Psychic prediction may take several basic forms.

First I will describe the most basic types of prediction.

First of all, the most basic type is 0-dimensional prediction. This
consists of predicting what has already occurred, that is,
predicting the types of things that have already happened. A
second degree of this is had by predicting things that are similar
to those things that have happened. For our purposes, this can be
called simple generalization. If Henrick usually wants to play
games, perhaps he wants to play games now. This is the first
dimension of prediction, and it is the type that gains most easily
by probabilistic inductions. This method is also called specialized
prediction when it is applied to specialized modes of behavior. For
example, we can predict that a Matisse will sell high compared to
an unknown artist. We know that popular items in an auction sell
high, whereas unpopular items might not sell at all. Therefore,
there is an exponential relationship for example, between selling
a Matisse, and selling a Matisse at an auction. These kinds of
things can be predicted by studying the specific character of the
modalities and events involved in a given situation. However, if
an event is instead informal or contrived, this lends an aspect of
unpredictability. The predictions only work when all of the prior
conditions are met, and become less predictable with every
difference from the previous cases. Therefore, differences can be
used to predict differences, as another type of specialized
prediction. It may help to predict trickery or confusion (‘likely
outcomes’), rather than predicting a specific event. It should be
accepted that some conditions and choices are arbitrary. Because
we do not know if conditions will be met to satisfaction, we know
that some events are arbitrary. If the conditions are one half
different, then prediction requires a strong degree of formalism,
however that is calculated. It involves, in effect, exceeding
expectations, or coming across an event that happened just in the
same way, but as if by chance. This is one reason that scientists
have been known to require the reproduction of laboratory
conditions, even with highly predictable phenomena. Thus,
specialized predictions have some limitations.

The next type is delineative or elaborative prediction. What it
consists of is a generalization modified by additional imagination
about the significance of the factors involved. This type of
prediction can be called variablistic, because it often functions by
applying a generalization to a deduction about a variable. If
elephants are painted red, perhaps it is a sight for sore eyes, etc.
One form of this is prediction through emergence. This is not
necessarily a linear prediction because it essentially doesn’t
predict based on existing data. Nor does it predict based on
known exterior data. Instead, it involves a conclusion that
something is missing from the data. Logical conclusions are
drawn so that we can make major systemic conclusions about
what the data means. The new theory appears as if from thin air.
This is similar to the emergence of Darwinism, or the genetic
explanation of reproduction. What determines the success of
these theories is their relative importance, not necessarily the
lack of any alternative. It is the importance of the theory----its
emergence----which drives the prediction. (Many theories from
social science involve emergent theories, such as socialism and
capitalism. Instead of acting as a formal constraint, they often
expand the way that the conditions function. In this case, the
explanation is not erroneous, but instead, serves as a new
rational mode of explanation).

A third type is contingent or categorical prediction. If something
is the case, then we can predict that the things that rely upon this
first condition are modified when that category is modified. This
form of prediction works better for predicting quality differences
than actually-different conditions. However, if multiple qualities
are absent, predictions can be made about the alternatives. If
there is no snow, it can be predicted that it is not cold, or there is
a shortage of water, for instance. If it is not cold, one can predict
that it is arid or moist. If there is a shortage of water, one can
predict that it is dry, or there is a high tolerance for water. This
can also take the form of complex categorization. Attaching
variables to a given object means that predicting the outcome for
the main object affects the outcome of some, if not all, of the
variables. For example, ‘if we do something extreme, the change
might be observable. Otherwise, it is an abstract or un-
measurable form of extremity. We must have some means of
observation, or we can usually conclude that the effects are not
extreme. Or we can adopt an irrational view’.

A fourth type of prediction is coherent prediction. This is also
called synergism or epiphany. The simplest form of coherent
prediction occurs by the exclusion of all but one unlikely option.
Hella spent a hot day in the desert, and she was outdoors, and
walked several miles, time passed and she didn’t expire: she
must have brought something to drink with her. A more complex
form occurs by qualifying what it means to make a given
combination. People who have complicit sex are always lovers.
Therefore, if two people have sex, it might be complicit, and they
might be lovers. Or, something is complicit between two people. If
it is sex, they are lovers. This can even involve highly complex
phenomena. For example: Joe defines himself as an editor, but he
works as an economist. In some way he is doing economic editing.
This is the beginning of a genuinely psychic method. Attaching
judgments of fully embraced variables can be a meaningful way of
reaching for epiphanies. For example, what ‘definitely IS
something’ about a given thing? Then apply that condition to
factors like responsibility, organization, and predictability. An
exception to this is so-called ‘black swans’. In that case, one must
predict the rationale which makes something a black swan. The
rule in that case is that things are either unreasonable,
reasonable, without purpose, or serving a prescribed function.  A
method for solving black swans involves corroboration or
defaulting. This occurs when there is no better explanation
remaining for a given thing. Well, we know that such-and-such a
creature has eyes based on the related species, but nothing about
the creature looks exactly like eyes. The eyes must be these
spots on its back. Otherwise its blind. Or, black swans could exist,
as long as we know that color serves no inherent function.

Now for more genuine psychic predictions:

A second genuine form of psychic prediction involves using a
posteriori reasoning on a 0-dimensional prediction. For example,
if we know that some events are arbitrary, then we can derive
that we don’t know if some conditions will be met to satisfaction.
If we know Henrick wants to play games now, we can predict that
he usually wants to play games. This form of prediction often
involves deducing the types of statements that lead to a particular
line of reasoning: that is, predicting a rationale. Many psychics
are familiar with this way of phrasing deductions.

A third form of genuine psychic prediction involves determination
based on unstated facts. Since everyone thinks about the
opposite of what they say, at least unconsciously, combining
multiple opposite terms for terms that have been stated as
someone’s opinion, or as the definition of a motive or interest for
the person or organization, will give information about the
genuine motivations, or else the looming unknowns in the life of
the person or organization. For example, if someone states that
the first thing on their mind is their motorcycle, and the second
thing on their mind is their manhood, then you can predict that
they’re concerned about meeting someone else on a motorcycle.

A fourth form of genuine psychic prediction involves categorical
relationships. One can ask or predict ‘what is someone’s usual
mode of relation with the world?’ Then one can predict that they
use that mode of relation with their perceived opposites. For
example, an artist who expresses that the thing on his mind is
cars can be predicted ‘not to buy a painting of a car, instead you’ll
make it yourself’ (the concealed opposition is between the artist
who makes art, and his opposite, the buyer of the art. The
opposite of making a painting of a car is buying a painting of a
car). Similarly, if a business expresses itself as aggressive and
competitive, but you think they’re liars, you can predict they’ll
have contradictory marketing (‘competing truths’, since their
mode of relation is competition, and their opposite is the truth).

A fifth form of genuine psychic prediction: take any number of
factors describing a current event or situation you’re in, and
reverse the factors that are different from the subject. This can
be used to predict how someone is feeling, or what their core
motivation are. For example, an artist is at a business convention.
So they’re feeling unconventional, and they feel like making art,
since that is not a different motive from business. Or, a
philosophy society is at an art gallery. So, it thinks its popular art
(‘society’ does not conflict with ‘gallery’), and it thinks its un-
philosophical art, or tries to make connections between art and
philosophy (‘philosophy’ is different from ‘art’ or it can be
debated). Other conclusions might be that they think art is trying
to commercialize philosophy, that philosophy ought to involve
graphics, or to view art or philosophy as a socialist movement.

Those are the eight categories of prediction that I have
determined. I hope this writing may be considered useful to my
readers on this most often unrealized subject.

Works Cited

Coppedge, Nathan.
The Dimensional Psychologist’s Toolkit.
CSIP, 2014