82

environment of the moment. Many people find the priming results unbelievable, because they do not correspond to subjective experience. Many others find the results upsetting, because they threaten the subjective sense of agency and autonomy. If the content of a screen saver on an irrelevant computer can effect your willingness to help strangers without your being aware of it, how free are you? - (in my article The pseudoscience of reductionism and the problem of mind, I investigate the problem of the free will). What is unsettling is not so much the possibility that all our thoughts and actions might be determined by factors we have no control over, but that they might be determined by factors we are unaware of and are inherently unknowable. The priming effect is closely related to Magical thinking, where you dont discriminate between word/image and reality, between subject and object. Central in critical thinking, and spiritual practice as such, is precisely that you begin to discriminate between word/image and reality, and between subject and object. See my article Quantum mechanics and the philosophy of Niels Bohr. The priming effect is also a central issue in my book A Portrait of a Lifeartist

Projection
Characteristics, thoughts, feelings, attitudes or wishes, which the person refuses to realize in himself, are attributed to other persons or things. Related to Attribution.

Proof by ignorance
Proof by ignorance (argumentum ad ignorantiam, argument to ignorance, argument from ignorance, and appeal to ignorance), is a fallacy in which a lack of known evidence (or just knowledge) against a belief is taken as an indication that the belief is true. However ignorance of evidence against a position does not prove that there could not be evidence against it; at best it is only indirect support for it. Many logic texts list Proof by ignorance as a fallacy of reasoning. Examples vary, but some of the more popular ones refer to Sen. Joseph McCarthys justifying a name remaining on a list of suspected Communists because there is nothing in the files to disprove his Communist connections. The critical thinker Robert T. Carroll used to call this the Mike Wallace fallacy when he was teaching logic courses; he named it after a tactic Mr. Wallace frequently used in 60 Minutes. He would show up unannounced, confront a surprised person with accusations of some sort of wrongdoing, and then the scene would cut to a slamming door or a grainy film of a car driving out of a parking lot. Wallace would then announce something to the effect

82