Talk:Cold reading

Bronzer
I've popped a brainstar on this one. It's the kind of high-priority stuff that should go silver/gold. I'll work on it later until I am completely satisfied and require a cigarette. 08:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I highly approve of this article. Awesome work. Junggai (talk) 11:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Perspectives
If someone makes use of psychics etc to achieve closure ('X is happy in the afterlife, and I told them my good news, now I can move on') or make a decision (a variant on flipping a coin/reading all the newspaper horoscopes to find one that tells you what you really want to do) is it necessarily 'bad'?

To what extent do 'psychologists, detectives and others analysing a situation' use the equivalents of cold reading to legitimate ends? 82.44.143.26 (talk) 17:02, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's necessarily bad, because cold reading is not something that happens by accident. Cold reading is a deliberate strategy to decieve another person that you have other ways of knowing when you actually do not. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 19:10, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * There are occasions when 'mumbo jumbo/using external decision makers' such as those mentioned works better than 'a plain statement to do the same thing' (and we have probably all used 'illogical decision makers' on occasion).
 * What would the positive equivalent of the second paragraph be - would add legal cross examination and certain types of research. 82.44.143.26 (talk) 19:28, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sad to say, but I rarely understand exactly what you mean (if at all). Could you be (much) clearer? Keep it simpler. Thanks! Reverend Black Percy (talk) 19:29, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think 82.44.143.26 means it can function similarly to flipping a coin? I disagree. Christopher (talk) 19:37, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * What is the 'professional version' of cold reading perhaps? 86.146.100.82 (talk) 13:47, 23 March 2017 (UTC)