When does a vision constitute a bonified psychic vision?

@seeker4 "Don't stop believin'
Hold on to that feelin'
Streetlights, people"

The lyrics apply here too 😊

Research casts a wide net these days. Qualitative research, a big umbrella with many approaches, has taken its place alongside the methods of logical positivism. Many scientists have always worked with intuition and imagination - now more than ever. Have a look at the work of evolutionary ecologist Monica Gagliano who listens, actually listens, to the voices of plants with which she works:
https://www.monicagagliano.com/

Even so, those who are troubled by approaches other than their own can be relentless and vitriolic in their critiques. Sometimes I wonder if they were burned (perhaps literally) for working as a healer or seer in a past life or timeline - when you were either a saint or a witch. We should never fear these people. They wear or are saddled with blinders.

Jeanne simply does not work within the framework of logical positivism, end of story. She beautifully lays out her framework of exploring consciousness in her post above. It is more closely aligned with that of seers and shamans and poets and artists and philosophers of old (way old). You might also think of it as aligned with action research, if that does not seem too much like pigeon-holing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_research

I have a hard time keeping up with the pace of the forum in terms of responding - many here are so skilled at elegantly and promptly responding. But I have been thinking about this for a couple of days and wanted to add my two cents, from the perspective of one who has been thoroughly grounded in logical positivism research methods since undergraduate days in the 1970’s. It was a happy day when a little later I was introduced to qualitative research. And who now practices etheric healing and listens to the plants and writes about what she hears!

Posted by: @marigold

↑

But I have been thinking about this for a couple of days and wanted to add my two cents, from the perspective of one who has been thoroughly grounded in logical positivism research methods since undergraduate days in the 1970’s. It was a happy day when a little later I was introduced to qualitative research. And who now practices etheric healing and listens to the plants and writes about what she hears!

I'm a bit confused by your post.  For the most part, we are aligned in our research methodology preferences as I prefer qualitative approaches and taught qualitative research at a local university.  I hope your references to "vitriolic and relentless" were not directed at me because there was nothing in what I wrote to suggest that.  I am in total agreement that positivistic research is not designed to study areas of intuition.  In fact, I've published and written about choosing a methodology to fit what it is one wants to study. Researchers in search of the vaccine for Covid require a quantitative approach.  Studying culture requires qualitative.  I offered constructive criticism in the hopes of avoiding unfair criticism of what this forum does. I read carefully and offered a second suggestion for consideration based on some great ideas that were posted.  However, I accept that there were a handful who misread what I posted which, perhaps, was my failure to communicate clearly.  I also accept that if the majority does not share my opinion or concern, then the majority reigns.  I have no problem with that.  

I love your final paragraph.  I look forward to checking out the website.  And, yes, I talk to my plants.  So far, they haven't talked back, but I can always hope.  

@seeker4 Oh no, heavens no that was not directed at you. I do apologize that it came across that way. Rather, it was about those who get SO critical about anything related to psychic/intuition, demands for statistical significance and experimental design etc (which do have their place ).

I understood your constructive criticism immediately and recognized the personal experience that it maybe comes from. Same here.  What I meant to convey is have no fear. For me that fear feels like a tightening of the heart. And for me I lose that fear by relaxing and knowing that, as you suggest, other ways of knowing require other ways of exploring.

The book I read by Gagliano is "Thus Spake the Plant." And you know, I bet those plants you talk to are listening.

@marigold Thank you so much for clarifying.  Yes, we are kindred spirits.  I read The Hidden Life of Trees a few years ago. I'm going to speculate that you've already read it.  I will definitely check out Gagliano's book.  Thank you for the reference.

@seeker4 I apologize for a poorly worded comment, and I can see why you took it as an insult although I never meant it as an insult.   I respect  your sensibility which is both analytical and intuitive. I too have a research background and find research important and useful. I have tried  to balance this forum in that way, but have explained why I consider all visions valuable.  You said you were coming from a research point of view and I meant to just point out that quantitative research, while important, can be limited in its viewpoint because it puts reality into packets and is not nuanced or expansive.  If you disagree with that point, that's okay.  But I apologize from the bottom of my heart for offending you.

@tesseract You have nailed what I have hoped to do here. You get it and I thank you for that. 

That said, we could catalogue our seers' predictions according to specificity, such as levels A (very specific), B (moderately specific), and C (vague). But I always want to include them because they almost always unfold. 

@jeanne-mayell

I accept your apology and offer my forgiveness—I never mess around with forgiveness!  Yes, quantitative research is limited in its viewpoint—deliberately and necessarily so.  The researchers furiously searching for the Covid vaccine had to describe their perimeters and results with precision so that other research teams could refute, expand, replicate, or build on them. Their life saving success came as quickly as it did because it was built on a wealth of previous (very precise) virus research—It’s the right research methodology choice for that research goal.  In other words, they cannot afford to be expansive and free without data driven certainty—lives depend on it.

     You say that you consider all visions valuable.  I have no problem with that although speaking for myself only, mine aren’t.  However, I hope you noticed that the discussion that my post triggered led Bluebelle, CC21, Deetoo, and others to describe how their predictions form and how they consider them as they are forming. That was incredibly valuable information for me with which to reflect on my own processes.  That also appears to have led to your decision to “catalogue our seers' predictions according to specificity, such as levels A (very specific), B (moderately specific), and C (vague).”  That Jeanne, is a very exciting outcome because my intuition tells me that there is much to learn there that may potentially help me and others grow as intuitives.  But BEWARE, Jeanne, it may also lead me to think about new research questions and speculations to post. 

@seeker4 After further thought, I will probably not catalog the visions. I find too many vague visions turn out to be just so valuable!  However, I would encourage people, when possible, to  put in brackets anything that came to them as they got their visions that might give us more insight into their process. Some people will be able and happy to do that, but others simply can't remember what they were thinking. The process is like art and many artists also don't like to think about the how or why of their process, when it for many is so spontaneous that they themselves don't understand it. Most of all, I do not want people to feel afraid to say what pops in their minds just because it is vague or requires explanation. I have made special effort when teaching people how to do this work not to worry about understanding what they get. I want them to be spontaneous and feel confidence in what pops up, regardless of how ludicrous or vague it is. That is where the gold is. 

How else would @journeywithme2 have received and remembered her wondrous hypnogogic vision of turquoise eyes, binoculars at a Journey concert. 

@jeanne-mayell After attending many Intuitive Way classes with you, I’ve noticed that students often start out with vague impressions during read the future exercises.  They may sense colors or simple images at first.  Then after practicing more Read the Future meditations, many of their predictions become sharper, coming into focus.