Parapsychology vs Religion and Science

[Student of X]

Ok, I like a challenge. So I'll try to defend parapsychology against any opposing perspective, be it a scientific perspective or a religious perspective. Bring it on!

An example of a "religious perspective" against "psi" (psychic ability):

RELIGION AGAINST PARAPSYCHOLOGY

"Diviners, foretellers of human fate by stars, by the flight of birds, etc., those who call spirits of the dead, guess right the secret thoughts of people, as well as sorcerers, magicians, wizards, exorcists, charmers and so on exist for ages. Religion always treated this kind of fictions extremely negatively. At present all of these fabricated phenomena has been united under the name of "parapsychology" or "extrasensory perception".

As these names show, the question is of phenomena, which remain, as if, outside the embrace of science, information that reaches the brain by some unknown ways out of sense organs, and influence that is exerted on the brains of other persons by the same ways. But telepathy or bio-information (perception of one's thoughts by another person without the help of any apparatus and even of sense organs), spiritism (calling of spirits of the dead), psychokinesis (the ability to move objects by the will-power, that is, without touching them), proscopy or precognition (the gift of prophecy) and other up-to-date names do not change the main point of the matter. That is why the judgment on these fictitious phenomena in the Holy Bible (Old Testament and New Testament), in the Holy Qur'an, in Hadith of Muhammad ring true even today.

The persons which as if can read the thoughts in the brains of other people are named "telepaths" or "extrasenses". Among the extrasenses that today addict themselves to doctoring one can see representatives of absolutely different professions, which have nothing to do with medicine-journalists, philosophers, engineers, geologists, teachers, sportsmen, and even illiterate sanitary engineers and unskilled labourers. For some reason or other this does not worry anyone seriously, nobody institutes criminal proceedings against them, and the persons are found which easily entrust to extrasenses "the greatest blessing", that is, their health. But the Prophet Muhammad had said as far back as in the VII century: "The man who begins doctoring with unknown medical abilities and practice, is guilty."

And an example of a "scientific perspective" (or skeptic perspective, if you will) against psi:

“There is no firm evidence for the existence of telepathy, ESP or whatever we wish to call it, and I think it is the refuge of scoundrels in many aspects for them to turn to something like quantum physics, which uses a totally different language from the regular English that we are accustomed to using from day to day, to merely say, oh that's where the answer lies, because that's all very fuzzy anyway. No it's not very fuzzy, and I think that his opinion will be differed with by the scientific body in general ...” -James Randi

So, lets get a debate rolling!

 

[meogi]

Why has no 'psychic' convinced Randi?

 

[Storm]

Who's Randi?

 

[meogi]

About James Randi

 

[Storm]

OK, then your question has a simple answer. He's decided that there's no such thing as psychic ability, and nothing's going to persuade him otherwise. The same way people remain YEC.

 

[meogi]

But that's not true. No one has even taken the challenge.

A challenge the applicant creates. Why is that?

 

[gnomon]

Let's not derail on Randi.

What exactly is a proposition the OP puts forth?

 

[meogi]

Let's not derail on Randi.

Derail, from what?

What exactly is a proposition the OP puts forth?

The OP didn't present a position - he's on the defense. Randi's the only offense so far.

How about, how do ghosts, souls, etc interact with the real world? And why so sporadic? You think it'd be commonplace, given all the humans who have lived before us.

 

[gnomon]

I'm a big fan of Randi.

His debunking of Geller, the Carlos episode and revealing faith healers such as Popoff are classics.

I'm just waiting for Student of X to provide something more.

 

[Storm]

Derail, from what?

The OP didn't present a position - he's on the defense. Randi's the only offense so far.

FTR, I'm not joinging the defense. I just didn't think Randi was a good argument.

 

[Student of X]

No one has even taken the challenge.

Do you mean that no one has applied to the challenge? Or that no one has beaten the challenge? It certainly isn't easy to successfully apply for the challenge...lots of hoops to jump through. Too many.

In any case, the challenge is not a meaningful test, as even Randi himself admits.

"I agree, the million-dollar challenge is not, in any way, a "meaningful test," nor have I ever represented that it is." -James Randi

 

[Student of X]

How about, how do ghosts, souls, etc interact with the real world? And why so sporadic? You think it'd be commonplace, given all the humans who have lived before us.

Well...I don't know. Psychically, I would say, if they exist. What is the "real world"? What is a "soul"? I've had a poltergeist experience many years ago and parapsychology does have a bit to say about poltergeists. It seems that RSPK is a strong consideration.

Have you ever heard of the Philip experiment?

 

[Student of X]

Let's not derail on Randi.

What exactly is a proposition the OP puts forth?

A few propositions, I suppose. First that parapsychology is legitimate, and second that psi is real and very misunderstood. Third, the implications of the reality of psi are profound for religion and science. Some religious people and some secular people would argue against these, and I would argue against them.

What do parapsychologists study?

Many feel that the strangest, and most interesting, aspect of parapsychological phenomena is that they do not appear to be limited by the known boundaries of space or time. In addition, they blur the sharp distinction usually made between mind and matter. In popular usage, the basic parapsychological phenomena are categorized as follows:

ESP: Extra-sensory perception; a general term for obtaining information about events beyond the reach of the normal senses. This term subsumes telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, and presentiment

Clairvoyance: Sometimes called remote viewing; obtaining information about events at remote locations, beyond the reach of the normal senses.

Precognition: Also called premonition. Obtaining information about future events, where the information could not be inferred through normal means. Many people report dreams that appear to be precognitive.

Presentiment: This is where physiological parameters may change prior to the application of a stimulus, suggestive of the fact that on an unconscious level the person knew what was coming before it occurred (and before it was even randomly chosen).

Telepathy: Direct mind-to-mind communication.

Mind-Matter Interaction: Previously known as psychokinesis or PK; direct mental interaction with physical objects, animate or inanimate.

Anpsi: Psi in animals.

NDE: Near death experience; an experience reported by those who were revived from nearly dying. Often refers to a core experience that includes feelings of peace, OBE, seeing lights and other phenomena.

OBE: Out-of-body experience; the experience of feeling separated from the body, often accompanied by visual perceptions as though from above the body.

Reincarnation: The belief that we live successive lives, with primarily evidence coming from the apparent recollections of previous lives by very small children.

Haunting: Recurrent phenomena reported to occur in particular locations that include apparitions, sounds, movement of objects, and other effects.

Place Memory: the apparent ability of a building or location to hold recorded impressions of people and events that transpired in the past.

Poltergeist: Large-scale PK phenomena often attributed to spirits, but which are now thought to be due to a living person or group of people. Although reported in all age groups, the agent is most frequently an adolescent.

Psi: A neutral term for parapsychological phenomena, inclusive of both ESP and mind-matter interaction. Psi, psychic, and psychical are synonyms.

 

[meogi]

Do you mean that no one has applied to the challenge? Or that no one has beaten the challenge?

No one who has applied (and was accepted) has attempted their own challenge. (I wouldn't be surprised if that was due to the 'pay your own way' clause in the challenge.)

In any case, the challenge is not a meaningful test, as even Randi himself admits.

Agreed, it's the essence of his argument I was trying to bring up... Why is it so hard to provide repeatable evidence (of what appears to be a 'skill')?

It seems that RSPK is a strong consideration.

Have you ever heard of the Philip experiment?

Thanks, havn't been introduced to either. I'll look into them and get back to ya.

 

[rockondon]

I'd say Randi is a good argument. A million bucks for one day's time, all you have to do is prove it. What's important is that the person agrees to certain conditions (ie..a controlled setting) and they give it a go. Hundreds have tried, all have failed. Why has no one collected the million bucks using parapsychology?

In any case, if you're the one claiming that parapsychology works then the burden of proof is on you. What evidence do you have that it works?

 

[Student of X]

I'd say Randi is a good argument. A million bucks for one day's time, all you have to do is prove it.

You make it sound so easy. Please read this:

Michael Prescott's Blog: The challenge, part one

And this:

The Myth of the Million Dollar Challenge

In any case, if you're the one claiming that parapsychology works then the burden of proof is on you. What evidence do you have that it works?

There is a great deal of evidence from parapsychological experiments. I'll give you some examples:

REPLICATION AND META-ANALYSIS IN PARAPSYCHOLOGY

[This paper was published in "Statistical Science," 1991, Vol. 6, No. 4, 363-403.]

ABSTRACT

Parapsychology, the laboratory study of psychic phenomena, has had its history interwoven with that of statistics. Many of the controversies in parapsychology have focused on statistical issues, and statistical models have played an integral role in the experimental work. Recently, parapsychologists have been using meta-analysis as a tool for synthesizing large bodies of work. This paper presents an overview of the use of statistics in parapsychology and offers a summary of the meta-analyses that have been conducted. It begins with some anecdotal information about the involvement of statistics and statisticians with the early history of parapsychology.

Next, it is argued that most nonstatisticians do not appreciate the connection between power and "successful" replication of experimental effects. Returning to parapsychology, a particular experimental regime is examined by summarizing an extended debate over the interpretation of the results. A new set of experiements designed to resolve the debate is then reviewed. Finally, meta-analyses from several areas of parapsychology are summarized. It is concluded that the overall evidence indicates that there is an anomalous effect in need of an explanation.

Experimental Evidence Suggestive of Anomalous Consciousness Interactions
Deborah L. Delanoy,
Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, U.K.

[...]

This paper will present seven major meta-analyses carried out on various parapsychological databases. These seven were chosen as they demonstrate both ESP and PK research, and highlight the wide scope of psi experimentation which has been conducted over the last 60 years. Meta-analysis is a term which refers to a group of statistical procedures that are used to summarise and describe bodies of research.

They provide a systematic means of combining results from groups of related individual studies to assess overall consistency of results, and can assist in identifying variables within the database that appear to affect outcomes, known as “moderating variables”. Meta-analytic techniques provide quantitative, as opposed to qualitative, reviews of bodies of research. The term “meta-analysis” was first coined by Glass in 1976[1], although the basic procedures had been known for several decades (Snedecor [2]; Mosteller and Bush [3]). More recently, many books have been published detailing methods, procedures and theoretical considerations for conducting meta-analyses (e.g. Glass, McGaw and Smith [4]; Hedges and Olkin [5]; Wolf [6]; Hunter and Schmidt [7]; and Rosenthal [8]); these references will provide further details of the procedures and statistical formulae described generally below.

[...]

Testing nonlocal observation as a source of intuitive knowledge

This study explored the hypothesis that in some cases intuitive knowledge arises from perceptions that are not mediated through the ordinary senses. The possibility of detecting such nonlocal observation was investigated in a pilot test based on the effects of observation on a quantum system. Participants were asked to imagine that they could intuitively perceive a low-intensity laser beam in a distant Michelson interferometer. If such observation were possible, it would theoretically perturb the photons' quantum wave functions and change the pattern of light produced by the interferometer. The optical apparatus was located inside a light-tight, double-steel walled, shielded chamber. Participants sat quietly outside the chamber with eyes closed. The light patterns were recorded by a cooled digital camera once per second, and average illumination levels of these images were compared in counterbalanced mental blocking versus nonblocking conditions.

By design, perturbation would produce a lower overall level of illumination, which was predicted to occur during the blocking condition. Based on a series of planned experimental sessions, the outcome was in accordance with the prediction (z = -2.82; P = .002). This result was primarily due to nine sessions involving experienced meditators (combined z = -4.28; P = 9.4 x 10(-6)); the other nine sessions with nonmeditators were not significant (combined z = 0.29; P = .61). The same experimental protocol run immediately after 15 of these test sessions, but with no one present, revealed no hardware or protocol artifacts that might have accounted for these results (combined control z = 1.50; P = .93). Conventional explanations for these results were considered and judged to be implausible. This pilot study suggests the presence of a nonlocal perturbation effect that is consistent with traditional concepts of intuition as a direct means of gaining knowledge about the world, and with the predicted effects of observation on a quantum system.

Electroencephalographic evidence of correlated event-related signals between the brains of spatially and sensory isolated human subjects

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether correlated event-related potentials (ERPs) can be detected between the brains of spatially and sensory isolated human subjects.

DESIGN AND SETTING: Simultaneous digitized electroencephalograms (EEGs) were recorded from the occipital area in pairs of human subjects placed in sound attenuated rooms separated by 10 meters. One person relaxed in one of the rooms while the other received visual stimulation while in the other room. Prior to each experiment, members of the pair were randomly designated as sender and receiver. Sessions were subsequently repeated with subjects reversing their roles. Previous to each session, the sender was instructed "to attempt sending an image/thought." The receiver was instructed "to remain open to receive any image/thought from his/her partner." Alternating stimulus-on/stimulus-off conditions were presented throughout the session to the sender, while a stimulus-off condition was presented to the receiver.

SUBJECTS: Thirty-seven (37) female, and 23 male subjects (n = 60; 30 pairs) participated in the study. Subjects knew each other well and claimed to have previous experience of being emotionally/psychologically connected to one another. OUTCOME MEASURES: A Runs test was applied to compare EEG "hits" in the receiver's EEG during the sender' stimulus-on condition versus sender's stimulus-off conditions. Test results at p < 0.01 were considered evidence of correlated brain signals. Pairs in whom at least one member had significant results were invited back for replication.

RESULTS: Of the 60 subjects tested, 5 (4 women/1 man) showed significantly higher brain activation (p < 0.01) during their sending partner's stimulus-on condition as compared to stimulus-off condition. Using the Stouffer z meta-analytic method all receiver EEG results across all 60 subjects were combined by transforming the individual session p values into z scores. Data analyses showed overall significant results for EEG data recorded during the flickering condition (z =-3.28, p = 0.0005) as well as nonsignificant results for data recorded during the static condition (z = 0.35, p = 0.64). Four pairs participated in a replication experiment during which one pair replicated the effect.

CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that in some pairs of human subjects a signal may be detected in the brain of a distant member of the pair when the brain of the other member is visually stimulated. These data support the findings of similar studies performed in seven laboratories reported in the peer-reviewed literature since 1963. Research in this area should now proceed with investigation of its physical and biologic mechanism, its generalizability to varying populations and relationships, and its clinical application.


I could go on and on, there's PLENTY more where this came from. But posts are limited to 10000 characters.

 

[Student of X]

Why is it so hard to provide repeatable evidence (of what appears to be a 'skill')?

Anytime you study human performance, you are going to get varying results. Especially when it comes to the mind, and especially when there are variables involved which we don't really have a good handle on yet. There are psychological variables, sociological variables, physiological variables, and environmental variables involved in psi performance. Psi comes from the unconscious mind, and therefore the conscious mind isn't always calling the shots. Sometimes the conscious mind isn't in the loop at all. These variables can, on occasion, make things difficult for researchers. Sometimes answers lead to more questions.

New insights into the links between ESP and geomagnetic activity

By Adrian Ryan, in the Journal of Scientific Exploration, Fall 2008

A database of 343 free-response ESP trials conducted at centers in the U.K. was constructed in order to test the hypothesis that the relatively fast varying components of geomagnetic activity, geomagnetic pulsations, might be driving the reported associations between ESP, geomagnetic activity and local sidereal time. Local geomagnetic field-strength measurements taken at 1-second intervals during 99 trials, and at 5-second intervals during 244 trials, were converted by fast Fourier transform into power within five frequency bands. Two patterns were observed: ESP was found to succeed only during periods of enhanced pulsation activity within the 0.2-0.5 Hz band, but ESP effect was absent during the most disturbed periods of activity in the 0.025-0.1 Hz band.

The pattern of ESP effect by local sidereal time was similar to that found by Spottiswoode (1997b), and this shape was found to be attributable to the pattern of ESP results by pulsation activity in the 0.2-0.5 Hz band.

The observed patterns were demonstrated to have excellent explanatory power in terms of accounting for findings previously reported in the literature.

Go here for the full paper

 

[Student of X]

I think the recent wave of presentiment experiments is very exciting.

Presentiment: This is where physiological parameters may change prior to the application of a stimulus, suggestive of the fact that on an unconscious level the person knew what was coming before it occurred (and before it was even randomly chosen).

Basically what you do in a presentiment trial is sit someone down in front of a computer and show them different pictures randomly. Some pictures will be very disturbing, or very arousing, and some won't. You monitor physiological changes as they view the stimulus, and then do an analysis. It turns out that the body responds in subtle ways to disturbing or arousing stimulus 1-3 seconds BEFORE the stimulus is shown or even randomly chosen. There are lots of variations in presentiment studies. And presentiment experiments are easy to replicate.

Please Read:

A Brain Response to a Future Event?

 

[Storm]

I'd say Randi is a good argument. A million bucks for one day's time, all you have to do is prove it. What's important is that the person agrees to certain conditions (ie..a controlled setting) and they give it a go. Hundreds have tried, all have failed. Why has no one collected the million bucks using parapsychology?

In any case, if you're the one claiming that parapsychology works then the burden of proof is on you. What evidence do you have that it works?

Since I'm the one who said Randi wasn't a good argument, I'm assuming this is addressed to me. I'm not claiming anything.

 

[Student of X]

Since I'm the one who said Randi wasn't a good argument, I'm assuming this is addressed to me. I'm not claiming anything.

I would echo the sentiment that Randi isn't a good argument.

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/whoswho/index.htm