JuliaHunter (talk | contribs) |
m pronunciation, punctuation |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Other uses|Second sight (disambiguation)}} |
{{Other uses|Second sight (disambiguation)}} |
||
'''Second sight''' is a form of [[extrasensory perception]], the supposed power to perceive things that are not present to the senses, whereby a person perceives information, in the form of a [[Vision (religion)|vision]], about future events before they happen ([[precognition]]), or about things or events at remote locations ([[remote viewing]]).<ref>[http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=second%20sight Wordnetweb]</ref><ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/second+sight Merriam-Webster online dictionary]</ref> |
'''Second sight''' is a form of [[extrasensory perception]], the supposed power to perceive things that are not present to the senses, whereby a person perceives information, in the form of a [[Vision (religion)|vision]], about future events before they happen ([[precognition]]), or about things or events at remote locations ([[remote viewing]]).<ref>[http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=second%20sight Wordnetweb]</ref><ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/second+sight Merriam-Webster online dictionary]</ref> |
||
The term ''da-shealladh'' (pronounced "dah-haloo"), often translated as "second sight", literally means "two sights". It refers to the ability to see apparitions of both the living and the dead. The ''taibshear'' (pronounced "tysher") is the seer who specializes in observing the energy double (''taibhs''). |
|||
A dream or vison is a ''bruadar'' ("broo-e-tar"). The bruadaraiche ("broo-e-taracher") is more than a dreamer in the common sense; he or she has 'true' dreams of the past or the future. |
|||
==History== |
==History== |
||
Second sight may have originally been so called because normal vision was regarded as coming first, while supernormal vision is a secondary thing, confined to certain individuals.<ref>[[s:1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Second Sight|Encyclopædia Britannica, 1911]]</ref> |
Second sight may have originally been so called because normal vision was regarded as coming first, while supernormal vision is a secondary thing, confined to certain individuals.<ref>[[s:1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Second Sight|Encyclopædia Britannica, 1911]]</ref> ''An da shealladh'' or "the two sights," meaning "the sight of the seer", is the way [[Gaels]] refer to "second sight", the involuntary ability of seeing the future or distant events. There are many Gaelic words for the various aspects of second sight, but ''an da shealladh'' is the one mostly recognized by non-Gaelic speakers, even though, strictly speaking, it does not really mean second sight, but rather 'two sights'.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/dreamgates/2011/02/scottish-dreaming-an-ancestral-call.html# |author= Moss, Robert |date= 2015 |title= Scottish dreaming: an ancestral call |publisher= Beliefnet, Inc. |accessdate= March 27, 2016 |quote= The term ''da-shealladh'' (pronounced "dah-haloo"), often translated as "second sight", literally means "two sights". It refers to the ability to see apparitions of both the living and the dead. The taibshear (pronounced "tysher") is the seer who specializes in observing the energy double (''taibhs''). A dream or vison is a ''bruadar'' ("broo-e-tar"). The bruadaraiche ("broo-e-taracher") is more than a dreamer in the common sense; he or she is the kind of dreamer who can see into the past or the future. |
||
An early example of symbolical second sight is found in the [[Odyssey]], where [[Theoclymenus]] sees a shroud of mist about the bodies of the doomed Suitors, and drops of blood distilling from the walls of the hall of [[Odysseus]]. The [[Pythia]] at [[Delphi]] saw the blood on the walls during the Persian War; and, in the [[Argonautica]] of [[Apollonius Rhodius]], blood and fire appear to [[Circe]] in her chamber on the night before the arrival of the fratricidal [[Jason]] and [[Medea]]. Similar examples of symbolical visions occur in the [[Icelandic sagas]], especially in [[Njál's saga|Njala]], before the burning of [[Njál's saga|Njal]] and his family. In the Highlands, and in [[Wales]], the chief symbols beheld are the [[shroud]], and the [[corpse candle]] or other spectral illumination. |
An early example of symbolical second sight is found in the [[Odyssey]], where [[Theoclymenus]] sees a shroud of mist about the bodies of the doomed Suitors, and drops of blood distilling from the walls of the hall of [[Odysseus]]. The [[Pythia]] at [[Delphi]] saw the blood on the walls during the Persian War; and, in the [[Argonautica]] of [[Apollonius Rhodius]], blood and fire appear to [[Circe]] in her chamber on the night before the arrival of the fratricidal [[Jason]] and [[Medea]]. Similar examples of symbolical visions occur in the [[Icelandic sagas]], especially in [[Njál's saga|Njala]], before the burning of [[Njál's saga|Njal]] and his family. In the Highlands, and in [[Wales]], the chief symbols beheld are the [[shroud]], and the [[corpse candle]] or other spectral illumination. |
||
Ranulf |
[[Ranulf Higden]], author of the ''[[Polychronicon]]'' (14th century), describes Scottish second sight, adding "that strangers setten their feet upon the feet of the men of that londe for to see such syghtes as the men of that londe doon". |
||
==Second sight and extrasensory perception== |
==Second sight and extrasensory perception== |
||
These phenomena may be classed under [[clairvoyance]], [[precognition]], and [[telepathy]]. There is no scientific evidence that second sight exists. Reports of second sight are known only from anecdotal evidence given after the fact.<ref>[[Brian Regal]]. (2009). ''Pseudoscience: A Critical Encyclopedia''. Greenwood. p. 169. ISBN 978-0-313-35507-3</ref> A famous book with documented alleged cases of second sight was the two-volume ''[[Phantasms of the Living]]'' (London: Trübner, 1886) written by the psychical researchers [[Frederic W. H. Myers]], [[Edmund Gurney]] and [[Frank Podmore]]. The book claimed that visions of [[Apparitional experience|apparitions]] were telepathic hallucinations.<ref>Gurney, E., Myers, F. W. H., & Podmore, F. (1886). ''Phantasms of the Living''. Vol I and II London: Trubner.</ref> |
These phenomena may be classed under [[clairvoyance]], [[precognition]], and [[telepathy]]. There is no scientific evidence that second sight exists. Reports of second sight are known only from anecdotal evidence given after the fact.<ref>[[Brian Regal]]. (2009). ''Pseudoscience: A Critical Encyclopedia''. Greenwood. p. 169. ISBN 978-0-313-35507-3</ref> A famous book with documented alleged cases of second sight was the two-volume ''[[Phantasms of the Living]]'' (London: Trübner, 1886), written by the psychical researchers [[Frederic W. H. Myers]], [[Edmund Gurney]] and [[Frank Podmore]]. The book claimed that visions of [[Apparitional experience|apparitions]] were telepathic hallucinations.<ref>Gurney, E., Myers, F. W. H., & Podmore, F. (1886). ''Phantasms of the Living''. Vol I and II. London: Trubner.</ref> |
||
The two-volume ''[[Phantasms of the Living]]'' was criticized by scholars for the lack of written testimony and the time elapsed between the occurrence and the report of |
The two-volume ''[[Phantasms of the Living]]'' was criticized by scholars for the lack of written testimony and the time elapsed between the occurrence and the report of its being made.<ref>Alfred Douglas. (1982). ''Extra-Sensory Powers: A Century of Psychical Research''. Overlook Press. p. 76. "''Phantasms of the Living'' was criticized by a number of scholars when it appeared, one ground for the attack being the lack of written testimony regarding the apparitions composed shortly after they had been seen. In many instances several years had elapsed between the occurrence and a report of it being made to the investigators from the SPR."</ref> Some of the reports were analyzed by the German [[hallucination]] researcher [[Edmund Parish]] (1861–1916), who concluded they were evidence for a dream state of consciousness, not the paranormal.<ref>[[Edmund Parish]]. (1897). ''Hallucinations and Illusions. A Study of the Fallacies of Perception''. London: Walter Scott. p. 104</ref> [[Charles Sanders Peirce]] wrote a long criticism of the book arguing that no scientific conclusion could be reached from anecdotes and stories of unanalyzed phenomena.<ref>[[Charles Sanders Peirce]]. (1958). ''Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Volume 4''. Harvard University Press. p. 360</ref> [[Alexander Taylor Innes]] attacked the book due to the stories lacking evidential substantiation in nearly every case. According to Innes the alleged sightings of apparitions were unreliable as they rested upon the memory of the witnesses and no contemporary documents had been produced, even in cases where such documents were alleged to exist.<ref>[[Alexander Taylor Innes]]. (1887). ''Where Are the Letters? A Cross-Examination of Certain Phantasms''. Nineteenth Century 22: 174-194.</ref> |
||
===Dermo-optical perception=== |
===Dermo-optical perception=== |
||
{{Main| Dermo-optical perception}} |
{{Main| Dermo-optical perception}} |
||
In the early 20th century Joaquin María Argamasilla known as the "Spaniard with X-ray Eyes" claimed to be able to read handwriting or numbers on [[dice]] through closed metal boxes. Argamasilla managed to fool [[Gustav Geley]] and [[Charles Richet]] into believing he had genuine [[psychic]] powers.<ref>[[Massimo Polidoro]]. (2001). ''Final Séance: The Strange Friendship Between Houdini and Conan Doyle''. Prometheus Books. pp. 171-172. ISBN 978-1591020868</ref> In 1924 he was exposed by [[Harry Houdini]] as a fraud. Argamasilla peeked through his simple blindfold and lifted up the edge of the box so he could look inside it without others noticing.<ref>[[Joe Nickell]]. (2007). ''Adventures in Paranormal Investigation''. The University Press of Kentucky. p. 215. ISBN 978-0813124674</ref> |
In the early 20th century, Joaquin María Argamasilla, known as the "Spaniard with X-ray Eyes," claimed to be able to read handwriting or numbers on [[dice]] through closed metal boxes. Argamasilla managed to fool [[Gustav Geley]] and [[Charles Richet]] into believing he had genuine [[psychic]] powers.<ref>[[Massimo Polidoro]]. (2001). ''Final Séance: The Strange Friendship Between Houdini and Conan Doyle''. Prometheus Books. pp. 171-172. ISBN 978-1591020868</ref> In 1924 he was exposed by [[Harry Houdini]] as a fraud. Argamasilla peeked through his simple blindfold and lifted up the edge of the box so he could look inside it without others noticing.<ref>[[Joe Nickell]]. (2007). ''Adventures in Paranormal Investigation''. The University Press of Kentucky. p. 215. ISBN 978-0813124674</ref> |
||
Science writer [[Martin Gardner]] has written that the ignorance of blindfold deception methods has been widespread in investigations into objects at remote locations from persons who claim to possess second sight. Gardner documented various conjuring techniques psychics such as Rosa Kuleshova, Lina Anderson and [[Nina Kulagina]] have used to peek from their blindfolds to deceive investigators into believing they used second sight.<ref>[[Martin Gardner]]. (2003). ''Are Universes Thicker Than Blackberries?''. W. W. Norton & Company. pp. 225-243. ISBN 978-0393325720</ref> |
Science writer [[Martin Gardner]] has written that the ignorance of blindfold deception methods has been widespread in investigations into objects at remote locations from persons who claim to possess second sight. Gardner documented various conjuring techniques psychics such as Rosa Kuleshova, Lina Anderson and [[Nina Kulagina]] have used to peek from their blindfolds to deceive investigators into believing they used second sight.<ref>[[Martin Gardner]]. (2003). ''Are Universes Thicker Than Blackberries?''. W. W. Norton & Company. pp. 225-243. ISBN 978-0393325720</ref> |
Revision as of 13:08, 27 March 2016
Second sight is a form of extrasensory perception, the supposed power to perceive things that are not present to the senses, whereby a person perceives information, in the form of a vision, about future events before they happen (precognition), or about things or events at remote locations (remote viewing).[1][2]
The term da-shealladh (pronounced "dah-haloo"), often translated as "second sight", literally means "two sights". It refers to the ability to see apparitions of both the living and the dead. The taibshear (pronounced "tysher") is the seer who specializes in observing the energy double (taibhs).
A dream or vison is a bruadar ("broo-e-tar"). The bruadaraiche ("broo-e-taracher") is more than a dreamer in the common sense; he or she has 'true' dreams of the past or the future.
History
Second sight may have originally been so called because normal vision was regarded as coming first, while supernormal vision is a secondary thing, confined to certain individuals.[3] An da shealladh or "the two sights," meaning "the sight of the seer", is the way Gaels refer to "second sight", the involuntary ability of seeing the future or distant events. There are many Gaelic words for the various aspects of second sight, but an da shealladh is the one mostly recognized by non-Gaelic speakers, even though, strictly speaking, it does not really mean second sight, but rather 'two sights'.Cite error: A <ref>
tag is missing the closing </ref>
(see the help page). A famous book with documented alleged cases of second sight was the two-volume Phantasms of the Living (London: Trübner, 1886), written by the psychical researchers Frederic W. H. Myers, Edmund Gurney and Frank Podmore. The book claimed that visions of apparitions were telepathic hallucinations.[4]
The two-volume Phantasms of the Living was criticized by scholars for the lack of written testimony and the time elapsed between the occurrence and the report of its being made.[5] Some of the reports were analyzed by the German hallucination researcher Edmund Parish (1861–1916), who concluded they were evidence for a dream state of consciousness, not the paranormal.[6] Charles Sanders Peirce wrote a long criticism of the book arguing that no scientific conclusion could be reached from anecdotes and stories of unanalyzed phenomena.[7] Alexander Taylor Innes attacked the book due to the stories lacking evidential substantiation in nearly every case. According to Innes the alleged sightings of apparitions were unreliable as they rested upon the memory of the witnesses and no contemporary documents had been produced, even in cases where such documents were alleged to exist.[8]
Dermo-optical perception
In the early 20th century, Joaquin María Argamasilla, known as the "Spaniard with X-ray Eyes," claimed to be able to read handwriting or numbers on dice through closed metal boxes. Argamasilla managed to fool Gustav Geley and Charles Richet into believing he had genuine psychic powers.[9] In 1924 he was exposed by Harry Houdini as a fraud. Argamasilla peeked through his simple blindfold and lifted up the edge of the box so he could look inside it without others noticing.[10]
Science writer Martin Gardner has written that the ignorance of blindfold deception methods has been widespread in investigations into objects at remote locations from persons who claim to possess second sight. Gardner documented various conjuring techniques psychics such as Rosa Kuleshova, Lina Anderson and Nina Kulagina have used to peek from their blindfolds to deceive investigators into believing they used second sight.[11]
See also
References
- ^ Wordnetweb
- ^ Merriam-Webster online dictionary
- ^ Encyclopædia Britannica, 1911
- ^ Gurney, E., Myers, F. W. H., & Podmore, F. (1886). Phantasms of the Living. Vol I and II. London: Trubner.
- ^ Alfred Douglas. (1982). Extra-Sensory Powers: A Century of Psychical Research. Overlook Press. p. 76. "Phantasms of the Living was criticized by a number of scholars when it appeared, one ground for the attack being the lack of written testimony regarding the apparitions composed shortly after they had been seen. In many instances several years had elapsed between the occurrence and a report of it being made to the investigators from the SPR."
- ^ Edmund Parish. (1897). Hallucinations and Illusions. A Study of the Fallacies of Perception. London: Walter Scott. p. 104
- ^ Charles Sanders Peirce. (1958). Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Volume 4. Harvard University Press. p. 360
- ^ Alexander Taylor Innes. (1887). Where Are the Letters? A Cross-Examination of Certain Phantasms. Nineteenth Century 22: 174-194.
- ^ Massimo Polidoro. (2001). Final Séance: The Strange Friendship Between Houdini and Conan Doyle. Prometheus Books. pp. 171-172. ISBN 978-1591020868
- ^ Joe Nickell. (2007). Adventures in Paranormal Investigation. The University Press of Kentucky. p. 215. ISBN 978-0813124674
- ^ Martin Gardner. (2003). Are Universes Thicker Than Blackberries?. W. W. Norton & Company. pp. 225-243. ISBN 978-0393325720