Talk:Silva Method

This page was placed on Votes for Deletion on June 21 2004. Consensus was to keep; see discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Silva Mind Control.

POV

After reading the article and the votes on the deletion page, it's obvious to me that the real problem is that this article is POV. But no one ever said so, and its critics were too lazy to re-write it with all the prerequisite supposeds and allegedlys and so on.

And I'm glad it's not, frankly. Such a rewrite would make the prose much clumsier without adding new information. I'm happy to read about this subect on its own terms. It gives me a good feel for the flavor of this school of thought.

Do Wikipedia readers really need to be protected from opinions by obfuscatory and qualifying language? Doesn't the fact that anyone with an interest can write an article make it obvious that people with strong opinions will be the first to start one? Perhaps those that can't read critically should go back to watching television. Clarknova 16:39, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Would anyone mind if I move the above comment into its own section, below? At the moment it is wrongly positioned in the page and gives a false impression of importance over and above other discussion points, correctly entered below.Jimjamjak (talk) 21:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

 Done HairyWombat 19:21, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

The problem is not just POV, it's the fact that, like so many POV articles on WP, it's badly written. In its current state I'd just sandbox the whole thing until an editor has time to do a complete rewrite. Dadge (talk) 19:49, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

[New comment July 3, 2013] First of all, if we are talking about Point Of View (POV) then 80% of ALL articles as well as all written human experience in ALL the books written (hard or soft copy) in the last 22,000 years are ALL POV. Our senses deceive us... greatly. Read about color blindness below.

I am all for neutrality, as long as it does not become "The pendulum swinging the other way". As far as intuition is concerned, I read too many "Experts" who fall back on "we cannot prove it empirically beyond the shadow of a doubt to all humans" just to scream "Scam" in the "Name Of Science" and claim to be part of the highly enlightened "Skeptics Society". I have personally experienced highly intuitive experiences throughout my life and even though life would be so much more philosophically simple if I could disprove the phenomenon, I cannot deny/disprove/doubt the existence of intuition even by doing all I can to try to convince myself.

In 2001 I was running seriously behind schedule as I needed (read: absolutely HAD) to be on time for a major ($$$$$$) I.T. director job interview in Pleasanton, CA. I landed very, very late at San Jose Airport, someone had damaged my cell phone at Sky Harbor in Phoenix and I only had 30 minutes to get there (almost impossible on a good traffic day). Oh and did I forget to mention?... I had never been there, had no map... all I had was an address and a mental picture of the building. I literally had to trust my intuition and "Use the Force" as I jokingly thought to myself. After getting the rental car on the 880, I had to make/take 8 exact exits and merges and NOT MISS a single one AND get there on time. Much to my amazement and stupefaction, I arrived at my intended destination within 29 minutes, with only intuition to get me there. Yes, I believe taxi driver's intuition is entirely possible.

In 1967, I had a clear, vivid and extremely detailed dream of a new Montreal Metro (subway) station that would not even be conceived by its architect (not me), until 1973. My jaw dropped when I first stopped through it in 1979.

These are only "Mild" examples of several dozen such private/personal/precious experiences I had with "Intuition".

Max Planck, Albert Einstein and Wolfgang Pauli ALL understood and made great use of "Intuition". I also know of too many other individuals, men, women and children who have experienced intuition personally.

A trained artist and painter can see subtle shades and color variations that the untrained eye cannot. Ophthalmologists regularly mention visual perception variances in order of 10 million color hues and more. Yet if you speak with "Normal" people, they will tell you "Are you kidding me man?! This apple is green and that apple is just the same shade of green you bozo! Heck they were even picked on the same tree branch!" and let's not even talk about Daltonism or Color blindness... if all of a sudden, through a rapid genetic degradation, almost all males were to become color blind, would the voice of 4 billion "Color skeptics" silence all others? If ALL members of the "Skeptics Society" and/or ALL members of ALL of the "Science Academies" world wide ALL were color blind, would all the uneducated painters in the world be "Fools"? To the untrained ear, an A440 on the piano sounds the same as an A442 or an A438. The expert piano tuner (those who are blind are especially good) CAN and WILL "Perceive" the difference.

Trying to explain this to someone who is tone deaf, is like trying to explain salt to someone who has never tasted it or trying to explain the color Fushia to someone who is color blind. Although some people seem to be naturally gifted at it, just as predisposed artists may be naturally gifted toward respective sensory acuity, intuition can actually be "Taught and trained" like many people can be trained to see more hues and shades and hear subtle tonal variations. I know many people who never had ANY intuitive experiences in their entire lives, who experienced intuition while taking a Silva Method training for the first time. Here is a "neutral" article on the matter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silva_method

Do not criticize, belittle or "Psha!" just yet. Before you do, open up your mind to the scientific possibilities... like Newton, Einstein et al... The Silva Organization has a no questions asked money back guarantee and all you have to lose is a bit of stubborn ignorance.

Please, oh please, oh please Let Us NOT Confuse Neutrality With Skepticism.

Remember that the great "Minds, Leaders, Popes, Potentates and Skeptics" 600 years ago all thought that Earth was flat... and there was NO WAY to demonstrate otherwise... yet.

We all "Knew" it was impossible to fly in 1569 and that "Man" never would... even though Leonardo Da Vinci had drafted several plans for flying machines decades earlier.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_da_Vinci#Engineering_and_inventions

We all "Knew" it was impossible to travel to the moon in 1869 and Jules Verne was nearly laughed into oblivion then. Some "really smart and well educated skeptics" still believe it was all a cleverly orchestrated con job.

We all "Knew" Global warming was a scam. All the science academies knew... until they reversed themselves and signed a universal declaration a couple of years ago. Did you take a good look at satellite imagery of the North Pole lately?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Academy_of_Sciences#Joint_declaration_on_global_warming

Also, we all "Knew" it was impossible to travel at "Warp Speed"... until December 2012:

http://io9.com/5963263/how-nasa-will-build-its-very-first-warp-drive

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive

The last 150 years are filled with demonstrable proof, that the last thing we must do is "Encyclopedically educate ourselves" with the cleverly disguised and politically correct "Neutral" discourses of skeptics, naysayers and obtuse pseudo-intellectuals. There is a big difference between, what is real, what is unreal and what is perceived... or imperceptible... yet. This applies to you, me and all of "Us".

In reference to that 3 July rant (I won't call it a comment) it's a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing. The author doesn't understand the scientific method at all and misrepresents skepticism. The "tell" is the rant about, "Remember that the great "Minds, Leaders, Popes, Potentates and Skeptics" 600 years ago all thought that Earth was flat... and there was NO WAY to demonstrate otherwise... yet" That's hogwash and an urban legend as any serious scholar could tell you. Here's a hint: The doubt was about Columbus' estimate of the diameter of a spherical Earth. Guess what, he was WRONG! You're engaging in the old "Well they laughed at Galileo" argument. They also laughed at a lot of losers and idiots too. And they're still laughing at Jules Verne because other than pegging the location of Kennedy Space Center no one is seriously pursuing launching a manned aluminum bullet by firing it out of a cannon. Tell you what, you have your ability to use The Force polished to a high degree. Contact James Randi and set up a demonstration and you could win one million dollars. But before that you might want to actually follow the links that you provided to make your "point". The Alcubierre drive is "speculation" which means it's STILL impossible to travel at Warp speed right now.John Simpson54 (talk) 00:37, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Non-paranormal part of method

I took the Silva Method introductory class/sessions several years ago (about 1995 when i was 14-15). A large portion of the class wasn't actually about remote viewing, or ESP. Basically a lot of it was sort of concerning meditation, with the more paranormal elements intertwined within, supposedly accessible from the "higher" meditative state(s). I'll admit a lot of it was weird and nonsensical (my instructor claimed he could bend a spoon with his mind or shoot invisible balls of energy across the room). I'll attempt to add about the relatively unique meditative methods it advocates. I'm not going to defend the class, because I don't really buy any of it outside the meditation parts, but I'll try to remain neutral. I have a course book lying around somewhere I'll consult for references. if I do waver from NPOV someone please correct me. Zoffoperskof 06:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Claims: proven or unproven

The article states, "Claims of psychic abilities, remote viewing and healing have not been empirically proven."

I think there is research "empirically proving" such "claims." I'll look for references.

The Institute of Noetic Sciences is a start... http://www.noetic.org/

--sparkit 05:12, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It is Called The Silva Method

The title, "Silva Mind Control," was originated by José Silva in the 1960s at the onset of his world-famous self-empowerment system. The name was changed years ago to "The Silva Method," in order to more accurately describe the program.

The article posted in Wikipedia is not supported by Silva International Headquarters in Laredo, Texas. The external link, listed as the "official website," is not the official site at all. The correct URL for the Silva Method Headquarters is http://SilvaMethod.com

The people who posted the Silva article are not affiliated with José Silva's Silva Method. It is unfortunate that they represent themselves as the home of the Silva Method, and fail to give credit where it is due.

Any comments may be directed to george@SilvaMethod.com— Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.78.52.6 (talk) 16:34, 7 April 2005 (UTC)

What is all this stuff doing here in a Wikipedia talk page? Does the person who wrote this have any idea of what Wikipedia is for? I am considering removing the email address, as I absolutely don't think that editors should be encouraging the diversion of discussion away from the page and to a private email address. Any thoughts?Jimjamjak (talk) 21:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

It has been there since 2005. Try to relax more. HairyWombat 19:32, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Reference to Alpha Brainwave State

The Alpha brainwave state can be achieve easily through entrainment, it is characteristic of "mind methods" to attemp crude forms of visualisations to achieve 'subjective' results.

Writers to this page should focus on reporting objectively the method and changes to the Silva Method over the years, perhaps a chronology is in order to illustrate how the Silva Method has changed over the years. Perhaps the Silva Method could invigorated with an entrainment device? Carl --210.10.180.20 02:11, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

move request

I made a typo moving this and can't fix it myself. Admin needed, I think. Also Silva Method redirect needs to be reversed. Thanks!

--sparkit 11:57, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Quite Dissappointed...

My opinion may be biased because I use the the Silva Mind Control Method, but this article is an outrage. It may also be that todays silva method is much different than the 1970's version. I suggest a new section on the page about the original intentions of the Silva Method or a whole new page titled "The Silva Mind Control Method" (The new page seems unneccesary but I assure you that the original silva method was not a "self-empowerment system to shape beliefs, augment personal success and allegedly view distant objects or locations and connect with a higher intelligence for guidance")

So, please write about original silva method, because I do not know nothing about 1970's version. Maybe author of this article also does not have any knowledge about original silva method? 62.21.67.47 12:54, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

You are very welcome to write about the original Silva method, in addition to the updated, new or otherwise slightly different method that may or may not be correctly described currently. Please do feel absolutely free to make NPOV edits where you see fit. I have suggested elsewhere on this page that a chronologic development of the method would be very useful as a starting point for improving the page.Jimjamjak (talk) 21:49, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

These techniques really work

I have had results with Dynamic Meditation, Stress control, Memory & Concentration improvement, finding a most satisfying job without much effort, remote viewing/seeing places far away (sitting wherever you are - with eyes closed), Telepathy (mind reading/sending messages), stopping smoking, losing/gaining weight, improving confidence, regressing to a past life (especially to solve problems that one has in this life related to a past life), finding lost objects, getting answers for the unsolvable, getting whatever through guided visualization (a car, a house, money etc.), E.S.P. (Clairvoyance, Sixth sense, Intuition etc.) and so on. I can prove this anytime, anywhere. Visit #### for more information. Dr.Ramanand 23:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)Dr.Ramanand

I removed the link in the above text as it was not directed to any useful or relevant website - in fact it seemed just to be advertising. Feel free to revert if my edit is out of place in a comments page.Jimjamjak (talk) 21:50, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

The technique works for me, too. Not at the very advanced level (no remote viewing at the like) and I don't have time to test those. I think the result depends on the person's mentality and that how much effort he/she invests into it. In many aspect it is the same as yoga relaxation and healing. Paul McKenna's hypnosis methods use similar visualization techniques for weight control, etc. and they work with many people, including me. 75.109.97.20 (talk) 15:40, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

"how do they do it?"

would it be against any wikipedia rules or somthign to either have in the article an explanation of what exactly is involved in applying the silva method, or at least linking to sites which offer instruction on the silva method for free? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TiagoTiago (talk • contribs) 00:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC). coolies, I forgot to sign and it signed automatically :D

More explanation is OK. But with external links you have to be careful; see Wikipedia:Spam. Several external articles have been posted by websites trying to sell their products or services related to the Silva Method (which have been deleted). That's against Wikipedia policy. Ward3001 02:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

sounds like his concern is not so much that such links would be spam but that the Silva people would not view kindly any role wiki might play in divulging details of their methods for free that they consider intellectual properties. Of course wiki was founded upon the concept of sharing free information, but does respect copyrights and the like. The basic techniques of the Silva method, regarding meditation and reaching the supposed state of alpha, can probably be summarized in a paragraph of text, the principles of the hows and whys that could make you do this successfully, perhaps a dozen loosely spaced pages at best.

More than the descriptions however you need faith that it is achievable, and that is where a good human instructor is crucial, and why the seminars weren't cheap. As I recall my parents paid about $400 each for us to attend around 1975,a large sum at the time.

For the OP, it simply involves relaxation, a detachment of the mind from all sensory input to the body in a slow methodical manner, and mental visualization of where you want to be. It is similar to many other meditation techniques, BTW. Batvette (talk) 11:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether this discussion led to any edits in the end. If you wish to make a brief explanation of how the Silva method is done in practice, then just add the relevant description. Note, however, that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not an instruction manual, so lengthy descriptions of "how to" are not appropriate here. There are many other places online for doing that.Jimjamjak (talk) 21:54, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Question

This article does not appear to contain any cited references declaring it to be LGAT in nature. The LGAT category does not seem to apply here. Lsi john 23:46, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Lack of Notability?

Can someone explain why this subject seems to lack notability? When I lived in Lexington, NC, there was a Silva office on West Center Street. Since moving from there, I've listened to audio media about the Silva Method, and I've read lots of criticisms online of the Silva Method, mostly by Christian groups.

I've also wondered if the Silva Method was somehow connected with the occult. I mean, how would you know that a screwdriver was accidentally dropped into a wall and left there during construction if some sort of entity or medium didn't reveal this knowledge? Supposedly, Jose Silva hypnotized his kids in an attempt to get them to learn better. Religious critics, particularly Fundamentalist Christians, tend to suggest that hypnosis opens up a person to to occult.

So I think this is a subject of notability and wide interest.--65.190.103.147 00:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I got to know the method in Bogotá, Colombia and I would dare to say that it is notable enough to remain in the wiki. Certainly there hasn't been many references to it but the movement is sufficiently big to remain IMHO. Although I went through the whole thing I cannot tell if their claims are valid or just the effect of suggestion. In any case I believe that it is important to have the article for reference and try to add some criticism. --Nicorojas 16:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Religious groups likely criticize it because Silva believed that using the method allowed you to open up your mind to some sort of higher universal consciousness. This kind of thing generally gets criticized by religious groups because it's a competing philosophy. - perfectblue (talk) 17:14, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Many Silva Courses not just one

The article, while correct in a limited sense, seems to be taken from a narrow POV. The Silva Method has many variations. The article is from the prospective of the Silva Ultramind. The Silva Ultramind is a course that focuses on ESP and intuition. The Silva Method BLS (Basic Lecture Series) focuses on your control of your own mind, controlled relaxation, improving memory, sleep control, awake control etc. The basis of the Silva Method is controlling your center of your brain frequency distribution to the Alpha region (from 9 to 14 Hz) and controlling what you focus on mentally. It is not really spooky stuff and has been the starting point to many of the similar programs that have copied Silva. The Silva Method BLS is the course that most people think of when they hear the name Silva Method because over 4 million people have taken it. The Silva Ultramind is a superb course buts lacks the focus on controlling your own mind. It is best thought as a specialized version of the Silva Method. On hypnotism Jose Silva was an expert hypnotist before he discovered the basis for the Silva Method. Hypnotism while good for some purposes does not allow you to control yourself independently. It ties you to the hypnotic suggestion. If you want to change that suggestion you usually need outside assistance from a hypnotist. The Silva Method differs in that you write your own program. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.81.235.115 (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 16:50, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

This is not the place to be discussing subjective evaluations of the method, or of individual courses. However, I would accept that there may be better ways of presenting the different types of courses that are presented as related to--or derived from--Jose Silva. I know little about these issues, but think that a chronological presentation of the different manifestations of the Silva Method would be very useful and good start for improving this article.Jimjamjak (talk) 21:41, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Not enough sources

This article is almost a Carbon Copy of one of the two sources cited. Most of the citations don't contain sources either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcblackn (talk • contribs) 06:30, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

If there are whole sentences included here that are copied verbatim from primary sources, and are not strictly quoted, please highlight them as they should be removed/edited.Jimjamjak (talk) 21:56, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

External links

Added {{No more links}} to EL sect. Cirt (talk) 15:01, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

All of the external links are credulous of the Silva Method. I feel there needs to be at least once link to a skeptical source for balance. I would like to suggest the online Skeptic's Dictionary. Would this be acceptable? Jackbox1971 (talk) 20:05, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Seems like a reasonable starting place to me. I am sure that there are plenty of more detailed sources out there though. Any thoughts anyone?Jimjamjak (talk) 21:58, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Use of James Randi

I find the use of James Randi's name in the opening paragraph to be somewhat misleading in tone. The context seems to (mildly) suggest that Randi is a proponent of SMC. In fact, Randi is very critical of it. Jackbox1971 (talk) 20:07, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Indeed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.181.127 (talk) 18:41, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't know much about Randi, but it would appear from the Wikipedia article on him that he is likely to be critical of this method, rather than a proponent of it. Can someone who knows about this please make the appropriate edits?Jimjamjak (talk) 21:38, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Criticisms

:I am curious should we expand on that part in the criticisms section with Johanna Michaelsen and her story,and should be make a page for her as well? Megamenomichi (talk) 19:04, 22 December 2013 (UTC)Megamenomichi

Having read a summary of Michaelsen's book, it does not appear relevant to this entry on Silva Method. She argues against a very wide range of what she considers "occult" practices on the basis that the Bible is the only source of true knowledge and the occult is an attempt by Satan to subvert humanity. I would remove this section entirely since this does not qualify as serious controversy.Fredricwilliams (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2014 (UTC)FredricWilliams

Article Rewrite

This article is in desperate need of a rewrite, it reads like an advert and is totally positive in its view of the method, apart from one sentence mentioning James Randi there are basically no critical or neutral descriptions. Silent1 11:06, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Discussion of Redirect - please comment

Hello fellow editors, let's discuss what to do about the huge problems with this article. {u|Billca42}, your edit summary undoing the redirect to meditation stated that it's not an appropriate topic to redirect to. Do you object to redirect, period? If not, have a suggestion for what to redirect to?

If you do object to any redirect whatsoever, and you think this topic is likely notable enough for WP and want to put in the legwork to demonstrate that, then please do. Several talk sections above itemize some of the problems. A brutal copyedit is needed to remove promotional language, but more importantly, a good number of quality sources need to be added (and invalid or duplicate sources removed). Thanks!--Karinpower (talk) 00:21, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Silva Method. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120426021736/http://aphilosophersnotes.com/notes/all/the-silva-mind-control-method-of-mental-dynamics to http://aphilosophersnotes.com/notes/all/the-silva-mind-control-method-of-mental-dynamics

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:37, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Why is there a Silva Method template? (see the very bottom of the article)

The existence of a Template seems unnecessary. One thing could be used to flesh out the article, though - it does mention two "notable students," Werner Erhard and Alexander Everett. I hadn't heard of these two, but from their WP articles, Erhard is the founder of EST trainings (from the Human Potential Movement, perhaps the first major personal growth training), and Everett is perhaps less notable but involved in the same world. Cited in Everett to show relationship to Silva: Navarro, Espy M.; Robert Navarro (2002). Self Realization: The Est and Forum Phenomena in American Society. Xlibris Corporation. pp. Pages 54–64. ISBN 1-4010-4220-1. Erhard's bio doesn't mention Silva; maybe it should if sources show a connection.--Karinpower (talk) 07:07, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

@Karinpower: I agree. The relevant links are either in the article or could be added to the 'See also' section. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 09:57, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

suggestions to improve the article

i have a POV and its okay. whether it is neutral is to be decided by you, i dont care. the silva method (on a side note: actually i prefer the former "mind control" name since that was the label when this was a hype and when i last heared about it anything relevant. also mind control name implies theres a phenomenon of how peoples mind can be self controlled and the silva mehod name implies that there is a proprietary method - i d rather focus on the implied natural phenomena of human brain/mind than care about someones proprietary stuff they sell. the latter is not even of much encyclopedical notability, like someones secret proprietary recipe for beer brewing, while the former sounds more like a good point for a generic encyclopedical covering of beer brewing in general.) that distinction made i think the article should 90% deal with what is the alpha state, why it is of interest, what it can be used for and links to see also stuff like "flow" mindstate, self suggestion/programming, etc. some of this above seems missing from the article. theres a story about the chemist (kekulé?) inventing the molecular electron-ring structure of benzol solving first his/her riddle in a dream just to go back next day to the lab to confirm it. also probably notable this hungarian descent psychologist with the funny name mihalyfalvi mihaly or something similar who was all about the "flow" state of the mind. as to mr silva's claims to clairvoyance and stuff - i wont even touch it. but the verifyable mindsttate he based his supernatural claims on do deserve an encyclopedical description even if the overall method ends up in the hocus-pocus wastebin. 89.134.199.32 (talk) 22:11, 13 December 2019 (UTC).

@EjeSur: Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. It's a matter of googling.

Possible explanation for paranormal claims

It is common for people to have an altered mental state just before and after going to sleep. This is known to, at times, result in mental images between a standard visualization and a dream. I call these lucid hallucinations. I assume it is also possible to enter this state from deep meditation. This could result in people believing they have control over reality that they don’t actually have. Knowing this, meditating to enter more peaceful mental states clearly can have cognitive benefit. 2600:1012:B1C5:36D4:41B3:E108:CD8C:C97E (talk) 00:55, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

its one thing to meditate to a dream like state of your imagination, but the Silva Method made many claims of developing paranormal abilities like remote viewing and reading minds. Indeed the final part of the seminar involved you probing the mind of another student and diagnosing an undisclosed disease of one of their family members, and both of you believing you actually did.

The scam was merely "hot reading" but neither of you knew you were doing it.

Theres nothing wrong with entertaining fantasies but some people really believe in ESP etc despite no scientifically valid evidence to support it.

Batvette (talk) 23:43, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Questionable source

The second paragraph in the lead uses a very questionable source as a basis for the claims made. The source is merely a dissertation from 1984 by an unknown student at Wayne University. Because the complexity or level of research required of a thesis may vary significantly among universities or programs, to present "the Powers dissertation" as if it is academic and peer-reviewed is a stretch. Maybe moving it down in the article and clarifying who "Powers" is may remove the (perhaps) unintended bias. Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 15:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)