This may come as a surprise to some, but what we know as modern science began as studies into magic and the occult. One might not recognize this if one were to look at the current view of magic and the occult in the mainstream. To illustrate what I'm talking about I would like to call attention to the fact that natural magic (the study of astrology, alchemy, herbology, etc.) evolved to become the natural sciences. Allow me to explain.
Astronomy as a science owes everything to the practice of astrology. Astrology had us looking to the heavens to discover more about ourselves. We tracked the movements of the stars and planets, some cultures with more precision than others, and we were able to predict what celestial body was going to do what next and perhaps what that meant for us. When the telescope was invented astronomy really came into its own and the "superstitions" of astrology were divorced from the new science.
From the study of herbs and their magical and medicinal effects we arrived at pharmacology. Mankind has known since the dawn of time that certain plants are capable of doing certain things. Some are foods, some are medicines, and some are deadly poisons. Through the study of correspondences and the spirit of the plant we determined what it was capable of, both magically and medicinally. This knowledge of plant medicines led the way to modern pharmaceuticals. Many powerful medicines are still extracted from plants.
Alchemy is many things to many people, but the quest for the power of transformation ultimately led to the birth of chemistry. Over time, alchemy became less about transforming the self and more about transforming metals. From this we began to experiment and observe more closely how substances interacted with one another. New theories emerged and the symbolism of the reactions was forgotten. Thus chemistry was born.
Something else that may come as a surprise to the modern reader is that Isaac Newton was a bit of an occultist. That's right, the man behind universal gravity, calculus, and so much more was an occultist. More specifically, Newton was an alchemist. On top of his more accepted scientific pursuits, Newton had great interest in the Philosopher's Stone. Newton also worked with antimony and it has been said that the star pattern formed by antimony alloys inspired his ideas of light and gravitation.
There is a lesson in all of this. "Occult" simply means "hidden" and we should not run from what is hidden. Some of the greatest things that mankind has discovered have come from the study of the hidden aspects of reality. As such, some might do well not to hastily badmouth occult and magical pursuits. If the natural sciences emerged from natural magic then what mysteries might await us in the study of ceremonial magics like theurgy and goety? How about survival studies? Extra-sensory perception and psychokinesis? Astral projection and out-of-body experience? Instead of shunning modern occult or paranormal pursuits, shouldn't we perhaps be looking to them as a means to gain even more knowledge of our reality?
Wikipedia on natural magic.
More on Isaac Newton's occult studies.
Showing posts with label ESP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ESP. Show all posts
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
The ESP debate rages on.
ESP Report Sets Off Debate on Data Analysis
I think that this is just another example of finding any possible way to mitigate the impact of a study that suggests that ESP exists. If the protocols can't be attacked then attack the data analysis. When attacks on the data analysis fail, the critics will inevitably cry fraud. This is not the first time this has happened and most likely won't be the last. This said, it kind of makes you wonder about all the statistics thrown around in more accepted scientific fields.
In the constant effort to hunt down bias in results, critics might consider the obvious bias against ESP in the first place. I don't think that ESP research has a fair shot under the best of circumstances, so it really won't surprise me when Daryl Bem's research is torn apart and kicked aside like so many papers before it.
Bem's results have allegedly failed replication so far which is, again, not surprising. This happens whenever positive ESP results receive a lot of public attention. There is usually very little discussion of these failed replications though. One of the attempts to replicate this particular study wasn't even a true replication attempt as it did not follow Bem's protocol. This, again, is common when it comes to ESP studies under scrutiny.
Keeping all of this in mind, if we ever hope to have any scientific recognition of psychic abilities then we need to stop relying on statistics that can be made to say whatever each particular side wants them to say. All this gets us is endless battles over statistical analysis and proper interpretation of results. If we really want recognition and acceptance then parapsychology needs to focus on more observable effects. The best that I can think of would be macro-psychokinesis. That is, the movement of objects by mental means.
Most, if not all, demonstrations of psychokinesis on a larger-than-statistical level have been decried as hoaxes with various conjurers stepping forward to demonstrate how they can do the same thing through parlor tricks. Some performers, demonstrating what is ostensibly a psychokinetic effect, have been later exposed as frauds. A small number, however, have not. One such case would be that of D.D. Home, whom I have written about before.
The thing about psychokinesis is that most psychokinetic feats can indeed be duplicated by parlor tricks. That is just the nature of the beast. However, I think it would be foolish to proclaim that the PK feats are tricks when there's no evidence to support that claim in a particular case. Just because something can be duplicated by trickery does not mean that it is impossible by less-deceptive means. When one cries fraud the burden of proof is theirs. All of this in mind, I still think that demonstrating psychokinesis will be the thing that silences the detractors. It may take many years of laboratory study, but I think it's the best bet.
My message then is that anyone that wants psychic abilities to be taken seriously should set about developing their abilities to the highest level possible. It is going to take direct observation of psychic functioning to get it viewed as a real phenomenon. Even then you should expect fire from all sides. There are people that won't be convinced no matter what. Many psychics and researchers alike have been permanently disgraced because there was too much doubt cast on them, too much ambiguity in the results they produced. Some just weren't vigilant enough in examining what they had to offer before offering it, or they tried to augment it with parlor tricks. My advice, then, is try to prove it at your own risk.
Parapsychology going mainstream? - My previous post about this very topic.
Journal’s Paper on ESP Expected to Prompt Outrage - More on the debate and "outrage."
I think that this is just another example of finding any possible way to mitigate the impact of a study that suggests that ESP exists. If the protocols can't be attacked then attack the data analysis. When attacks on the data analysis fail, the critics will inevitably cry fraud. This is not the first time this has happened and most likely won't be the last. This said, it kind of makes you wonder about all the statistics thrown around in more accepted scientific fields.
In the constant effort to hunt down bias in results, critics might consider the obvious bias against ESP in the first place. I don't think that ESP research has a fair shot under the best of circumstances, so it really won't surprise me when Daryl Bem's research is torn apart and kicked aside like so many papers before it.
Bem's results have allegedly failed replication so far which is, again, not surprising. This happens whenever positive ESP results receive a lot of public attention. There is usually very little discussion of these failed replications though. One of the attempts to replicate this particular study wasn't even a true replication attempt as it did not follow Bem's protocol. This, again, is common when it comes to ESP studies under scrutiny.
Keeping all of this in mind, if we ever hope to have any scientific recognition of psychic abilities then we need to stop relying on statistics that can be made to say whatever each particular side wants them to say. All this gets us is endless battles over statistical analysis and proper interpretation of results. If we really want recognition and acceptance then parapsychology needs to focus on more observable effects. The best that I can think of would be macro-psychokinesis. That is, the movement of objects by mental means.
Most, if not all, demonstrations of psychokinesis on a larger-than-statistical level have been decried as hoaxes with various conjurers stepping forward to demonstrate how they can do the same thing through parlor tricks. Some performers, demonstrating what is ostensibly a psychokinetic effect, have been later exposed as frauds. A small number, however, have not. One such case would be that of D.D. Home, whom I have written about before.
The thing about psychokinesis is that most psychokinetic feats can indeed be duplicated by parlor tricks. That is just the nature of the beast. However, I think it would be foolish to proclaim that the PK feats are tricks when there's no evidence to support that claim in a particular case. Just because something can be duplicated by trickery does not mean that it is impossible by less-deceptive means. When one cries fraud the burden of proof is theirs. All of this in mind, I still think that demonstrating psychokinesis will be the thing that silences the detractors. It may take many years of laboratory study, but I think it's the best bet.
My message then is that anyone that wants psychic abilities to be taken seriously should set about developing their abilities to the highest level possible. It is going to take direct observation of psychic functioning to get it viewed as a real phenomenon. Even then you should expect fire from all sides. There are people that won't be convinced no matter what. Many psychics and researchers alike have been permanently disgraced because there was too much doubt cast on them, too much ambiguity in the results they produced. Some just weren't vigilant enough in examining what they had to offer before offering it, or they tried to augment it with parlor tricks. My advice, then, is try to prove it at your own risk.
Parapsychology going mainstream? - My previous post about this very topic.
Journal’s Paper on ESP Expected to Prompt Outrage - More on the debate and "outrage."
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
My ambiguous stance regarding some paranormal topics.
I've been told that when it comes to some paranormal topics that I'm very ambiguous about where I stand. There is a reason for this and it is mostly because I'm not sure where I stand on a lot of things. I believe that the UFO phenomenon is a reality. However, I do not know what is causing it. I believe that Bigfoot may exist but we won't know for sure until we find one.
There are some topics that I'm less ambiguous about because I have more knowledge or experience with them. ESP and PK are two things that I am a strong believer in as I've seen the research that supports both and I've had personal experiences with both. Magic(k) is another thing that I believe in (to some extent) as I have some experience with it. In all of these cases, I don't claim to have the absolute answers of how they work; I just know that they do.
Another reason that I hold to some ambiguity is that I don't want to shove my opinions down other peoples' throats. I'd rather just give my readers the information and let them decide for themselves (which I hope they do anyway, regardless of how I feel about a topic).
I guess the point of all of this is that if you see that I'm not taking a solid stance on some topic or other that it's not because I don't care about it or don't know anything about the topic; it's because I'm trying to remain as impartial as possible for the reader or because I simply can't say for certain. Who can really say much for certain about the paranormal anyway?
There are some topics that I'm less ambiguous about because I have more knowledge or experience with them. ESP and PK are two things that I am a strong believer in as I've seen the research that supports both and I've had personal experiences with both. Magic(k) is another thing that I believe in (to some extent) as I have some experience with it. In all of these cases, I don't claim to have the absolute answers of how they work; I just know that they do.
Another reason that I hold to some ambiguity is that I don't want to shove my opinions down other peoples' throats. I'd rather just give my readers the information and let them decide for themselves (which I hope they do anyway, regardless of how I feel about a topic).
I guess the point of all of this is that if you see that I'm not taking a solid stance on some topic or other that it's not because I don't care about it or don't know anything about the topic; it's because I'm trying to remain as impartial as possible for the reader or because I simply can't say for certain. Who can really say much for certain about the paranormal anyway?
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Stimulus Seekers Do Better on ESP Tests
I finally got around to reading Daryl Bem's paper that I mentioned in this post. (You can find the whole paper in .pdf format here.) I have to say that I'm impressed and I'm anxious to see if this paper will have a very large impact. One thing that it does make more clear is that extroverts (specifically stimulus seekers) seem to do better on ESP tests. This makes psychological sense based on what we know about cortical arousal and stimulus-seeking tendencies.
This is not the first study to discover this; it builds on earlier work that says essentially the same thing. So, if you're the type of person that gets bored easily you may do better on ESP tests than an introvert. I still think we're a while away from unlocking the secrets of psi, but at least this is a start.
This is not the first study to discover this; it builds on earlier work that says essentially the same thing. So, if you're the type of person that gets bored easily you may do better on ESP tests than an introvert. I still think we're a while away from unlocking the secrets of psi, but at least this is a start.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Is there a concerted effort to suppress evidence of the paranormal?
In my studies of the paranormal I have noticed what seems to be an effort by some to obscure, hide, or debunk the most convincing evidence. I'm not talking about Men in Black silencing people that have UFO encounters; I'm talking about supposed "skeptics" making attempts to debunk evidence for things that they are ideologically opposed to, whether it be UFOs or ESP.
One example might be the controversies surrounding the Mars Effect. Another example might be the extensive debate surrounding the results of the ganzfeld and auto-ganzfeld ESP experiments. Perhaps the best examples of this kind of bias against evidence for the paranormal would be "rational skeptics" and the endless attempt to debunk anything and everything that may lend validity to the field of the paranormal. The James Randi Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge is a component of this effort (but not the extent of it) and it should be noted that not just anyone can participate in the Challenge.
Of the rules listed in the application for the Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge I find number twelve to be particularly suspicious. The "media presence" aspect is what I find suspicious and Randi has a history of going after prominent paranormal performers. Going after public figures and exposing their fraud is commendable, but not when that is taken as some kind of strike against the paranormal as a whole. I think that Randi wishes to draw out challengers and then publicly humiliate them in an effort to support his anti-paranormal agenda.
But is there a concerted effort to suppress evidence of the paranormal? I don't think that it's a "concerted" effort. I don't think there's a huge conspiracy to keep people from knowing the truth. I think that the reason why most people aren't aware of the significant evidence for the paranormal is because most people don't like to read academic papers and to a lot of people the paranormal is seen as taboo. When it comes to academics, it seems that any suggestion that there may be truth to paranormal claims is met with harsh criticism. When no evidence of fraud or methodological error is found, those that cannot accept that precognition may be a reality, or find the idea of psychokinesis to be absurd, will often resort to simply ignoring it or attempting to discredit the researcher(s). Worse still is the halfhearted attempt at replication that doesn't use the original protocol but claims negative results that bear on the validity of the original experiment.
My opinion is that these people are just trying to preserve their worldview. It's really no different than creationists doing everything they can to cling to their belief. If one has a totally materialistic and secular view of reality then something like ESP can really shake things up. They really can't be blamed in this sense as everyone participates in this kind of behavior whether we admit it or not. Does this mean that I like this kind of pseudo-skepticism? Not at all. I do, however, accept that the reasons for it don't seem to be any more sinister than simple fear of what we don't understand.
One example might be the controversies surrounding the Mars Effect. Another example might be the extensive debate surrounding the results of the ganzfeld and auto-ganzfeld ESP experiments. Perhaps the best examples of this kind of bias against evidence for the paranormal would be "rational skeptics" and the endless attempt to debunk anything and everything that may lend validity to the field of the paranormal. The James Randi Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge is a component of this effort (but not the extent of it) and it should be noted that not just anyone can participate in the Challenge.
Of the rules listed in the application for the Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge I find number twelve to be particularly suspicious. The "media presence" aspect is what I find suspicious and Randi has a history of going after prominent paranormal performers. Going after public figures and exposing their fraud is commendable, but not when that is taken as some kind of strike against the paranormal as a whole. I think that Randi wishes to draw out challengers and then publicly humiliate them in an effort to support his anti-paranormal agenda.
But is there a concerted effort to suppress evidence of the paranormal? I don't think that it's a "concerted" effort. I don't think there's a huge conspiracy to keep people from knowing the truth. I think that the reason why most people aren't aware of the significant evidence for the paranormal is because most people don't like to read academic papers and to a lot of people the paranormal is seen as taboo. When it comes to academics, it seems that any suggestion that there may be truth to paranormal claims is met with harsh criticism. When no evidence of fraud or methodological error is found, those that cannot accept that precognition may be a reality, or find the idea of psychokinesis to be absurd, will often resort to simply ignoring it or attempting to discredit the researcher(s). Worse still is the halfhearted attempt at replication that doesn't use the original protocol but claims negative results that bear on the validity of the original experiment.
My opinion is that these people are just trying to preserve their worldview. It's really no different than creationists doing everything they can to cling to their belief. If one has a totally materialistic and secular view of reality then something like ESP can really shake things up. They really can't be blamed in this sense as everyone participates in this kind of behavior whether we admit it or not. Does this mean that I like this kind of pseudo-skepticism? Not at all. I do, however, accept that the reasons for it don't seem to be any more sinister than simple fear of what we don't understand.
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Can psychic abilities be learned?
Psychic abilities are typically thought of as gifts that are bestowed on a person, usually at birth. This is what makes them special and able to use ESP and other similar abilities, at least in the popular view. What if it's not just about being born with it, but what if psychic abilities can be learned?
My personal opinion on the matter is that everyone has the potential to be psychic; most people just don't tap that potential. I think that some people are probably more predisposed to psychic functioning than others just as some people are born predisposed to being better at math or sports or art. Does this mean that only those born with the predisposition can have psychic abilities? No more than it means those with the predisposition for math or sports or art are the only ones that can learn those things.
This just means that some people will have to work harder to attain the same level of skill. This also assumes that they even want that skill in the first place. If you don't have the desire to have the skill or to be good at it then there's really no getting it unless you've been gifted with it from the start. Even then, with a predisposition, if you choose not to use that ability then it will atrophy and you may as well not have it at all.
Then we have different areas of psychic ability. Most people are probably better suited to some areas more than others, just like with anything in life. Someone may be really good with the perceptive aspects but have no skill at all with more active abilities like psychokinesis. Some people may be better suited to experiencing things visually while others may be better suited to sensing through feeling or intuition. Again, predispositions come into play with this. This is the view that Pete A. Sanders, Jr. takes in his book You Are Psychic! I highly recommend this book to anyone looking to tap into their own psychic abilities.
I think we also have to take into consideration our society and the overall worldview towards things like psychic abilities. Children are said to have more psychic experiences than adults. The reasoning behind this is that children are still experiencing the world in a fresh way. They haven't had a particular paradigm imposed on them yet so they are more open to whatever may come. As they grow up they are told that things like magic and auras are not real, but just pretend. As they start to believe this then it becomes true to them and they ignore and close off abilities that were natural and effortless to them. That's the popular reasoning anyway.
My advice for (re)awakening your own psychic abilities is to listen to your intuition and take note of how it feels when something is right. Practice the more active abilities. Work out your psychic muscles so they'll grow. Like any skill worth learning, it's going to take some practice to get the hang of it. You can use the Quick ESP Test gadget at the bottom of the page to see how your skills are coming along.
My personal opinion on the matter is that everyone has the potential to be psychic; most people just don't tap that potential. I think that some people are probably more predisposed to psychic functioning than others just as some people are born predisposed to being better at math or sports or art. Does this mean that only those born with the predisposition can have psychic abilities? No more than it means those with the predisposition for math or sports or art are the only ones that can learn those things.
This just means that some people will have to work harder to attain the same level of skill. This also assumes that they even want that skill in the first place. If you don't have the desire to have the skill or to be good at it then there's really no getting it unless you've been gifted with it from the start. Even then, with a predisposition, if you choose not to use that ability then it will atrophy and you may as well not have it at all.
Then we have different areas of psychic ability. Most people are probably better suited to some areas more than others, just like with anything in life. Someone may be really good with the perceptive aspects but have no skill at all with more active abilities like psychokinesis. Some people may be better suited to experiencing things visually while others may be better suited to sensing through feeling or intuition. Again, predispositions come into play with this. This is the view that Pete A. Sanders, Jr. takes in his book You Are Psychic! I highly recommend this book to anyone looking to tap into their own psychic abilities.
I think we also have to take into consideration our society and the overall worldview towards things like psychic abilities. Children are said to have more psychic experiences than adults. The reasoning behind this is that children are still experiencing the world in a fresh way. They haven't had a particular paradigm imposed on them yet so they are more open to whatever may come. As they grow up they are told that things like magic and auras are not real, but just pretend. As they start to believe this then it becomes true to them and they ignore and close off abilities that were natural and effortless to them. That's the popular reasoning anyway.
My advice for (re)awakening your own psychic abilities is to listen to your intuition and take note of how it feels when something is right. Practice the more active abilities. Work out your psychic muscles so they'll grow. Like any skill worth learning, it's going to take some practice to get the hang of it. You can use the Quick ESP Test gadget at the bottom of the page to see how your skills are coming along.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Parapsychology going mainstream?
Can science prove we're psychic?
I haven't found time to read the paper that this article is about, but I hope to soon enough. Judging from the article though, I'd say that this is going to encounter the same stumbling blocks that most parapsychology studies finding positive results encounter.
It seems that already people are trying to shrug the study off because it doesn't provide a working theory. I'm not a science historian, but it seems to me that most often we discover the phenomenon first and then work out the theory afterward. Expecting a theory before an objective phenomenon is taken seriously seems like a very backwards way of doing things to me.
Then we have the problem of replicability. Not everyone agrees on what counts as replicability in the first place, but for now let's focus on the people that have attempted a replication and got negative results. Going solely by the article, it doesn't seem that they really attempted a replication as they didn't follow the exact procedure of the original experiment. How can this be called a failure to replicate when they weren't even copying the original experiment?
Lastly, I suspect that as soon as conventional explanations for the positive results run dry then the cries of fraud will go up. Never mind that an accusation of fraud requires evidence to prove it; it was surely a trick all along! Some people just don't want ESP or psychic abilities to be demonstrated as a reality. It would topple their worldview.
I have a hard time understanding the ferocious opposition to the idea of ESP and psychic abilities in the age of quantum strangeness. There are plenty of things that we can't explain; why ignore ESP when there is evidence that it is a real phenomenon? This is by no means the first study to show results in favor of ESP, though it could turn out to be one of the best known. It could even be the study that makes people stand up and take notice, if it's replicated. Call me a pessimist, but I don't think it will be that simple or easy to get this taken seriously.
I haven't found time to read the paper that this article is about, but I hope to soon enough. Judging from the article though, I'd say that this is going to encounter the same stumbling blocks that most parapsychology studies finding positive results encounter.
It seems that already people are trying to shrug the study off because it doesn't provide a working theory. I'm not a science historian, but it seems to me that most often we discover the phenomenon first and then work out the theory afterward. Expecting a theory before an objective phenomenon is taken seriously seems like a very backwards way of doing things to me.
Then we have the problem of replicability. Not everyone agrees on what counts as replicability in the first place, but for now let's focus on the people that have attempted a replication and got negative results. Going solely by the article, it doesn't seem that they really attempted a replication as they didn't follow the exact procedure of the original experiment. How can this be called a failure to replicate when they weren't even copying the original experiment?
Lastly, I suspect that as soon as conventional explanations for the positive results run dry then the cries of fraud will go up. Never mind that an accusation of fraud requires evidence to prove it; it was surely a trick all along! Some people just don't want ESP or psychic abilities to be demonstrated as a reality. It would topple their worldview.
I have a hard time understanding the ferocious opposition to the idea of ESP and psychic abilities in the age of quantum strangeness. There are plenty of things that we can't explain; why ignore ESP when there is evidence that it is a real phenomenon? This is by no means the first study to show results in favor of ESP, though it could turn out to be one of the best known. It could even be the study that makes people stand up and take notice, if it's replicated. Call me a pessimist, but I don't think it will be that simple or easy to get this taken seriously.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Dowsing
Dowsing is the use of a Y-shaped stick, two L-shaped rods, a pendulum, or even your own body to discover hidden items or information. There are probably many other variations on the technique of dowsing; these are just the ones that I'm most familiar with. Personally, I prefer the L-shaped rods as they are easy to use, easy to read, and don't require a lot of effort or material to make a basic set to practice with.
I've had mixed results with dowsing rods though, to be honest, and I've yet to do a thorough test of my dowsing ability. It is my opinion that the rods only amplify the unconscious motions of the individual and these motions can carry information from the subconscious mind, hence acting as a kind of psychic amplifier. This explanation depends on the belief that the subconscious mind has access to abilities and information that the conscious mind does not.
Historically, dowsing has been used to find water under the ground or to find minerals. "Water witches" were used to determine where a well should be dug. Allegedly, some people still use dowsing to find buried water pipes when maps are unreliable. I've never seriously tried to find something that was underground as I usually have little desire to dig holes in search of things, but if I find that my dowsing ability is pretty good I may change my mind and go looking for buried treasure or something.
Dowsing can apparently be used to find a lot more than water and minerals. As long as the dowser can focus on what they're trying to find then it seems like the rods will amplify that signal. This has been my experience. Recently I used my rods to try to find a missing cat. I seemed to have problems from "interference" at first as the rods kept leading me back to the cat that isn't missing. Once I was able to break away from that it became a matter of what about the cat I was specifically focusing on. I didn't find the missing cat because the rods were leading me onto an adjoining property and it was getting dark, so I decided to call off the search for the day. However, I think I may have some idea of where to look now.
Honestly, I'm hoping the cat just comes back on its own. Dowsing for cats is one of the more absurd things I've ever heard of. Here's the Wikipedia page on dowsing.
I've had mixed results with dowsing rods though, to be honest, and I've yet to do a thorough test of my dowsing ability. It is my opinion that the rods only amplify the unconscious motions of the individual and these motions can carry information from the subconscious mind, hence acting as a kind of psychic amplifier. This explanation depends on the belief that the subconscious mind has access to abilities and information that the conscious mind does not.
Historically, dowsing has been used to find water under the ground or to find minerals. "Water witches" were used to determine where a well should be dug. Allegedly, some people still use dowsing to find buried water pipes when maps are unreliable. I've never seriously tried to find something that was underground as I usually have little desire to dig holes in search of things, but if I find that my dowsing ability is pretty good I may change my mind and go looking for buried treasure or something.
Dowsing can apparently be used to find a lot more than water and minerals. As long as the dowser can focus on what they're trying to find then it seems like the rods will amplify that signal. This has been my experience. Recently I used my rods to try to find a missing cat. I seemed to have problems from "interference" at first as the rods kept leading me back to the cat that isn't missing. Once I was able to break away from that it became a matter of what about the cat I was specifically focusing on. I didn't find the missing cat because the rods were leading me onto an adjoining property and it was getting dark, so I decided to call off the search for the day. However, I think I may have some idea of where to look now.
Honestly, I'm hoping the cat just comes back on its own. Dowsing for cats is one of the more absurd things I've ever heard of. Here's the Wikipedia page on dowsing.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Scientific Evidence for ESP
Not many people know that subjects like ESP and PK are accumulating scientific evidence in favor of their existence. The best evidence of psychokinesis is manipulation of random event generators (such as occurred at Princeton's now defunct PEAR lab). The best evidence for ESP seems to be in the ganzfeld and auto-ganfeld experiments, but there have been many more experimental setups for ESP.
It seems that no matter what the psychic ability being tested is, the effect size is usually very small. Yet, the effect size appears to remain consistent across studies. Meta-analysis has been put to great use in parapsychology because of the ability to compare and examine data from multiple studies. It also allows for small effects to become apparent by putting all of the data into one study.
I could go on and on about parapsychology and the evidence of psychic abilities but I mainly wanted to write this post in order to share with you one of the best papers on the subject I've read. It's by Jessica Utts who is a professor of statistics at UC Davis. It's kind of long and gets a little technical, but if you're as interested in the evidence as I am then you may find it worth your time.
Replication and Meta-Analysis in Parapsychology
It seems that no matter what the psychic ability being tested is, the effect size is usually very small. Yet, the effect size appears to remain consistent across studies. Meta-analysis has been put to great use in parapsychology because of the ability to compare and examine data from multiple studies. It also allows for small effects to become apparent by putting all of the data into one study.
I could go on and on about parapsychology and the evidence of psychic abilities but I mainly wanted to write this post in order to share with you one of the best papers on the subject I've read. It's by Jessica Utts who is a professor of statistics at UC Davis. It's kind of long and gets a little technical, but if you're as interested in the evidence as I am then you may find it worth your time.
Replication and Meta-Analysis in Parapsychology
Monday, October 25, 2010
The Power of Objects
Do objects have power or do we give them power? In many forms of magic there is emphasis on using particular objects to focus or direct metaphysical energies. Could these things be done without the tools? Most likely, I think. The tool merely serves as a kind of key to unlock what our minds can already do. So do objects have innate power or is it all in our heads?
Does a candle's flame hold more power than a light bulb? I'm inclined to say that it does. I feel that a flame holds more connection to the Fire element and all of the archetypal powers that it represents. But is that why it has power, because I think that it does? Does it have power because of its associations and symbolism in my mind? I think that there are a lot of deep subjects I could go into with this but I want to narrow the field a bit.
I feel that magic and parapsychology are just two different ways of looking at the same phenomenon. In parapsychology the emphasis is on anomalous effects that are directly observable, ostensibly coming from the subject. There is more freedom in the practice of magic as the force behind the magic often has more freedom to operate and is not bound by strict parameters, capable of taking whatever path is necessary to bring about the desired change. Magic seems to be more impersonal whereas abilities like ESP and PK almost have to be personal by their very nature. In both cases though, I think that the energy and force behind the feats comes from within the person
I think that in some instances of magic it is the person's own power being allowed to manifest rather than objects having power in and of themselves. I think that the object acts like a key to unlock the safeguards on the subconscious mind. The power of the subconscious mind is thought by some to be enormous (even limitless). I can say from my own experience with ESP and PK that the subconscious mind seems to play some part in how these abilities work. I think this also explains the sometimes erratic manifestation and accuracy of these abilities.
When it comes to magic there is little conscious effort to control the powers of the subconscious. The magic is performed consciously and it is turned loose for the powers that be to manifest the desire in any way they see fit. In my view, fewer limits on the subconscious means more paths for it to do what you want it to do. The conscious act spurs the subconscious mind into action but in a less direct way than "Read his thoughts," or "Move that object." Magic usually has a much less strict time frame as well.
I think that by turning over the power to something like an object or a deity, we remove ourselves from the equation enough to not stand in our own way when it comes to harnessing the power of our minds. Perhaps this is for the best, this mental safeguard. Imagine what the world would be like if every conscious whim were manifested? It seems to me that it might be a very scary place.
Maybe it's not the carvings and the sigils or the symbolism and the ritual that is powerful but the person using these things that holds all the power. Perhaps all these things do is allow the person to unleash their full potential? What about psychometry then? Psychometry is the ability to read the history of an object through psychic means because of the emotional and energetic imprints left on the object by people that are in close contact with it.
So objects can hold energy and impressions, but can objects hold their own power? If they do then perhaps it is power that has been imprinted by human beings that can be picked up by other human beings, similar to telepathy between individuals only with an object as the go-between. Perhaps magical objects or enchanted objects can pass their powers on to others because of suggestions planted in the mind of the new owner or because of unconscious reading of the object through psychometry. From this suggestion the new owner's mind would take over where the last owner left off.
These are just some thoughts I've had while comparing parapsychology with magic. I would appreciate any thoughts from the more magically inclined on this subject. Let me know if I'm out of line or on to something with a comment. If nothing else, I find this interesting to think about and hopefully you do too. See you next time.
Does a candle's flame hold more power than a light bulb? I'm inclined to say that it does. I feel that a flame holds more connection to the Fire element and all of the archetypal powers that it represents. But is that why it has power, because I think that it does? Does it have power because of its associations and symbolism in my mind? I think that there are a lot of deep subjects I could go into with this but I want to narrow the field a bit.
I feel that magic and parapsychology are just two different ways of looking at the same phenomenon. In parapsychology the emphasis is on anomalous effects that are directly observable, ostensibly coming from the subject. There is more freedom in the practice of magic as the force behind the magic often has more freedom to operate and is not bound by strict parameters, capable of taking whatever path is necessary to bring about the desired change. Magic seems to be more impersonal whereas abilities like ESP and PK almost have to be personal by their very nature. In both cases though, I think that the energy and force behind the feats comes from within the person
I think that in some instances of magic it is the person's own power being allowed to manifest rather than objects having power in and of themselves. I think that the object acts like a key to unlock the safeguards on the subconscious mind. The power of the subconscious mind is thought by some to be enormous (even limitless). I can say from my own experience with ESP and PK that the subconscious mind seems to play some part in how these abilities work. I think this also explains the sometimes erratic manifestation and accuracy of these abilities.
When it comes to magic there is little conscious effort to control the powers of the subconscious. The magic is performed consciously and it is turned loose for the powers that be to manifest the desire in any way they see fit. In my view, fewer limits on the subconscious means more paths for it to do what you want it to do. The conscious act spurs the subconscious mind into action but in a less direct way than "Read his thoughts," or "Move that object." Magic usually has a much less strict time frame as well.
I think that by turning over the power to something like an object or a deity, we remove ourselves from the equation enough to not stand in our own way when it comes to harnessing the power of our minds. Perhaps this is for the best, this mental safeguard. Imagine what the world would be like if every conscious whim were manifested? It seems to me that it might be a very scary place.
Maybe it's not the carvings and the sigils or the symbolism and the ritual that is powerful but the person using these things that holds all the power. Perhaps all these things do is allow the person to unleash their full potential? What about psychometry then? Psychometry is the ability to read the history of an object through psychic means because of the emotional and energetic imprints left on the object by people that are in close contact with it.
So objects can hold energy and impressions, but can objects hold their own power? If they do then perhaps it is power that has been imprinted by human beings that can be picked up by other human beings, similar to telepathy between individuals only with an object as the go-between. Perhaps magical objects or enchanted objects can pass their powers on to others because of suggestions planted in the mind of the new owner or because of unconscious reading of the object through psychometry. From this suggestion the new owner's mind would take over where the last owner left off.
These are just some thoughts I've had while comparing parapsychology with magic. I would appreciate any thoughts from the more magically inclined on this subject. Let me know if I'm out of line or on to something with a comment. If nothing else, I find this interesting to think about and hopefully you do too. See you next time.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
If you believe in telekinesis raise my hand.
Telekinesis (or psychokinesis, as I prefer to call it) is, in my opinion, the holy grail of psychic ability. There has been a lot more scientific research into extra-sensory perception (ESP) than there has been into psychokinesis (PK). Most "How To" books on psychic abilities don't even provide a definition of psychokinesis, let alone instructions on how to make progress toward acquiring the ability. There has been recent work in studying micro-PK, or psychokinesis acting on microscopic (even quantum) systems such as random number generators. While interesting, these test results are not particularly convincing. Certainly they are not as convincing as the feats of Russian psychic Nina Kulagina (shown in the video above). The story of Nina Kulagina is a very interesting one and PK was not her only feat. It was the one she is most famous for, however.
Accusations of trickery aside, I find cases like Kulagina's to be very convincing and not just because objects are moving. Physical tests were allegedly done on Kulagina throughout her stint of performing PK and they revealed some very interesting things were occurring with her body. These things included, but were not limited to, exhaustion, shallow pulse, weight loss during her PK sessions, irregular heart beat, high blood sugar, and a disturbed endocrine system. It's believed by some that the strain of performing PK so often contributed to her death. At this point I would like to note that Nina Kulagina is not the only well-known telekinetic. I mention her here because of her popularity which is perhaps rivaled by only Uri Geller (who's surrounding controversy is an entirely different subject).
Personally, out of all psychic phenomena, I find PK to be the most interesting and ostensibly the easiest to verify. It seems to me that it should be a lot easier to determine if someone is moving something with their mind or using tricks than if they are reading someone's mind or just making some lucky guesses. I also find it interesting because it's just damn cool. To me it seems like telepathy or precognition are relatively benign when compared to the ability to move things around with your mind, even if they are just matchsticks and compasses.
There are many theories about how PK might be possible or how a person may perform it but as you might expect there is no published experimental evidence to support these theories. None that I'm aware of, anyway. Any correlations between physical phenomena and psychic activity seem to apply to ESP alone, probably because that seems to be the area of psi research that has the most data. The only relevant correlation that I'm aware of is produced by Wilkinson and Gauld in their observation that there is a small tendency for the days of onset of poltergeist and haunting cases to coincide with days of higher-than-usual geomagnetic activity. While incredibly interesting, it is not very enlightening as to what allows for psychokinesis to take place.
So this is the challenge with psychokinesis. There is no accepted theory and no experimental evidence to back up any one theory. Most, if not all, demonstrations of psychokinesis are either proven to be frauds or are accused of being frauds because of the distaste for psi in the first place. Combine this with the lack of funding available for parapsychology research and we have a very complex (and difficult) puzzle.
I happen to believe that many cases of "poltergeist" activity actually emanate from a living human being. The contemporary term for "poltergeist" activity is "recurrent spontaneous psychokinesis" or RSPK. I think this reflects the change in thinking toward poltergeist activity. Many cases of alleged poltergeists seem to surround particular people and abate when the psychological issues of these people are resolved or the individuals reach the end of puberty.
Personally, I'm a believer in PK. I've had enough personal experiences to be convinced of the reality of PK. This doesn't mean that I'm any closer to solving the riddle of how it works or how to perform it though. If you are interested in more information about Nina Kulagina or about learning psychic abilities then please see the links below. Take care until next time, and if you happen to discover the secret to mastering telekinesis do be sure to share it with me in a comment.
More on Nina Kulagina.
A website with many articles related to learning psychic abilities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)