People are also essentially saying that when the psychic gave them a reading he spoke to the dead but when he read for someone else he used cold reading. Funny how almost everyone thinks they got a legit test but it's the others that got short changed.
Not really. My French teacher tried mouthing words at me during my French oral GCSE exam. That doesn't automatically invalidate other's ability to speak French without prior cues.
And I haven't done that I think you'll find. One equivalence I've brought up is that when these other phenomena are tested, the kinds of flaws and loopholes I'm talking about in the sakki test are, where possible, removed and/or taken into account. I'm saying that in order for sakki to get beyond personal "I think it's real" it would need similar testing with similar standards.
And again...I'm not debunking anything. I'm mainly interested in having a laugh at the MAP meet and showing that the sakki test can be passed by some of the non-sakki means I've mentioned.
Yes, that is interesting. I'm not saying that these other factors could not play a role in the Godan test. All I'm saying is that if you appeal to a higher standard of evidence, you ruin your own argument by being just as biased as those who hold the beliefs you are attacking. I'm also not saying that it is unreasonable to doubt the claims of sensing sakki. But reason is not the same as logic or the scientific method.
Interesting that reading comprehension has been mentioned..... I have told you a million times, do not exaggerate I have said 'IMHO ALL TESTS ARE NOT EQUAL' ( read that again please) Are SOME tests luck? Yes I think so are some tests a guaranteed pass? Yes I think so Are some tests a guaranteed fail yes I think so Are some tests the real deal and totally outshine the rest and are repeatable and happen consistantly enough to blow away options a b and c ! Well meg says it best; http://youtu.be/3C6Utr027QY Do driving instructors fail people because of personal feelings related to race, religion and/or politics, and pass people based on same? I'd say so! Do people pass driving tests irrespective of the above based on skill/ ability ? Is it..... Is it just possible both things can be true and happen at the same time In the same universe?! THE REAL SAKKI TEST PASSES ARE BLATENTLY OBVIOUS, I've said that before too I think That video game idea is very interesting I think, I also believe a high 'real' pass rate will be noted at the map meet ( assuming test is done, less giggles, more intent) as most of the attendees are martial artists close to violence/ danger, if you get me.
But if the French teacher was "beaming" the words into your head from behind then that would be entirely different n'est pas? (see what I did there?) The sakki test is claiming that an emotional intenstity can be projected to an individual with no line of sight and with no physical cues whatsoever - something entirely unheard of in science. This does NOT mean it does not exist, nor does it mean those who believe it is true are deluded or fools What it DOES mean is that this is classified as an extraordinary claim and as such requires extraordinary proof. Videos with wildly varying standards are NOt proof. Anecdotal evidence is NOT proof. 0:55 - 2:50 on this clip illustrates how being too close to something is not always a good thing for objectively assessing [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMNsyJudxuY"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMNsyJudxuY[/ame] (as an aside, watching the entire series of JRI is time well spent - awesome TV series) I have no dog in this hunt - I believe the existence or otherwise of "sakki" has no impact on the efficiacy of BBT anymore than the existence or otherwise of chi has an effect on Taijiquan as a system - but for me if there is a mundane explanation for a phenomena (and there are MANY ways I can see sakki being something other than....well "sakki") then it seems a little awry to look for a more esoteric cause
Fine by me. The way my back is at the moment I'll be lucky to get off the floor when I kneel down let alone pass a sakki test.
As I've said, It's a man hitting another man on the head with a stick". If sakki exists and the students can sense it, wouldn't it make more sense to randomly approach students in the class and swing at them. Real world application and all that. It does seem to me that if you can talk to dead people you can talk to dead people, be that in the middle of the day in a crowded high street, or a nicely lit room in a one to one sitting. Likewise if you can sense sakki, why does the test have to be done with a nice simple set up?
I am reminded of this koan I love the philosophy about viscerality of response, but do not take this as an actual account
If you were sneaking up on people unawares, then you would have to account more for sound/peripheral vision and the like. I reckon do it as it is done in the Buj, but with the testee (chortle) blindfolded and with ear plugs in, and leave anywhere up to 10 minutes for the strike to happen.
Did it work for RVD, SKH and the countless others than are dismissed as not being capable? Not a dig or a snide, a question that I asked earlier and was never really answered. PR did say it is not a reflection of comabt ability - in the same way being able to do push ups isn't I suppose - but if it shows a level of skill in *something* then there are a lot of unskilled and frankly laughable martial artists out there that have passed the sakki....which makes it pretty pointless
How about doing it from behind a sheet/screen/blanket? That eliminates a LOT of "non sakki" variables
Any attribute can be trained in isolation and prove useless in combat though. Spend your whole life hitting a heavy bag as hard as you can, but without taking movement, balance, guard or anything else into account, and you'll be taken apart by someone with more rounded training - even if they can't hit half as hard as you.
I really don't think that it's a test of anything, it doesn't really denote skill as such. Of course people with skill will shine when sitting the test, but that's no different to them shining when performing technique I honestly think that it is a gift, an experience to do with what you will. Some people use that experience to improve themselves and develop in certain directions and, naturally, many people think "Wow I passed the super cool magic test, I am now a masterful ninja who can beat anyone" Probably the test is what you do with the experience rather than the experience itself Hope that makes sense?
