Psychic Intuitions: Why 75% Accuracy is a Low Bar

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

I’ve been working on psychic intuitions lately, so I’m also thinking about my goals. How accurate should I aim for? 75% sounded like a good goal, until I did some math.

First, a couple of assumptions:

  • When you correctly receive a psychic intuition, it gives you the right answer 100% of the time.
  • When a psychic intuition fails, you simply get your non-magickal intuition’s best guess. (That is, failed psychic intuitions don’t make you wrong, they just don’t help you.)

So, how good do you have to be to get 75% of your intuitions to come out correct? The answer is, not very.

Let’s say you receive psychic intuitions correctly 50% of the time, and that on the remaining 50% (where you don’t receive a psychic intuition), your non-magickal intuition is right about 50% of the time. Boom, you’re getting the right answer 75% of the time, even though you’re failing with psychic messages as often as you’re succeeding.

And if your normal intuition is right more often? Then you can mess up more than half your intuitions, and still get over 75% accuracy. Which tells me I need to set a higher bar.

If you liked this post, consider visiting my current blog at

Tags: ,

2 Responses to “Psychic Intuitions: Why 75% Accuracy is a Low Bar”

  1. Ananael Qaa says:

    It seems to me that the challenge here is telling the difference between psychic intuition and guesses. I would suggest that in addition to recording the results themselves, you should also record whether you feel like the answer was psychic or a guess. If you get a big enough sample size, you might be able to find some commonality in terms of what the successful results feel like. The difference is subtle and I still need more practice at it, but it does feel like there is one, at least so far.

    At any rate, if you can obtain hard, empirically verifiable information using psychic abilities more than 75% of the time that would be quite impressive. I’ve never met anyone much better than that. I know that I can sometimes be skeptical about your results and explanations, but if you can pull this one off I’ll be the first to congratulate you.

  2. Kol Drake says:

    IF it is verifiable results of 75% that should be considered pretty darn good. (taking into account what AQ mentions above) since most ‘lab studies’ that say random chance is 50% and they get a shift of 53-57% and consider that statistically VERY significant — having a 75% confirmable rate would be through the roof I would think.

Leave a Reply