lute@abnjh.UUCP (J. Collymore) (04/09/84)
A few years ago I read an article by a Dr. Jan Ehrenwald that postulated an interesting theory regarding why paranormal events may not be reliably duplicated in the laboratory. He suggests the concept of "need-determined" vs. "flaw-determined" psi events. The need-determined (ND) type are those we most commonly hear in anecdotes, such as people having psi experiences when they, or a loved one, were in a life threatening situation. The flaw-determined (FD) type are typically those various experiments that are performed in the lab, where there is no threatening stimuli or event. He seemed to suggest that it was when there was a great deal of danger presented to the organism (or, I guess, some significant other) there was a greater likely hood of psi occuring. It was the use of a function that acted as a hot-line, only to be used in certain types of emergencies. Since laws and ethics do not allow us to simulate such stressful situations in the labs, it is less likely that we will see psi functioning. This leads us then to a FD situation when looking for psi in a laboratory setting. This seems to be one of the more reasonable theories I have heard regarding why psi experiments may fail. Jim Collymore
presley@mhuxj.UUCP (Joe Presley) (04/10/84)
>This seems to be one of the more reasonable theories I have heard regarding >why psi experiments may fail. Another theory is the existence of controls to prevent cheating ... -- Joe Presley (mhuxj!presley, ihnp4!j.presley)
ward@hao.UUCP (Mike Ward) (04/11/84)
[]
I always liked the theory that belief was such a major factor in
*controllable* ESP phenomena that the strong atmosphere of doubt
that pervades a lab setting renders it inoperative.
The reason I like it so much is that it makes ESP as impossible to
verify scientifically as creationism. (OOPS I think this belongs
in net.origins, or at least the second half of the second paragraph
does. Now lets see....)
--
Michael Ward, NCAR/SCD
UUCP: {hplabs,nbires,brl-bmd,seismo,menlo70}!hao!ward
BELL: 303-497-1252
USPS: POB 3000, Boulder, CO 80307max@bunker.UUCP (Max Hyre) (04/19/84)
[ Is this line really present, except under stress? ]
~v
^ Oh, well, my vi invocation doesn't seem to be working--excuse the typos &c.
For an interesting treatment of the "you need to *need* ESP for it to
show up" theory, see the early chapters of "The Stars My Destination", an
excellent sci-fi novel by Alfred Bester. The researchers in the book
learn to induce teleportation by locking the subject in a glass cubicle and
filling it with water, making sure that he knows it won't stop until he's
either dead or gone. Eventually they learn enough about it to be able
to teach the technique without the threat.
Max Hyre
(Somewhere in the vicinity of decvax!bunker!max)
( ^ Discovered a new link.)david@randvax.ARPA (David Shlapak) (04/24/84)
I dunno, Marty, this just sounds like another rationalization of
the persistent and universal failure of ESP hacks to perform in
the laboratory enviornment. I mean, the reason quarks don't appear
in physics labs is 'cause they don't "need" to...and Tinkerbelle is
still alive since we all believe in fairies...
Personally, I find the most reasonable and convincing explanation of
psi's failures to be the simplest one: the whole parapsychology
schtick is a load of unicorn manure. But, hey, what do I know...
I can't even bend a spoon with a Vise-Grip.
--- das