Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!pyramid!pesnta!valid!pete
From: pete@valid.UUCP (Pete Zakel)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy,net.religion,net.sci
Subject: Re: PSI:  Yes I see it / No you don't
Message-ID: <291@valid.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 23-May-86 19:51:45 EDT
Article-I.D.: valid.291
Posted: Fri May 23 19:51:45 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 25-May-86 15:42:18 EDT
References: <8300@kestrel.ARPA>
Organization: Valid Logic, San Jose, CA
Lines: 25
Xref: linus net.philosophy:5020 net.religion:9874 net.sci:606

> One question to those who claim the existence of psychicic phenomena:
> 
> Evolution theory predicts that if it exists and is useful it would be
> the norm as those with the ability would outbreed those without.

Evolution theory predicts no such thing.  Being useful doesn't cause one to
outbreed.  Being detrimental causes one to not live long enough to breed.
Only if NOT having psi is detrimental would psi be selected for.

> Who can deny the utility of the ability to detect a stalking tiger at a
> distance?  To cloud a prey animal's thinking to prevent him from
> bolting?  To know what lies under concealment?  To perform telekinetic
> manipulation?

Yes, but what if psi is somewhat unreliable and requires training and a
certain mindset to bring out.  What if it doesn't work under normal stress
but works well under EXTREME stress.  You then wouldn't expect to see it
except in optimal conditions.

Also, considering precognition, what if there isn't *A* future, but *MANY
POSSIBLE* futures.  Then if on sees something bad in the future and manages to
avoid it, that which is seen doesn't happen and becomes evidence AGAINST
precognition, even though the precognition was actually USEFUL.
-- 
-Pete Zakel (..!{hplabs,amd,pyramid,ihnp4}!pesnta!valid!pete)