From: Terry W. Colvin (fortean1@mindspring.com)
Date: Sun Jun 01 2003 - 15:04:56 MDT
A Field Guide to Skepticism" is Chapter 13 in Dean Radin's well-
researched, widely-read book, The Conscious Universe (HarperEdge,
1997). Dr. Radin is highly respected among his peers who investigate
paranormal phenomena for his scholarship, intellectual honesty,
experimental ingenuity, and attention to detail. Before anyone,
debunker or not, makes any claim about the reality of psi, he or she
should read this book.
Chapter 14: A Field Guide to Skepticism
Dean I. Radin
FROM THE CONSCIOUS UNIVERSE
I am attacked by two very opposite sects the scientists and the
know-nothings. Both laugh at me calling me "the frogs'
dancing-master." Yet I know that I have discovered one of the
greatest forces in nature. Luigi Galvani, Italian physician
(17371798)
This chapter does not argue against skepticism. On the contrary, it
demonstrates that critical thinking is a double-edged sword: It must
be applied to any claim, including the claims of skeptics. We will
see that many of the skeptical arguments commonly leveled at psi
experiments have been motivated by non-scientific factors, such as
arrogance, advocacy and ideology. The fact is that much of what
scientists know or think they know about psi has been
confused with arguments promoted by uncritical enthusiasts on one
hand, and uncritical skeptics on the other. History shows that
extremists, despite the strength of their convictions, are rarely
correct. So, are all scientists who report positive evidence for psi
na๏ve or sloppy? No. Are all skeptics intolerant nay-sayers? No.
Does psi justify the belief that angels from the Andromeda galaxy
are among us? No.
DOUBT
There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't
true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true. S๘ren
Kierkegaard 181355)
THE NECESSITY OF DOUBT
Skepticism, meaning doubt, is one of the hallmarks of the scientific
approach. Skepticism sharpens the critical thought required to sift
the wheat from the chaff, and it forces experimental methods,
measurements, and ideas to pass through an extremely fine sieve
before they are accepted into the "scientific worldview." A little
critical thinking applied to many of the claims of New Age devotees
reveals why many scientists are dubious of psi phenomena. Science
requires substantial amounts of repeatable, trustworthy evidence
before taking claims of unexpected effects seriously. Depending on
the claim, providing sufficient evidence can take years, decades, or
half-centuries of painstaking, detailed work. Learning how to create
this evidence requires long training and experience in conventional
disciplines like experimental design, analysis and statistics.
Conducting research on controversial topics like psi requires all
this plus an appreciation for interpersonal dynamics, politics,
aesthetics, philosophy, and physics, combined with intellectual
clarity and a strong creative streak to help break the bounds of
conventional thinking.
>From the lay perspective, science appears as a logical,
dispassionate, analytic process. This is true sometimes, but it is
also a harshly adversarial, emotional battlefield when it comes to
evaluating unusual claims. The process of gaining acceptance for
effects that are not easily accommodated by dominant theories takes
an enormous amount of energy and persistence. This is why most
scientists and psi researchers alike grimace upon reading breathless
advertisements hawking, "The amazing miracle blue crystal, found
deep beneath an ancient Mayan pyramid, proven by top researchers to
relieve headaches and enhance psychic powers, and now available for
a limited time for only $129.95!"
The claim about a blue crystal is not the problem. After all, if
someone were to claim that a moldy piece of bread could cure all
sorts of horrible diseases, they'd be labeled a charlatan, unless
the mold happened to be penicillin. The problem with many popular
psi-related claims, especially claims for health-related products
and devices, is that it doesn't take much digging to discover
that sound, scientific evidence for the claim is either entirely
absent, fabricated or based solely upon anecdotes and testimonials.
THE DANGER OF UNCRITICAL DOUBT
It's one thing not to see the forest for the trees, but then to
go on to deny the reality of the forest is a more serious matter.
Paul Weiss
However, the same scientific mind-set that thrives on high precision
and critical thinking is also extremely adept at forming clever
rationalizations that get in the way of progress. In extreme cases,
these rationalizations have prevented psi research from taking place
at all. Ironically, the very same skeptics who have attempted to
block psi research through the use of rhetoric and ridicule have
also been responsible for perpetuating the many popular myths
associated with psychic phenomena. If serious scientists are
prevented from investigating claims of psi out of fear for their
reputations, then who is left to conduct these investigations?
Extreme skeptics? No, because the fact is that most extremists do
not conduct research, they specialize in criticism. Extreme
believers? No, because they are usually not interested in conducting
rigorous scientific studies.
The word "extreme" is important to keep in mind. Most scientists
seriously interested in psi are far more skeptical about claims of
psychic phenomena than most people realize. Scientists who study psi
phenomena grind their teeth at night because television shows
predictably portray psi researchers as wacky "paranormal
investigators" with dubious credentials. Psi researchers cringe at
seeing the word "parapsychologist" used in the telephone yellow
pages to list psychic readers. And unfortunately, because the only
thing most people know about parapsychology is its popular
association with credulous "investigators" and psychic over-
enthusiasts, it is understandable why some skeptics have taken
combative positions to fight what they see as rising tides of
nonsense.
This book is intended to help illustrate that common stereotypes
about psi research are overly simplistic at best, and in many cases,
they are just plain wrong. As an example of "just plain wrong," here
is one stereotype that many mainstream scientists have simply
accepted as conventional wisdom. As philosopher Paul Churchland put
it,
Despite the endless pronouncements and anecdotes in the popular
press, and despite a steady trickle of serious research on such
things, there is no significant or trustworthy evidence that such
phenomena even exist. The wide gap between popular conviction on
this matter, and the actual evidence, is something that itself calls
for research. For there is not a single parapsychological effect
that can be repeatedly or reliably produced in any laboratory
suitably equipped to perform and control the experiment. Not one.
Wrong. As we've seen, there are a half-dozen psi effects that
have been replicated dozens to hundreds of times in laboratories
around the world. As another example, conventional wisdom often
assumes that professional magicians and conjurers "know better" than
to accept that some psychic phenomena are real. In fact, as
parapsychologist George Hansen wrote, Although the public tends to
view magicians as debunkers, the opposite is more the case. Birdsell
(1989) polled a group of magicians and found that 82% gave a
positive response to a question of belief in ESP. Truzzi (1983)
noted a poll of German magicians that found that 72.3% thought psi
was probably real. Many prominent magicians have expressed a belief
in psychic phenomena.
. It is simply a myth that magicians have
been predominantly skeptical about the existence of psi.
SKEPTICISM ABOUT SKEPTICISM
Why it is necessary to spend any time at all on the criticisms of
psi research when we can simply refer to the previous chapters to
demonstrate that there are valid experimental effects in search of
answers? One answer is that very few are aware that the standard
skeptical arguments have been addressed in exquisite detail, and
they no longer hold up. Another is that the tactics of the extreme
skeptics have been more than merely annoying. The professional
skeptics' aggressive public labeling of parapsychology as
a "pseudoscience," implying fraud or incompetence on the part of the
researchers, has been instrumental in preventing this research from
taking place at all. In a commentary in the prominent journal,
Nature, skeptical British psychologist David Marks wrote,
Parascience has all the qualities of a magical system while wearing
the mantle of science. Until any significant discoveries are made,
science can justifiably ignore it, but it is important to say why:
parascience is a pseudo-scientific system of untested beliefs
steeped in illusion, error and fraud.
Such statements are pernicious because significant discoveries do
not occur by themselves. Such statements published in influential
journals have had strong effects on the ability of scientists to
conduct psi research. Many funding agencies, both public and
private, have been reluctant to fund parapsychological studies
because they fear being associated with what conventional wisdom has
declared to be a "pseudoscience." Fortunately, there are notable
exceptions among funding agencies who know that there is a
difference between popular stereotypes and serious researchers.
-- Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1@mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1@msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 01 2003 - 15:18:03 MDT