Doesn't this kind of argument work for almost every type of fraud though? "The customers were paying for the fraud, not what was advertised."
How about "sports entertainment" like professional wrestling? They purport to provide a sport, but in reality it's a fraudulently scripted drama. Would that be a fraud?
Customers appear happy to buy into many things even with the full knowledge of what it is.
Okay, so what about religion then? Would it not be fraudulent using this criteria you've laid out? Or maybe it's less fraudulent since many religions operate under a tithing "donation" scheme instead?
It seems you need these criteria:
1. The fraud knows they are duping the subject.
2. The subject truly believes the fraud is real.
In the magician example, 2 does not hold.
In the religion example, 1 does not hold.
Of course, there are _some_ frauds in religious circles. But I don't think the average church minister is rubbing their hands together in anticipation of the next donation.
So as long as the psychic actually believes they are psychic, it's 100% not fraudulent. Got it.
It can't be fraud if your intentions are good, apparently.
I'd love for any lawyer to chime in, but I believe that's the case, yes.
I believe it's similarly not murder if you can prove it wasn't your intent, making it manslaughter or other classifications.
Huge IANAL disclaimer.
Are they supposed to ignore that, not dig into it, and pretend it didn't happen? That's as irrational as asking you to believe it without such an experience.
Exactly.
There's a boat load of generalisations here though so will be plenty of exceptions to what I've said.
edit: it's really weird that there's two comments posted around the same time and making the same point. One comment has several replies agreeing with it where as this one has been downvoted and a comment disagreeing with it. I'm not complaining though, it's just amusing me how erratic this site can sometimes be.
I would strongly push back on both of those assertions, myself.
My last sentence clearly answers that question:
"There's a boat load of generalisations here though so will be plenty of exceptions to what I've said."
I suggest you read peoples comments in full if you intent to rebuke them.
I also notice you didn't touch professional wrestling, another case where while many know it's fake, many others enjoy it as if it were real.
Or if we want to get political, let's talk about religion and Christian churches. Is it fraudulent to offer a religious service to people who believe it's real?
For psychics and religion? not so much. People who blindly take what they are told as the truth may make life defining decisions based on the "advice" given. In some cases the outcome may be benign or even positive, but in most cases a real persons action are influenced by statements not grounded in reality. So overall it is valid to call out these "services" as fraudulent IMO.
If one knows something is untrue then I'd say it's fraud. After decades growing up in increasingly progressive churches I'd say that secular education is whittling away at all the falsifiable claims.
Conveniently there are scriptures like "don't test the Lord your God." So there are parts that, in their view, can never be disproven. (Of course god can and does test people and violate free will.)
EDIT: fixed incomplete quote
When I was a kid we weren’t sure the wrestling was scripted. When people wanted to bet on it. Regulators made it known. People still enjoy it, much like scripted movies and tv.