“Living with a psychic, I’ve seen how context-dependent the ability is.” This is a key point that sceptics are determined to ignore. This is not a unique feature of paranormal actions. Other semi-voluntary actions are also hard to perform under scrutiny in a laboratory. How many of us would be able to orgasm when performing to order wired up in lab conditions? So Dr Blackmore can ‘prove’ that orgasm does not exist? This kind of thinking is where scientific rigour bleeds into unscientific dogma. I once met Uri Geller and saw him bend someone else’s spoon in good visibility and close proximity (barely a foot from me). He said that he can perform only when he can get into the right mental state. Seems pretty plausible to me. But trying to perform to order on a stage is not always conducive to paranormal action. So he resorted to magician’s tricks. That’s a pity as it contaminated his ouvre of genuine paranormal actions with fake junk.
IMHO the biggest obstacle to mainstreaming paranormal phenomena is the lack of a cogent scientific theory. For the scientific method to get traction we need a theory that yields specific falsifiable hypotheses that can be tested. Then we get into the standard science loop: theory -> hypothesis -> test -> data-> corrected theory.
The parapsychology community expends its energies on endlessly repeating tests that prove paranormal phenomena exist. Enough already! Dean Radin, before he went off the rails, did an excellent meta-analysis that showed that the more rigorous the experimental design, the stronger the effect, which is the opposite of Susan Blackmore’s belief.
In a few weeks I will be proposing in my Substack posts a theoretical framework for psi. (I am covering basic concepts of consciousness at present.)
AMEN. Lived experience of psi phenomena is the best way for someone to give it credence. I'd like those materialists to explain how I dreamed I married my husband-to-be the first night after I met him. Explain how I dreamed of a massive fire in downtown New York City, exactly one month BEFORE 9/11. There are so many incidents like this in my own life that it's pretty darn hard NOT to believe in these phenomena.
I agree that, ultimately, the acceptance of the existence of psi phenomena relies on a first-person experience and inner intuition, rather than on empiric evidence found in some lab and published in an article in a journal. In fact, trying to convince physicalists like Blackmore is a waste of time.
However, that said, I also believe that something would change if these kinds of investigations were accepted in academia and research centers that would dedicate funds to this line of research. Actually, they are in a state of denial, and as long as that doesn't change, we will have to rely on anecdotal accounts that everyone can choose to believe or not.
“Living with a psychic, I’ve seen how context-dependent the ability is.” This is a key point that sceptics are determined to ignore. This is not a unique feature of paranormal actions. Other semi-voluntary actions are also hard to perform under scrutiny in a laboratory. How many of us would be able to orgasm when performing to order wired up in lab conditions? So Dr Blackmore can ‘prove’ that orgasm does not exist? This kind of thinking is where scientific rigour bleeds into unscientific dogma. I once met Uri Geller and saw him bend someone else’s spoon in good visibility and close proximity (barely a foot from me). He said that he can perform only when he can get into the right mental state. Seems pretty plausible to me. But trying to perform to order on a stage is not always conducive to paranormal action. So he resorted to magician’s tricks. That’s a pity as it contaminated his ouvre of genuine paranormal actions with fake junk.
IMHO the biggest obstacle to mainstreaming paranormal phenomena is the lack of a cogent scientific theory. For the scientific method to get traction we need a theory that yields specific falsifiable hypotheses that can be tested. Then we get into the standard science loop: theory -> hypothesis -> test -> data-> corrected theory.
The parapsychology community expends its energies on endlessly repeating tests that prove paranormal phenomena exist. Enough already! Dean Radin, before he went off the rails, did an excellent meta-analysis that showed that the more rigorous the experimental design, the stronger the effect, which is the opposite of Susan Blackmore’s belief.
In a few weeks I will be proposing in my Substack posts a theoretical framework for psi. (I am covering basic concepts of consciousness at present.)
AMEN. Lived experience of psi phenomena is the best way for someone to give it credence. I'd like those materialists to explain how I dreamed I married my husband-to-be the first night after I met him. Explain how I dreamed of a massive fire in downtown New York City, exactly one month BEFORE 9/11. There are so many incidents like this in my own life that it's pretty darn hard NOT to believe in these phenomena.
This is a wonderful post!! Thank you for sharing!!
Early on in my shamanic journey, trying to find validation, I stumbled upon a statistics professor at UC Irvine to test psychic abilities.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrwAiU2g5RU
Thank you so much for bringing her to my attention!
Just deleting a massive wall mansplaining. Sorry.
I agree that, ultimately, the acceptance of the existence of psi phenomena relies on a first-person experience and inner intuition, rather than on empiric evidence found in some lab and published in an article in a journal. In fact, trying to convince physicalists like Blackmore is a waste of time.
However, that said, I also believe that something would change if these kinds of investigations were accepted in academia and research centers that would dedicate funds to this line of research. Actually, they are in a state of denial, and as long as that doesn't change, we will have to rely on anecdotal accounts that everyone can choose to believe or not.