Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site decwrl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-pbsvax!cooper From: cooper@pbsvax.DEC (Topher Cooper HLO2-3/M08 DTN225-5819) Newsgroups: net.philosophy Subject: Re: Parapsychology. Message-ID: <970@decwrl.UUCP> Date: Tue, 22-Oct-85 13:15:35 EDT Article-I.D.: decwrl.970 Posted: Tue Oct 22 13:15:35 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 24-Oct-85 00:02:14 EDT Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Lines: 145 >>Apparent paranormal phenomena has been elicited in the laboratory many >>(conservatively speaking, hundreds) times under conditions most scientists >>would consider highly rigorous, particularly if they were not informed that >>the experiment were a parapsychology experiment. > > . . . Please document these claims. >Parapsychology is not widely accepted in the scientific community precisely >because it has *not* been demonstrated in the way you calim. > >-- Jim Balter (ima!jim) Glad to. It is obviously impractical for me to personally summarize over the net a literature consisting of over 3000 papers, and I'm sure that no one expects me to. Instead I'll give some useful citations and anyone interested can try to check them out themselves. Unfortunately even the major publications are hard to find in libraries so you may have to look around some. There are lots of primary sources but two stand out: *The Journal of Parapsychology*: this is the journal started by J.B. Rhine in the late 30's. Much of the early work, as in any field, is flawed but these flaws were quickly found and corrected. Early issues are interesting to read for this very reason: one can watch a new science being born. Standards have been high throughout the Journal's lifetime. A useful feature is the section of abstracts in each issue. This includes works published elsewhere and also work that, for one reason or another, remains unpublished. The unpublished papers can be obtained for a nominal copying charge from "The Foundation for Research on the Nature of Man" (FRNM) which publishes the Journal. The most common reason for non-publication is lack of overall significant scoring, this service was in part inspired as a response to criticisms of selective publication as the source of "psi" results. *The Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research* (JASPR): early issues (from 1906) concentrated on field work and are thus rather weak in evidential terms. Somewhere around 1925 the ASPR was "taken over" by "spiritualists." Although there was occasional good work published during this period, it could not really be considered a properly refereed, scientific journal, and can't be taken too seriously. In the early 40's, however, it got back to a scientific orientation, and high standards were reimposed. If you're in doubt about any early 40's issue, look for Gardner Murphy's name. It remains less laboratory oriented then the Journal of Parapsychology but this is far from absolute. A good source of reprints for many outstanding original papers in parapsychology is the book *The Basic Experiments in Parapsychology* edited by K. Ramakrishna Rao, published in 1984. Dr. Rao is the current director of FRNM and the editor of the Journal of Parapsychology. The papers are not restricted, however, to that source. Some caution is necessary (and Dr. Rao himself provides it in the introduction). Dr. Rao was forced, because of space limitations, to drop many papers he wished to include, and of course, other people would have chosen papers that Dr. Rao didn't. A more accurate title might, therefore, have been *Some of The Basic Experiments ...*. Also, these papers were selected to provide an overview of experimental parapsychology, not to provide the best existing evidence for the existence of psi. Many of the experiments are the first to investigate a particular phenomena, or to use a particular technique. These frequently contained flaws (major or minor) which were later corrected in further experiments. Some papers were included simply because they sparked controversy. There are of course, many surveys. It is hard to imagine a parapsychologist writing a book about parapsychology for a general audience without including one. You may find such surveys interesting but they tend to be neither complete nor detailed enough to provide much meat. There are, however, several good, technical surveys. The classic is *Extrasensory Perception After Sixty Years* by J.G. Pratt, J.B. Rhine, Burke M. Stuart, Charles Stuart and Joseph A. Greenwood. It was first published in 1940 and surveyed the field up to that time. There is much discussion of the criticisms leveled at Rhine's early work, and his answers. The book has been reissued and is still in print. The *Handbook of Parapsychology* edited by B.B. Wolman (not to be confused with a book of the same name by Hans Holtzer) contains many good survey articles. Unfortunately, it has recently gone out of print. I have no doubt at all that by far the most complete source is the irregular series *Advances in Parapsychological Research* edited by Stanley Krippner. The first three volumes were published by Plenum Press, and the fourth by McFarland and Company. Not all the articles are relevant, so I'll list the relevant ones separately. Volume 1, subtitled "Psychokinesis", published in 1977 contains: "Problems and Methods in Psychokinesis Research" by Joseph H. Rush. "Research Findings in Psychokinesis" by Gertrude Schmeidler. Volume 2, subtitled "Extrasensory Perception", published in 1978 contains: "A Survey of Methods and Issues in ESP Research" by Robert L. Morris. "Extrasensory Perception: Research Findings" by John Palmer (this is a monumental survey, running almost 200 pages. If you read only one thing it should be this.) "Theories of Psi" by K. Ramakrishna Rao. Volume 3, published in 1982, was principally intended as an update for the previous two volumes. It contains: "An Updated Survey of Methods and Issues in ESP Research" by Morris. "ESP Research Findings: 1976-1978" by Palmer. "Problems and Methods in Psychokinesis Research" by Rush. "PK Research: Findings and Theories" by Schmeidler (this is not simply an update but goes into areas, most importantly theoretical, not covered by her first paper). I have not yet read Volume 4 which was published in 1984, and so, with one exception cannot recommend any of the papers. The exception is: "Methodological Criticisms of Parapsychology" by Charles Akers. (This is a good, hard, mostly negative look at one particular body of experimental work by an insider. This is in my mind, one of the best pieces of broad critical work around, and I recommend it. If you do read it, however, keep in mind that it has not gone unchallenged, and that it is not universally perceived as a negative evaluation of the evidence it examines. Also, it deals with some of the methodologically more complex areas of parapsychology, so there is a question as to its generality. I'll be glad to discuss it with anyone who has read it.) If you are unable to find any of these I will give one last source. It's primary advantage is accessibility: most technical libraries will have it. It is not, however, complete nor does it give a representative view of the field. It was written by a "convert", essentially to explain why he decided that there was something to the field after all. The author is Robert G. Jahn who is the Dean of Engineering at Princeton. Jahn, Robert G.; The Persistent Paradox of Psychic Phenomena: An Engineering Perspective; PROCEEDINGS OF THE IEEE, VOL. 70, #2 (February 1982) If you need any help, or wish to know about the "legitimacy" of any source, I'd be glad to provide any help I am able to. Topher Cooper USENET: ...{allegra,decvax,ihnp4,ucbvax}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-pbsvax!cooper ARPA/CSNET: cooper%pbsvax.DEC@decwrl Disclaimer: This contains my own opinions, and I am solely responsible for them.