Showing posts with label PK. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PK. Show all posts

Monday, May 6, 2013

Consensual Reality and Psychokinetic Safeguards


The notion of consensual reality is popular in some metaphysical and philosophical circles. The basic idea is that reality is the product of the consensus of the minds experiencing it. Inertia and gravity are things that most people will agree about the existence of. If you put something down it will stay there until something moves it. Gravity constantly pulls things down. These are pretty basic truths. The question that consensual reality brings up is "Do gravity and inertia work because we believe they do?" An even deeper question is "Are gravity and inertia so inescapable simply because we believe they are?"

I'm not trying to touch too deeply on consensual reality but it brings me around to psychokinesis and other paranormal events that could be the product of psychokinetic processes. Are psychokinetic feats so difficult because we've been conditioned all our lives to believe that they should be? Does the consensus have anything to do with this? I bring all of this up because in my own PK experiments with moving objects I've noticed that once I make a little progress in making something move it suddenly gains a mind of its own and fights me. Pinwheels that will rotate one way suddenly decide to do the opposite of what I will them to do when I decide I want them to spin clockwise instead of counterclockwise. They will just stop dead or wobble or move in little half-rotations back and forth like they can't decide what to do.

Psychokinesis is no easy feat but manifesting small effects is not as difficult as one would think. I feel that this may be because one eventually thinks it's not that difficult. You come up with a neat visualization or get really psyched up and you make it budge a little. That little budge makes you believe enough until you're making the pinwheel do rotations. Eventually you can make it move under glass and that erases all the doubts that it could just be a draft or the heat of your hands. Then the question becomes "Where do I go from here?" and it usually leads to trying to move bigger stuff that has more inertia and more friction acting on it. This is where I usually hit my roadblock and get bored.

Back to consensual reality. Is the shared believe that heavy things should be hard to move what stops us from being able to do it? Can we overcome this sort of passive shared belief with an active personal one? That seems to be the mechanism at work with PK acting on a pinwheel. It is an act of sheer will in the face of everything we've been taught to believe about reality that takes us over that first hurdle. Perhaps that pinwheel enters our personal sphere of reality enough for us to be able to manipulate it free of the constraints of the consensus. Maybe our continued attention, intention, and interest pulls that pinwheel into our sway and away from the collective sway of other minds saying it should sit still no matter how hard we stare at it. Could we overcome bigger obstacles with more time and effort? If you kept pushing this notion of personal reality could you eventually do more?

Maybe impressive psychokinesis is hard on purpose. Maybe consensual reality is a safeguard for all reality. I mentioned earlier that even after I succeed in making the pinwheel move, at a certain point it rebels against me. It moves but with a seeming mind of its own. Maybe it's trying to get back into that consensual equilibrium. If our minds are so powerful that they contribute to the rules of reality then maybe reality needs a safeguard. If everyone could manipulate matter however they wanted with just their thoughts then imagine what kind of chaos there would be. Or what if just thinking something caused it to happen with no intent on your part? You have a fleeting image of someone being pushed down the stairs and then they go tumbling. What if you didn't want that to happen but it did anyway just because you thought it? Do you see how distressing that could be? We would have to have supreme control of our thoughts and impulses.

Maybe this is why it's so hard to use psychokinesis. Perhaps this is why it's necessary to build extreme intent to perform PK. If just thinking something caused it to happen we would all be in a lot of trouble. Consensual reality could be helping keep us all safe in this way by building and enforcing the rule that things just don't happen because you think them. This is a good thing.

It seems the key to psychokinetic ability is riding that line between personal intent and consensual safeguard. We can only push on that barrier for so long until it seems to push back. Maybe this is how uncontrolled psychokinetic activity happens, things that are often blamed on poltergeists? It's just a thought. All of this is just conjecture. I've been thinking on it deeply enough lately that I thought I would share it. Hopefully I've been clear enough that this makes some amount of sense.

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."

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?

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Poltergeists: Spirits of the Dead or Uncontrolled Psychokinesis?

Of all ghostly phenomena, poltergeists are the most startling.  Objects move, appear and disappear, and the poltergeist may even lash out at people violently.  The popular notion of the poltergeist is reflected in the meaning of its name:  "noisy spirit."  There are some that believe that poltergeist activity may actually come from a living human being.  How is that possible?  Spontaneous recurrent psychokinesis (RSPK).

The trend in parapsychology in recent years has been to lean toward the RSPK explanation for poltergeist activity.  This makes some sense as poltergeist activity is commonly focused on one person, the activity only present in their vicinity.  This explanation proposes that some individuals, when under emotional distress, will release that tension through psychokinesis.  These people are usually completely unaware that they are causing these strange events and many are terrified of what's happening.  This leads to the belief in a noisy spirit haunting the person or place.

This implies that people are capable of amazing feats of psychokinesis when under stress, but they are not in conscious control of what happens.  This explanation also requires no idea of an afterlife to explain poltergeist activity.  Poltergeist activity, however, is only one small part of the greater realm of ghosts and hauntings.

Then again, maybe both the spirits-of-the-dead and the RSPK theories are accurate.  If a deceased person is able to perform the seemingly impossible feats of a poltergeist then why wouldn't a living person be able to do the same?  I have no preference, myself.  I think that one is just as likely as the other and that they are not mutually exclusive.  I am convinced of the human capacity for psychokinesis and I also find it likely that we continue on in some form after death.  I hope that future research will shed light on both of these subjects.

If you would like to read more about ghosts, poltergeists, and the quest for answers then please see this article.

Friday, December 10, 2010

Spoon (and Fork) Bending

Anyone that's interested in psychokinesis is aware of the idea of bending a spoon with your mind.  This has become a stereotype of ESP and PK research/ability.  When I was starting out with psi I tried my hand at bending cutlery using the instructions at forkbend.com, back when it was called fork-you.com.  I'll let you peruse the site and decide whether you want to try it or not.  I just want to leave some pictures of my results; maybe you'll find them motivating.  The three pictures below are of my first successful fork-bending.


The following three pictures are of my first successful spoon-bending.


These two are by far my best attempts.  I've had limited success since but I don't really play with this anymore.  Once I accomplished it a couple of times, I got bored.  In case you want to skip right to the chase, here is the beginning of the how-to at forkbend.com.  Note that I did not do any of this in a group setting.  While it may be easier (as the site suggests), it is not necessary to be in a group the first time.  Good luck!

Monday, December 6, 2010

The Plethora of Kinetic Abilities

If you hang around in psionics-oriented forums and communities for very long you will eventually see such fancy terms as "pyrokinesis" or "electrokinesis" or even "geokinesis."  I can understand the desire to want to differentiate between things that you may be affecting with terms specific to the substance.  However, I think that there comes a certain point when it becomes cumbersome and unnecessary.  All of this is why I prefer the umbrella term of psychokinesis.

Thinking about it logically for a second, all of these abilities consist of you using your mind to control or move something.  This would qualify them all as psychokinesis.  I just don't see the reasoning behind giving a fancy name to every particular way you could possibly use psychokinesis.  In my opinion, if you can move one thing with psychokinesis you should have the same ability to move another substance unless there's some kind of psychological block in place.

Words like "pyrokinesis" are convenient for telling people that you're working on  manipulating fire through psychokinesis.  Terms like "atmokinesis" or "aerokinesis" seem to overlap, as I imagine there would be a lot of air manipulation going on if you were manipulating the atmosphere.  Because of this, I just think that sometimes it's superfluous to use these terms.  I have nothing against people that use these terms, but they probably shouldn't be surprised when others have to ask "What is that?" and the practitioner has to explain it anyway, perhaps defeating the purpose of the specialized term.

In summary, I don't really care much for it.  I prefer to just use the umbrella term of psychokinesis.  I recognize that these designations must be useful to someone though, so to each their own.  I sometimes substitute "telekinesis" for "psychokinesis" when around people that don't know what psychokinesis means.

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

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.