Debugging Psychic: Uncovering a Large Problem

You found my old blog. Thanks for visiting! For my new writing, visit

Last month, I debugged my psychic intuitions, but said I probably wasn’t done. And indeed, I’m not: While consulting in Albany last week, I asked which ballroom dance to visit, and picked a dance that had been cancelled. Fail.

There are a few ways to approach solving this problem and developing better intuitions. You might practice until it works, which would (I think) work in this situation. Or you might find an expert, either a book or a teacher, and follow their exercises. Or, you might just give up and work on something else.

But I rarely do any of those things. I prefer to take the system apart, see all the moving parts, then reassemble them into what I want. That’s what this series is about.

Coming up, I’ll explain some results, and my overall strategy moving forward. But first, I need to explain one more ethereal software setting: Communication Level.

Ethereal Software Setting: Communication Level

Most ethereal software can communicate in several ways:

  • It can handle the entire interaction, reading your mind and dropping its response directly into your thoughts.
  • It can send you a packaged message, which you will unwrap, shift into your mind’s signature, and actively read.
  • Or it can do something in-between, handling some of those steps (unwrapping, shifting the signature, a few others), but letting you actively read the message.

I call this the “communication level.” Level 1 is where the software does everything for you, and Level 4 is where it sends a packaged message. This isn’t new — I first learned about it around 2009, while helping Lisa connect to new ethereal software for her psychic intuitions — but it’s the first time I’m using it for my own work.

I hesitate to use the word “level” in public writing, because it suggests a hierarchy. But remember, this just sets how the software communicates with you. While it is generally good to be able to communicate in the more advanced ways, in practice, it’s often better to use a lower communication level to keep things simple for yourself. The point isn’t to always use the highest-level communication, it’s to match the software’s communication level with what’s comfortable for you so you get good information.

Picking the Right Communication Level

When I set up psychic intuitions for myself, my goal was to easily receive messages while distracted. So I selected “Communication Level 1,” where the software handles the entire interaction.

While talking with the software and a trainer, I found a problem: Level 1 requires a lot of integration between the software and the receiver’s mind, and takes 3-6 months to set up properly. (That’s how long it took to set up for Lisa, anyway.) Until then, you get bad results.

Well, how about level 2? That’s also fairly easy — it sends you a message in your signature, ready to insert into your thoughts, and you just drop it there. And it only takes 1-2 days to set up (according to the ethereal software). Great! I changed that setting, and resolved to test it later.

There is a chicken-and-egg problem here: I need to communicate with the ethereal software in order to configure it, but if my communication isn’t reliable, how do I do that? My answer is, focus on the communication, rather than trying to get it working while you’re distracted. Then, verify the answers with my trainers, who can communicate with me more clearly than the ethereal software can. I’d love a better solution, but this is the best I can come up with.

Testing: A Problem

A few days later, I tested it. The procedure is simple: Ask the same question several times, read the answer with distracted communication (in this case, Level 2) and with focused communication (Level 4). And I found a large problem: Different communication levels gave different answers.

This is around the time when I realized there would be no easy answers, no quick fix, no psychic-in-a-weekend.

Now, I don’t think this is a bug in the ethereal software. I fully expect that it sent me the same answer each time, which I simply failed to read sometimes. I think this is a matter of debugging my communication techniques, or at least finding some setting I’m good at, rather than a matter of fixing the software.

But how should I communicate, and which level should I choose? I’ll explore those questions tomorrow.

Other posts in this series: If you liked this post, consider visiting my current blog at

Tags: , , ,

2 Responses to “Debugging Psychic: Uncovering a Large Problem”

  1. Ananael Qaa says:

    If you can ask a bunch of different verifiable questions, see if any of your levels are consistently correct. If not, you’ve got big problems. However, if you can identify a pattern there it will tell you where you need to focus your efforts. If, say, levels 2 and 4 work but 1 and 3 don’t you know the latter are what you have to fix. Make sure you run your tests enough times to get decent confidence interval. If you do this and feel like posting your results I would love to see them.

    • This has been on my mind, too. I don’t have an easy way to run a bunch of trials, but I’m pursuing 2 plans right now:

      1. Use level 4 for all manifesting. This requires me to be somewhere quiet so I can focus, but it’s the most likely to work, and it’s seemed to work in the past. If it continues to work, I’ll know that my ethereal software is configured properly, and that it’s just a matter of communicating with it accurately while distracted. Then I can try level 3, see if that works, and work my way down until it stops working. (And I’ll post results as I go, since I know you and other readers want to see some data.)

      2. Get my trainers to perform a gap analysis on my communication skills. (“Gap analysis” = Consulting term for uncovering gaps in someone’s skills, more or less.) We started that yesterday, and it turns out, I simply suck at level 2 communication. Level 1 is easy, and I can handle level 4, but I just never learned level 2. So, we’re going back to basics and training me in all the bits I’m missing.

      I’ll do a post about the gap analysis tomorrow.

Leave a Reply