magnets in a wheel and it's ball, and you can't mark cards. A rule book that went to the trouble of listing every possible method of rigging a table would be just a bit thick. So what rules usually state, is that the game has to be fair. The game isn't "fair" if it's weighted in some one's favour because they are making it easier for themselves to win. No one's said it's 100%, probably isn't. But any weighting in one person's favour is still "rigging".


That's all fine and well, but what about people who use micro-pk on an unconscious level? Sure they don't know that they're doing it, but that doesn't mean they're not "rigging" the game. Should we have "blind gambling" where you don't know the game you're playing to counterbalance for this possible effect? How about controlling air flow in the room so it doesn't blow onto a craps table and therefore influence how a dice will roll or fall, or on a roulette table to prevent any influence on how the ball bounces. What you're arguing for is this abstract notion of "complete fairness" which isn't possible. There are a multitude of variables that affect the probability of the game that are not just the odds of a dice roll or a card being dealt. This is something that Game Theory deals with. You're view of "fair" is too narrow and too specific for this argument.

Ivan wrote:
I "sir" don't gamble with my money and have no intention of entering a casino. For one, I like my random chance in small doses and with other than financial risk. That is my personal view, weather you think it's stupid or not is yours. I won't waste my time commenting on what I think of yours, because it's just that, a waste. Btw, I think that baby outside your window has a lollypop (or maybe I will comment but in a sarcastic way, whatever).


I was responding to your claim of how you "perfer the challange of dealing from uncertainty." So you're backpeddling now to say that you wouldn't leave financial risk/gain to uncertainty as you so obviously indicated in your previous post? If that's the case, then insulting my personal view on risk/gain in financial matters is the same as yours, so you can take the sarcasm and shove it up your ass, good sir.


Ivan wrote:
Did I say it was easy? No, i don't seem to be able to find me saying it was easy. I did say possible, and I commented on the ethics of doing it under any level of success, but I can't seem to find me saying it was super easy/ How about you don't put text in my dialog box (yes, I do think that's clever, lol). I don't remember anyone ASKING weather it was easy, only ethical. Maybe, just maybe, and I think I may be going out on a limb, no one but you has mentioned it? Maybe, just maybe, I'm not going to bother debating anything you said about ease, purely because it's off topic.


Yes, you implied it was easy when you said "Personally, I don't usually do things the easy way." Do you have amnesia or something? These words certainly weren't taken out of context, so please don't reply with that. If anything, they weren't put in the right context when you wrote them or you just don't remember writing them. Sure it's off topic, I merely responded because you brought it up.

Ivan wrote:
2) Again, Duh. Of course the people loosing their money are the ones being injured. Do they agree to loose their money? Duh, ya. Do they know and agree to some one influancing card draws? Well now, curious imho, you don't touch on that since I'm pretty sure they wouldn't agree if they were told up front. "Oh yes, I want to go through the formality of pretending this is a game before I give you my money" LMAO


I'm arguing that the simple fact that people agree to be bound by the laws of probability negates this from making psionics in gambling unethical. I'll say it again, probability does not stop with the cards or the dice. It also extends beyond the table.

Ivan wrote:
4) I can understand why you would see it as being like just another "tool" for winning at the table, or whatever environment the games takes place in. However (if you wish to debate it from that perspective), professional gamblers, who's skills are that well developed, are not allowed to enter casinos. Casino owners don't feel it is ethical for professionals to be fleecing their other patrons, and they certainly don't feel it's ethical (financially) for the casino to loose money to them. When they are discovered they are banned, and their picture and name are put into a shared database to prevent them from entering any other casino again. People who's skills are that well developed usually have only professional contests that will accept them. Investigate if you like, but what you'll find are lawsuits where "sharks" must return what they took, and this is the case more often when it is clear they intentinally withheld their level of skill (some, in the private arena can't walk anymore). Messing with probability would definitly fall under the "rigged table" catagory in gambling books. But, why? Because it makes things certain that are supposed to be random.


The opinions of the casino owners and operators does not determine if this is ethical or unethical. I think it's fairly established that they do everything they can to keep the odds tipped in their favor. As I said before, this is a fundamental element in casino game design. Counting cards is something that everyone is capable of learning, and yet it is outlawed. Why you may ask? Because it gives the player an unfair advantage. I'll say it again, the rules and regulations of the casino do not determine the morality in this situation. Therefore, your argument can be readily dismissed since the premise doesn't suppor the conclusion. I'd also like to see some documentation on the whole not allowing professional players into casinos. I have a pretty good feeling that you're getting something mixed up.

Ivan wrote:
Again, the question being, "is it in your opinion ethical to use micro-tk manipulate games of chance?" No, because imho it's just another way to rig a table. And AGAIN, it's not really about my opinion when some one tries to do it. It's really about what the people they are playing with beleive is ethical. I'm not gon't to be gambling with you, so you don't have to worry about me kicking your bum when you tell me you bent the odds in the game. If you don't like my opinion, fine. If you want a right to your opinion bugger the heck off and leave mine alone. I'm not going to change it because you call me stupid and make long posts. I could do both too, but long posts are satisfying enough for me, and believe me if you want a novel contest I'm up to the challange.


The day I worry about someone who says "bum" instead of "ass" kicking my ass is the day the temperature in hell hits absolute zero. It's not a matter of me liking or not liking your opinion, I disagree with it because I don't think your arguments logically support your conclusion. This is an open and public forum, buddy. I'm certainly not going to "bugger off". I don't care if you change your opinion, I respond so others can see a different point of view, one that makes sense and has some utility to it, and quite frankly, you're not much of a challenge at all.

Hugs and Kisses, XOXOXO
Back to top
Posted on Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:47 am

derricktheone

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 356

If the casino wants to use their "tricks", i.e pumping oxygen in the place, using all kinds of loud noises, bright lights, free drinks then I think it's fine for us to use our "tricks"...although they shouldn't be called that...everyone was born with a brain=everyone has the same chance...some choose to use it wiser than others Wink. That's my opinion
Back to top
Posted on Sat Sep 09, 2006 9:47 pm

Ivan

Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 15

derrick, what about those who's mother's drank alcohol while pregnent? Or those that were violently shaken as newborns? Those aside, what research, big company or small online community, has satisfactorly confirmed that every brain is created equal. That is with the same potential for all psi ability. Is it truly a given that everyone has the potential for similar levels of skill and power? Is the only factor that influances having "the same chance" having a brain? Hmmm, wonder if my friend's pet fish can move a psi wheel as well as me...
Back to top
Posted on Sun Sep 10, 2006 1:02 am

SubC

Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1

Do you guys go to the casino to lose money? I think not. Almost everyone want to win, right?

Because of that, every game is a psionic battle and the stronger win. If thay are untrained or something like that, that's their fault, not yours.

The rules state that you cannot use outside forces to influence the result of the game but do not said that you cannot use your inside forces to influence the result because everyone does it and you just use it better than they are.
Back to top
Posted on Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:11 am

neveza

Joined: 12 Jan 2006
Posts: 1147

Ivan wrote:
derrick, what about those who's mother's drank alcohol while pregnent? Or those that were violently shaken as newborns? Those aside, what research, big company or small online community, has satisfactorly confirmed that every brain is created equal. That is with the same potential for all psi ability. Is it truly a given that everyone has the potential for similar levels of skill and power? Is the only factor that influances having "the same chance" having a brain? Hmmm, wonder if my friend's pet fish can move a psi wheel as well as me...


Ethical or not, it's actually life. I mean, the better survives or get more out of life than the lesser.

Either way, I've mention before, Casino is all chance and I take that as the consideration of being unlucky and play with a psychic or lucky to be the psychic. Also, Casino is a place of sin, there would be hardly any ethicical people in the place. Casino aren't design to save people, so ethics don't apply.
Back to top
Posted on Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:06 pm

derricktheone

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 356

Ivan wrote:
derrick, what about those who's mother's drank alcohol while pregnent? Or those that were violently shaken as newborns? Those aside, what research, big company or small online community, has satisfactorly confirmed that every brain is created equal. That is with the same potential for all psi ability. Is it truly a given that everyone has the potential for similar levels of skill and power? Is the only factor that influances having "the same chance" having a brain? Hmmm, wonder if my friend's pet fish can move a psi wheel as well as me...


What about people who are born with PHYSICAL disabilities....we try to accomodate them in the best way we can to help them live a "normal" life, but the fact is a lot of times it just can't happen. Sometimes things may be more difficult for certain people and that's the way it is. It's life. So what if they DO find out we aren't born with the same level of psi ability. Michael Jordan was born with better natural basketball skills than everyone. Does that mean he should've held back his whole life to make things "fair"? Get over it. It's not fair for everyone. It can't be. You can simply do your best and live out to your full potentiel......And why would you make such a dumb comparrison about you and a goldfish brain....I was obviously talking about how humans were born with HUMAN brains....read the post again smart ass....Mabye your friends pet goldfish can move the wheel better than you
Back to top
Posted on Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:57 pm

Ivan

Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 15

Am I a smartass? Yes, sorry. It was funny to me because of a different place on the web I used to go to. Though, you didn't actually say "human" brain in that post. I appologize if you were offended rather than ammused.

You said (human)brain = everyone has the same chance. All I challenged is that statement. Would it be ethical for Jordan (other any other professional) to play on a disabled olympics team? I'm not arguing people should be held back, only questioning if it would be more ethical if they were only to compete with people who have similar levels of skill or similar skills, when money is a factor. Weather it's keeping unskilled or incapable out of the game or the reverse. As a blanket statement, do you actually think it's ethical for anyone to compete with anyone else for money reguardless of physical or mental ability? Or is it ethical to seperate and force people of similar skills and abilities to compete seperately (on a "fairer" level)?

Is your argument for using "tricks" limited to casinos or do see it as ethical for anyone to take advantage of their skills to compete with others who are incapable or inexerienced? Should everyone be viewed as "equal'? (sorry if I'm tending to word this to broadly. In my job I deal with a similar question regularly)
Back to top
Posted on Sun Sep 10, 2006 6:56 pm

derricktheone

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 356

Ivan wrote:
Am I a smartass? Yes, sorry. It was funny to me because of a different place on the web I used to go to. Though, you didn't actually say "human" brain in that post. I appologize if you were offended rather than ammused.

You said (human)brain = everyone has the same chance. All I challenged is that statement. Would it be ethical for Jordan (other any other professional) to play on a disabled olympics team? I'm not arguing people should be held back, only questioning if it would be more ethical if they were only to compete with people who have similar levels of skill or similar skills, when money is a factor. Weather it's keeping unskilled or incapable out of the game or the reverse. As a blanket statement, do you actually think it's ethical for anyone to compete with anyone else for money reguardless of physical or mental ability? Or is it ethical to seperate and force people of similar skills and abilities to compete seperately (on a "fairer" level)?

Is your argument for using "tricks" limited to casinos or do see it as ethical for anyone to take advantage of their skills to compete with others who are incapable or inexerienced? Should everyone be viewed as "equal'? (sorry if I'm tending to word this to broadly. In my job I deal with a similar question regularly)


Ofcourse it wouldn't be fair for Jordan to compete against disabled. They're DISABLED...that was an unfair comparison...being disabled is sort of a group on it's own, hence the special olympics. Are you trying to say everyone who does not know how to use mental ability is disabled compared to those who do? If so, I believe it is every persons right to learn any skills they can to enter a competition. We all have the ability to learn. And I would consider competing for money regardless of mental ability fair, because that's what it is, a competition. Whether it's for money or simply for fun. It's a competition. Incapable? Inexperienced? It's the same with physical competitions. Some are not as experienced or capable as others, which is why some go on to be the best in the world and some do not chose to play at all. (ofcourse noones on the same level, think about what it would be like if we were) If everyone had the same skills, and the same experience and were all on the same level, what's the point in the comp. A competition is to see who is the best given the talents, natural ability and experience they have. It is every persons choice to enter a competition on their own knowing full well that others may be better or more experienced in whatever subject. Also, who's to say where mental ability ends. Whos to say EVERYONE cannot develope mental abilities if they only knew how to. (which is what I believe) Some may be using it without even realizing. I.E going on a "hot streak", gut feeling, intuition) Are you going to try to dismiss using your gut feeling or intuition in a competition as well. Because whos to say that isn't in actuality mental ability being used. I don't know what else you want me to answer but I really don't feel like debating anymore. I gave you my opinion the 1st time. Everyone was born with a HUMAN brain(I believe everyone is capable of the same mental abilities with right trainning..some have better "trainers" than others and some chose not to train at all simply because they do not even believe in their own abilities, which is their own problem, and some have the natural ability, just as with the physical aspect )=Everyone has the same amount of chance to win
Back to top
Posted on Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:34 pm

Heolstor

Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 56

Quote:
Not true, You're not the only psychic in the world.


yes, but what are the odds that two psychics are in one casino? in the same game.. anyway only one person can use the slot machine..
Back to top

Goto page Previous  1, 2

PsiPog.net Forum Index » Psychokinesis » Ethics of psionics