dsi@unccvax.UUCP (Dataspan Inc) (06/18/85)
/* Begin excerpt From: David Alpern <ALPERN%SJRLVM4.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA> Bill Tanenbaum (ihnp4!ihu1e!tan), Whether Uri can or can't bend spoons psychically is one thing, but sudden bursts of knowledge, apparently unexplainable (i.e. the person involved can't figure out where he would have learned it, etc.) are common - but as far as I've heard, mostly uncontrolled. It's possible much of this has to do with someone remembering a fact but not where or that he was told it. But stories have been around for centuries of women who knew that that day was the one there husband would return from sea - or that he had just died. And too many of the people I know, */ Two fundamental problems here: 1) This kind of research explains away, rather than explains; 2) a reasonably decent model that will weather academic criticism well already exists. The tools to grapple with the class of problems you just mentioned already exist in behavioural psychology. Spoon bending behaviour is one thing (which I doubt exists) but all the other stuff (precognition, deja vu, etc) can be effectively explained. The fundamental flaw with paranormal psychology research is that it is often procedurally contaminated. In the above mentioned cases, each one can be explained by an "attenuated behaviour" model, where person A, based on some reinforcers in common (or, for that matter, disjoint) with person B, have the same behaviour. The first one goes out and wraps his Corvette 'round a pine tree. The second, behaving in an attenuated fashion, has a 'precognition' while in an elevator 2000 miles away that A has done so. But what about the cases where a 'psychic' is hired to find the dead body of some pour soul that has the cops baffled? Again, these psychics have the (albeit very limited) knack of finding some relevant reinforcer in the situation and extrapolating behaviourally to the behavioural end. This is certainly more reasonable an explaination than 'tapping in' to some undiscovered pheonomena in the Ether. Ditto for extraordinary knowledge from people with no training, etc. If you are willing to chuck out "knowledge as being representational" and all that cognitive crap, and assume that humans are behavioural systems rather than Von Neumann architectures (both of which will stand up much longer to severe enquiry than will ESP research), most, if not all, this paranormal crap is reduced to ordinary experience. If we were concentrating in behavioural psychology much more than just a topic for liberal arts majors, these "paranormal" pheonomena could be much better understood, and lead to far many more people getting the knack for extrapolated, attenuated behaviours. I submit that any experiment which purports to show "thought waves" or other traditionally profound dreck is a total farce unless and until all forms of traditional communication and reinforcement are removed from the subjects. When we see examples of telepathy or mind reading in those psychology films showed in 9th grade, they invariably do not exclude communication by olfactory or musical understanding, etc. Now, radical behaviourism as a science is not perfect, but at least it is scholarly, and makes a damned good attempt to explain rather than explain away. David Anthony DataSpan, Inc