[net.misc] Psychic Warfare - More lessons from a critic

dir@cbosgd.UUCP (01/19/84)

    Guy said, "Don't put words in my mouth."

Sorry, but turnabout is fair play.  In the lack of face to
face debate, one's words stand on their own!

    Guy said: I didn't say it was valid to ignore all future evidence.  
    I would, however, be far more careful in examining claims made in 
    favor of psychic phenomena [- than against?].

But you said later on, in effect, that it probably wasn't worth the effort.
Sounds like an attempt to ignore evidence to me.  Are you aware that 
most major scientific journals in the US have editorial policies prohibiting 
acceptance of experimental papers reporting positive evidence for psi,
regardless of who submits such papers?  They do allow negative evidence, of
course.  Do you suppose this sways scientific opinion?

    ... what I said was that the overwhelming majority of the opinion seems to
    be on the level of the National Midnight Star, and that I'm not about to
    harshly censure someone for dismissing most evidence for psychic phenomena
    out of hand.

I see.  Here you reveal your sources.  No wonder you think it's all bullshit.  
Of course any argument made on the basis of the popular media is worthless.
But many DO argue their viewpoint with evidence such as this, and it 
goes beyond ignorance to downright stupidity.

    ... scientific investigations should be balanced against 
    the likelihood of their a priori finding 'something useful.'
    Yes!  By "something useful coming out of such studies" I mean finding hard
    evidence for or against psychic powers.

Do you honestly think reputable researchers are spending 
enormous amounts of time and effort NOT trying to find hard evidence?
Pure research, by the way, IS NOT premised on finding something useful.  
That is completely counter to the aim and culture of science, which is
to discover truth; not just profitable truth.  Applied research
is another story.  Our government has funded both pure and applied psi research.

    If you want to be paranoid that sceptics are out to make fun of
    you, go ahead, but don't try to present it as reasoned argument.  

Oh come off it.  Sceptics delight in making fun of psychic research because 
ridicule is one of the most powerful means of swaying opinion without 
personally having to know anything about the subject.  Just look at the typical
response on the net!  Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain.

    Enough reported "psychic phenomena" have turned out to be bullshit that
    I see no point in chasing after sketchy reports and anecdotes.  

Look, the whole point of research into any kind of anomalous
phenomena -- and there are plenty of examples -- is to find where our 
models of the world do not fit reality.  To NOT chase after such
evidence is tantamount to sticking your head in the sand.  Your statement 
reveals that you have apparently made an a priori decision to
disregard such evidence, even if it means throwing out the baby with 
the bathwater.  This is not science, this is prejudice in the literal 
sense of the word.  Of course, every activity has its utility curve.

    Any phenomenon that only occurs when people who don't believe in 
    that phenomenon are around is rather hard to believe in.  

Sure, but how much do you think we know about the nature of creative insight, 
why placebos work, experimenter effects, or audience effects?  
Have you ever seen ball lightning, earthquake lights, etc.  Have you
ever tried to be spontaneous?  We understand far, far less about
human behavior and the rest of the world than we presume to know.

    People need not fudge data to invalidate it; they need merely
    interpret such data through their own biases.

I agree.  But remember that this works BOTH ways, and experimental 
methodologies exist to prevent personal bias from affecting results.

(Aside:  I am not nearly as strong a believer as these notes may suggest.
 I do, however, intensely dislike arrogance and scientific prejudice, 
 which seems rampant on the net.  Just as being open-minded
 should not mean that you have a hole in your head, being
 hard-headed should not mean that you've encased your head in cement.)

Dean Radin - AT&T Bell Laboratories - Columbus - cbosgd!dir