mind, psychic, psi, natural, nature

E is for ‘Evidence’. Do Psychic Abilities Really Exist?

I have a theory about how our psychic abilities operate. I do not know for sure, but my 20,000 readings have given me data to work with, time to ponder, and experience upon which to reflect, and my theory is the sum of these parts. I’d particularly like to share with you my thoughts regarding why it is that some people seem to be psychic, and others not. And why the scientific community has had such difficulty in agreeing whether intuitive abilities exist, or not. I’m going to draw upon some of the popular comments that sceptics and skeptics have made, and suggest another way to investigate the problem of inconsistency when it comes to collecting evidence about psychic abilities. That is to pose the question: Why do some experiments yield significant results which confirm that intuitive abilities exist, whereas other experiments yield no such results?

As I write this, I remember one reading that I did that I felt gave great evidence for the existence of psychic abilities, life after death, and the capacity for physical humans to communicate with non-physical humans. I was reading for a woman, discussing her job, when suddenly, in my mind’s eye, I saw a man in his 40s with thick black hair standing next to her. He told me that he was the woman’s father and he told me to mention the number 5. He put his hand up and spread out his fingers, like you would if you were trying to express the number five to someone who is out of hearing range. Now, I have learned not to interfere or argue with these experiences and just do as I’m told, so I stopped what I was saying and told her, ‘Your Dad is standing next to you. He has thick black hair, he’s in his 40s and he said that it’s very important that I mention the number 5 to you.’ A silence hung in the air for a long moment- I had no idea what she was going to say next. She stared at me, wide-eyed and unblinking, and all the colour drained from her face. She swallowed hard and begun to reach for her bag with a shaky hand. I asked her if she was alright and that I hoped I hadn’t upset her- I thought she was going to get up and leave! She didn’t reply, but continued to fumble around in her bag, and before long, she pulled out a photograph and handed it to me silently, before covering her face with her hands. I took the photo from her, and there he was, with his mop of black hair standing with his family. ‘Turn it over,’ she said from behind her hands. I turned the photo over and on the back was written, ‘Dad if it’s really you then say the number 5.’ The digit 5 was circled several times in black biro. She was shocked, but she wasn’t half as shocked as I was!

Being a student of philosophy, I am compelled to interrogate ‘how?’ and ‘why?’ that amazing and meaningful experience happened. ‘That’s just one occasion’, the skeptics amongst you may say, but this is just one example of the kind of repetitive phenomena that I, and other psychics, have had the absolute joy, amazement and bewilderment to be a part of over and over again.

So what’s the problem? Surely this would make news headlines and would be considered irrefutable evidence for the existence of psychic abilities? Well…not so fast. Whatever science says goes, and so far, the scientific community cannot agree on what psychic phenomena is, or if it even exists. In my opinion, the reason that science has so much difficulty ‘proving’ psychic ability under test conditions is two-fold.

First, because scientists have gone way, way off track with what the nature of psychic ability actually is and so many experiments are not fit for purpose.

Second, because, like quantum physics, observation, expectation, prejudice and belief influence psychic transactions, and thus, the outcome of the experiments. This is why the answer is always ‘inconclusive’ after a large amount of data is gathered.

People all over the world are experiencing psychic phenomena every day, and it’s getting more and more common, and of greater and greater significance to people’s lives. The proof is in the empirical data. Sceptics, skeptics and scientists need to admit that their findings are inconclusive at best, and resist the urge to say ‘psychic phenomena does not exist and we are going to prove it’. This is begging the question at issue. People who have experienced psychic phenomena are not anti-science. We trusted science when it told us that penicillin worked, and we all gave the thumbs-up when physical science said they desperately needed to build a Hadron Collider. We want science to have the answer. On the matter of psychic phenomena, we are not trying to be stupid or difficult, it’s just that science cannot falsify my experiences!

I believe that the reason that psychic ability experiments yield inconclusive results is because the scientific method requires that psychic abilities, if they exist, must abide by a law of nature, a formula, or a physical force that works by a set of rules…but why? Who decided that psychic ability takes that form? On what basis is this expectation founded? Every experiment surrounding psychic ability starts off by insisting that psychic ability be subjected to lab-based experimentation. This is a materialist view which requires that everything in existence be physically provable. However, there are, evidently, many, many things that exist that are non-physical, to which psychic phenomena is akin. Dreams, thoughts, love, interests, inspiration, and 94% of the Universe is non-physical, yet no one questions that they ‘exist’, so why are psychic abilities lumped into the ‘physical’ category? You can no more devise a lab-based test to prove the existence of psychic abilities than you could devise a repeatable lab-based test that proves I love my mother. There is no test for ‘I love my mother’. There is no formula that proves beyond doubt. There is no law that can be discovered to which ‘I love my mother’ abides, yet love my mother I do. So, if love were to be subjected to the same ‘repeatable-in-a-lab’ standards that psychic phenomena has been dragged through, science would be forced to conclude that I do not love my mother. Is science right to tell me that I don’t love my mother just because my love cannot be measured by the scientific method? ‘I’m sorry Lauren, I know you think you love your mother but we can’t find any formula that proves it and if you take a look at this graph, you’ll find that you do not, in fact, love your mother because there is no law that governs your alleged ‘love’ so give up this foolish idea ok?’ What an empty life that would be.

Psychic abilities are akin to a feeling, a talent, an artform- not a law of nature, so sceptical scientists need to stop trying to make psychic abilities fit into an irrelevant and erroneous mould, followed by self-congratulation for ‘proving’ that psychic ability doesn’t exist because it hasn’t met the conditions set by their unfounded and close-minded expectation of its nature.

Psychic abilities are easily influenced by a number of factors. Take this analogy:

An artist who is passionate about painting is contacted by a group of scientists who say, ‘We are not convinced that there is any such thing as art. We don’t believe that what you do is art, and we don’t like what you do. To prove that you are an ‘artist’ and that art exists, you need to come into this laboratory, get hooked up to a machine and produce your greatest work under a time pressure, and under the conditions that we set for you. As you do that, we are going to watch you, doubt you and attempt to disprove you. We will judge whether you are good enough or not. We are fit to decide if you are an artist. If you decline then we will tell everyone that you are not an artist and that your declination has proven that there is no such thing as art.’

Do you honestly think that this artist will be able to go to that laboratory and produce the greatest work of his life?! Of course not! Yet, these are the conditions, implied and/or explicit, under which psychics are expected to ‘prove’ their abilities.

Now consider this:

An artist receives a letter from a scientist that says, ‘We are really interested in your art. We are enthusiastic to understand how you produce your work, and we would like to do some research into what makes people believe so deeply in your work. We want to observe you in your own environment, over a period of time, to get a sense of how you work, and what inspires you and to find out if there’s anything new that we can learn about art through your process. We will treat you with respect and we will let you work at your usual, natural pace. Would you give us permission to do that?’

Do you think that this scientist is likely to learn something amazing about art, inspiration and how it is produced? Of course! This scientist may just get to experience this artist’s greatest work from inception to completion because he or she is working with the artist in situ, with open-mindedness and respect.

The frequency and accuracy of psychic phenomena increases with trust, support, encouragement and nurturing. It disappears with doubt, scorn, ridicule and a desire to prove that it doesn’t exist. If any scientist, experimenter, (or even client!) approaches psychic work with a heartful of scorn, condemnation and doubt, then they are never going to experience psychic ability at work. The existence of psychic ability is wholly subjective and depends ENTIRELY on the sum of collective bias. If the majority of people involved in the experiment are supportive, open-minded and encouraging, amazing things will be observed. If most people involved in the experiment are doubtful, scornful, desperate to prove the non-existence of the abilities and are inflexible with their methods then they will get exactly the result they are looking for: little to nil phenomena will show up. The psychic person is just like the artist, expected to produce his or her finest work, being watched by a roomful of doubting eyes, and when he or she fails, the skeptics (who secretly wanted to witness failure all along) give themselves a pat on the back and deem the case closed.

For any sceptics, skeptics, scientists, psychologists or parapsychologists reading this, try this:

Divide your existing data up into two categories: the experiment results of ‘majority of believers involved in experiments’ and ‘majority of skeptics involved in experiments’. You will see that the data findings are congruent with the respective ‘belief’ or ‘doubt’ sum of the group, not because anyone has been fiddling with the digits, or because of nit-picking at the method of experimentation, but because the mental expectation of the majority of those involved influences the outcome. Just like in quantum physics, observation itself, and the conditions of observation, affects the results, outcomes and evidence of psychic experiments, especially when that observations are being made by thinking beings who, knowingly or unknowingly, pour their prejudices and expectatons into EVERY STEP of the experimentation process, many of whom then go on to expect a replicable and unbiased result. It’s impossible!

I have one piece of advice for anyone who wants to experiment to discover whether or not psychic abilities really exist:

Experiment on yourself!

There is always room to doubt the findings, testimony and research of other people, especially if you are skeptical. The nature of psychic ability, like love or preference, is so subjective that the only data you can trust as being true (for you) is data you collect about yourself. Make your decision about what to believe based on that, because it is YOUR truth, and it’s the only truth you’re ever going to get. There is no objective number. There is no objective ‘yes’ or ‘no’. Psychic ability exists insofar as you will permit it to exist.

Check out this video of a well-known skeptic discovering his intuitive abilities for the first time:

Until next time: Practice psychic experiments with a friend whom you trust. Take turns at visualizing a colour. The person who is visualizing, ‘beams’ the colour across to the receiving person, who must write down which colour the sender was thinking of. Try it at different times of the day, at different locations, during different moon phases etc. and see if the results vary as to how many times you get it right or wrong. Whatever your findings are, you have permission to accept that they are true for you. I would love to know what you find and if your psychical connectivity increases over time the more you build trust between you both, and the connection to each other increases. Feel free to share your thoughts and findings by clicking on the comment bubble below.

click, circle, click to comment, comment

Next Week: E is for ‘Ethical Living’.

Come and gimme some love over at:



Get your daily love and happiness tweets @angellassie

16 thoughts on “E is for ‘Evidence’. Do Psychic Abilities Really Exist?

    1. writerlauren Post author

      Hi Mia, thank you! We use a lot of analogies in philosophy, and I often find it easier to make myself clear by illustrating the point with an analogy. When thinking about how psychics are treated by some skeptics or scientists, as soon as you replace the term ‘psychic’ with ‘artist’ it does look quite unfair. Psychics are prejudiced against on many occasions before the experiments have even begun. Some skeptics feel that they have the right to do that because they think they have correctly judged psychics as ‘liars’ and ‘frauds’ and designed the experiments around that belief. It’s insulting. Have a great day! xxx

      1. Mia - Lights of Clarity -

        Lauren, I relate to a lot of your allusions as I am a student of writing and literature, so I enjoy reading your posts all the more! I appreciate the fact that you differentiate though it is quite unfortunate that others equate fraud with psychic. I learn so much from your posts. 🙂

  1. Thea

    Great article! Personally I don’t know who in their right mind would want to be tested by someone who’s livelihood depends on your being a fraud.

    1. writerlauren Post author

      Hi Thea, thank you for your comment. When I read in trashy newspapers here in the UK, that yet another psychic has been led like a lamb to the slaughter of ill-informed experiments that are designed to help them fail, I feel filled with dismay. There is just so little compassion for the human being who is tested upon, and so little desire to actually understand the process of psychic work in an open-minded manner. Having said that, not all scientists operate like that (not all sceptics do either). Dr Rupert Sheldrake, Dr Robert Lanza and Dr Masaru Emoto are some scientists whose work I recommend for getting a better idea of how science and spirituality can work together. Thanks for reading! xx

  2. Stephanie

    I find it takes big courage to talk openly about this kind of stuff. Sometimes I even hold back when talking about my own spirituality and love of God. Even to my close friends, who have an idea that I’m spiritual, I don’t say too much about it. It’s weird because it’s number 1 in my life….but I keep it to myself because I fear judgement and sometimes I just find the consequences of not saying anything are more positive than the consequences of saying something. Kwim?

    Anyway! All that to say that although I’m not an expert in mediumship/psychic, it’s always been a fact for me that it is real. It probably explains why it’s easier for me to believe and see the Divine in my day-to-day life. I’m not sure what is different…but my guess is that my intentions are perhaps different and because of that, my heart opens and I see more than the average person.

    I’ve never had any “visions” per se, but I have gotten messages from one person in my life that has passed over. (and like I said, I also “listen” to God 🙂

    Thanks for talking to so openly about a subject that fascinates me and is at the centre of my life.


    1. writerlauren Post author

      Stephanie, thank you so much for taking the time to write this open and heart-felt comment. I’m really glad that you found the post interesting and relevant to you. There are some days where I feel that the right thing to do is to tell everyone who wants to know about my spirituality and beliefs. Perhaps I meet someone for the first time and they ask ‘what do you do?’ and I reply, ‘I’m a professional psychic.’ and I say it with pride. Other days, I just want to avoid judgement and can’t be bothered getting into big long-winded debates with people so I just say, ‘I’m a consultant.’ It’s not that I’m ashamed of my beliefs, it’s just that I don’t feel the need to justify them to anyone anymore so I just say what I feel like saying. Just remember Stephanie, other people’s judgements reflect their story- not yours. If someone were to judge you badly, it reflects their nature, and really has nothing to do with what you believe. Keep going with whatever works for you. Your beliefs may organically grow or change over time, but it shouldn’t be because of a lack of acceptance in someone else’s eyes. Have a great day and thanks for reading! xx

      1. gramlyn

        I’m with you, it is sad that some people demand some sort of explanation or justification! Does a plumber have to explain, why he is a plumber? Being open about ones psychic abilities can be tough, living in a culture which is pretty much devoid of all spirituality. I have a background in anthropology and i can tell you that there are many, many cultures all around the world who not only “believe” in psychic powers but live them – daily. Too bad psychics are almost always lumped together with various cons and scam artists. It really hurts. But ignorance does always hurt, doesn’t it? I would assume that most true psychics don’t practice their craft for money alone but to HELP others, to provide guidance in troubled times. Thank you so much for this much needed post!

  3. Spirit Contacts

    Great and thoughtful post, Lauren. I guess the first rule of science is that a thing should be reproducible in a lab with predictable and consistent results. This process is ever shifting with changes in energy, circumstance and what not. The thing is, we can’t control it. Enjoyed your writing.

    1. writerlauren Post author

      Hello, thank you for your comment. My issue with the whole lab thing is that psychic phenomena can be proven with experiments that are more akin to a psychological, behavioural or sociological study. Many studies of that nature are carried out in the ‘natural evironment’ of people. These cannot be reproduced in a lab, and yet they are accepted as scientific. I just don’t understand which part of psychic ability scientists expect can be reproduced under laboratory conditions? xxx

  4. Pingback: B is for ‘Belief’. What is your belief system? | From Angels to Zen.

  5. Pingback: B is for ‘Books’. My Recommended Books! | From Angels to Zen.

  6. Pingback: D is for ‘Dreams’. Understanding the Meanings of Dreams. | From Angels to Zen.

  7. Pingback: mypsychicadvice tarot's free automated tarot card readings

  8. Pingback: welcome to the online psychic - your source for online psychic

  9. Pingback: psychic reading

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s