DOCSLIB.ORG

The Responsibilities of the Media and Paranormal Claims

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Responsibilities of the Media and Paranormal Claims The Responsibilities of the Media and Paranormal Claims Because the media are a dominant influence in the growth of belief in the paranormal, there is a need to develop among journalists an appreciation for critical judgment in evaluating claims of truth. Paul Kurtz HE COMMITTEE FOR the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal was founded when a number of scientific skeptics Tand rationalists, increasingly concerned about the rising tide of unchallenged paranormal claims, decided to form a coalition of individuals committed to the use of science and rational methods of inquiry in evalu­ ating such claims. The word paranormal was being loosely used (we did not invent the term) to include many diverse things under its rubric; everything from psychic prophecies, ESP, clairvoyance, telepathy, psychokinesis, appari­ tions, hauntings, poltergeists, communication with discarnate spirits, rein­ carnation, levitation, psychic healings, on the one hand, to astrological charts and horoscopes, UFO sightings and abductions, Bermuda Triangles, and monsters of the deep, on the other. We thought it incredible that so many films, TV and radio programs, news stories, and books were pre­ senting these paranormal claims as the gospel truth, even maintaining that they had been proven by science, and that there was little or no public awareness of the fact that when these claims were subjected to careful scientific appraisal they were shown to be either unverified or false. We found the paranormal field so rife with wishful and exaggerated claims that we felt the public should have the opportunity to learn about dissenting scientific studies and thus have a more balanced picture. With this in mind, we launched CSICOP and a new journal, The Zetetic, which after the first two issues became the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. We were Paul Kurtz is chairman of CSICOP and professor of philosophy at the State University of New York at Buffalo. This article is adapted from his introductory address at the CSICOP conference "Paranormal Beliefs: Scientific Facts and Fictions, "at Stanford University, November 9-10, 1984. Summer 1985 357 committed to giving an impartial hearing to claims of the paranormal and to making our findings available to the general public. CSICOP was and still remains a grassroots movement. Little did we imagine when we began that we would grow so rapidly, that we would stimulate the formation of affiliated groups in ten other countries through­ out the world, that local and regional groups would spring up all over the United States, and that the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER, under the masterful editorship of Kendrick Frazier, would reach close to 23,000 circulation and still be growing rapidly. Nor did we anticipate the attention we would draw—pro and con—from the media, the public, and our fellow scientists. We apparently have crystallized a deep-felt need, particularly in the aca­ demic and scientific community. We are today witness to a breathtaking scientific and technological advance. Yet the scientific revolution is a relatively new development. Since its beginning in the sixteenth century, it has transformed the globe and radically altered human society. It led to the industrial revolution and the development of electronic and computer technology. It has given us the conveniences of modern life, made rapid communications and travel possible, including the great adventure into space. Scientific progress has dramatically increased food production, enabled us to control many diseases, and has contributed enormously to the betterment of the human life. For large sectors of the population, science is simply equated with the latest technological innovations, which are gladly accepted because of their economic benefits. Unfortunately, the public is often unaware of, or does not accept, other equally significant aspects of the scientific revolution. First there is the challenge of new intellectual conceptions of nature. Our planet is no longer the center of the universe, whose estimated age and size have been expanded tremendously. All life forms, including the human species, are part of nature, not separate from it, and have evolved over a long period of time. Our perspectives on nature and life are constantly being revised as the frontiers of science grow. Yet, in spite of this, ancient primitive, animistic, mythological, and occult views still prevail. Second, and often overlooked by the public, is the fact that modern science was made possible by the development of powerful new methods of inquiry. Although techniques and procedures may vary from field to field and subtle social and psychological factors intervene in the develop­ ment of science, still the process of scientific investigation emphasizes certain basic methodological criteria: (a) the use of experimental methods for testing hypotheses, the insistence upon verification, prediction, and replication, and (b) the use of deductive inferences in validating mathe­ matical and theoretical constructs and in explaining the observed data. Intrinsic to scientific investigation is some element of skepticism. This means that we need to pay diligent attention to the facts, including novel, discordant, and anomalous data that do not fit into the existing parameters 358 THE SKEPTICAL INQUIRER, Vol. 9 of explanations. One cannot rely on an appeal to the authorities. However well-respected they may be, they may be mistaken. Thus intrinsic to science is the self-corrective process whereby earlier hypotheses and theories are revised in the light of new data and new explanations. Scientific knowledge cannot be taken as absolutely fixed or final. Although there may be fairly reliable degrees of certainty, it is in the last analysis only hypothetical, tentative, probable. Unorthodox claims to truth may turn out to be correct in the end; they must not be peremptorily rejected. Before hypotheses can be accepted, however, they must be subjected to rigorous scrutiny by a community of objective inquirers. It is puzzling that, given the tremendous boon the scientific revolution has been to world civilizations, many people have failed to understand its implications regarding the formulation of new conceptual outlooks, its unsettling effect on old faiths and beliefs based on prescientific prejudice and habits, and the importance of the scientific method in testing truth claims. Perhaps this is one of the reasons there still persist in contemporary society so many occult, spiritualistic, and paranormal notions of reality. What can we do to correct this deficiency? Let me identify some directions I submit we should take. First, I think it is an important task of education to convey to students these two senses of science. However, it is not simply science as it is currently taught. Today science is taken as a technical specialty, and graduates of professional schools are credentialed primarily for their expertise in their chosen fields. Alas, as Emerson observed long ago, we are training men and women who know only a small corner of the spectrum of knowledge and are largely ignorant of the broader implications—and, I might add, do not know how to apply the methods of critical scientific inquiry to fields outside of their own dis­ ciplines. The Institute for Creation Research, for example, has several hundred chemists, engineers, and other specialists with advanced degrees affiliated with it, no doubt competent in their own subjects yet unable to apply the methods of critical scientific intelligence beyond their fields of expertise. 1 would suggest that it is not enough to train narrow specialists and technicians; both science and nonscience majors must be exposed to general education, and in particular science needs to be understood as one of the creative and liberating arts. We need to ask, Can the general methods of scientific inquiry serve as a model for other fields of human interest? Philosophers have explored the possibilities of extending the tentative evidential and rational approach used in science to other areas in which we formulate our beliefs and evaluate claims to truth. Today we are confronted by various forms of anti-intellectualism, even among college graduates, that abandon any pretense to objective, reflective, or critical inquiry and substitute faith, subjective prejudice, or occult thinking. We are also faced with the dominant influence of the media in forming attitudes and beliefs; for the growth of widespread belief in paranormal, pseudoscientific, and other untested claims may be traced in large measure Summer 1985 359 to the distorted presentation that appears on television, in films, and in print. In other words, many people accept psychic, astrological, or UFOlogical reports as true because of what they have seen, heard, or read in the media. Much misinformation and exaggeration can be traced to the desks of editors, journalists, publishers, program directors, and film producers. One question often raised is, How shall people in the scientific and academic community respond to the challenge of paranormal claims? The response should be, first and foremost, "By scientific research." In other words, what we need is open-minded, dispassionate, and continuing investi­ gation of claims and hypotheses in the paranormal realm. Here one must be fair-minded and one should work cooperatively—as Marcello Truzzi has pointed out—with the so-called paranormalists. The dogmatic refusal to entertain the possibility of the reality of anomalous phenomena has no place in the serious scientific context. The hypotheses and data must be dealt with as objectively as possible, without preconceived ideas or pre­ judices that would mean the death of the scientific spirit. We cannot reject unconventional or outrageous ideas simply because they are unfamiliar or upsetting to our existing theories. They may after all turn out to be true. Their proof or disproof is found by doing the hard work of scientific investigation. Unfortunately, the paranormal realm does not always lend itself to a dispassionate withdrawal into the quiet laboratory or library. For the paranormal is of such vital public interest that it immediately becomes news.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Deception by Subjects in Psi Research'
    Deception by Subjects in Psi Research’ GEORGE P. HANSEN* ABSTRACT: Parapsychology has long been tainted by the fraudulent behavior of a few of those claiming psychic abilities. Recently there has been renewed interest in studying persons who claim psi abilities even though they have been caught cheating. The issue of subject deception must be considered when evaluating most parapsychological studies; however, in certain research programs, attempted trickery is virtually certain, whereas in others it is unthinkable. When evaluating a report, a reader must consider the likelihood that deception may have been attempted, along with the effect this might have on the legitimacy of conclu- sions. This paper discusses two major approaches for providing safeguards against cheating. Subject-based control is an approach that focuses attention and resources on the subject. Target-based control is primarily concerned with adequately securing the target; this ap- proach is the more easily implemented and provides the higher degree of security. A section is devoted to the special security problems with telepathy experiments. Designing sufficient controls requires some knowledge of magic. A survey of past presidents of the Parapsycho- logical Association was conducted, revealing that they had little familiarity with conjuring. A discussion of the role of magicians is included. Recommendations are made for dealing with the problems of subject trickery. Psychic occurrences have endured a poor reputation because of fraud by a few of those claiming psychic powers (e.g., Keene, 1976). The affilia- tion of psi and fraud is found all over the world; both Rose ( 1952) and Reichbart (1978) have cited a number of anthropologists who have re- ported observing simulated psychic events.
    [Show full text]
  • Religion, Science, and Psi the Search for a New Energy
    RELIGION, SCIENCE, AND PSI THE SEARCH FOR A NEW ENERGY SOURCE by Dr. Gary L. Johnson [email protected] April 25, 2006 CONTENTS 1 WORLDVIEWS 1 1.1 The New Energy Source 1 1.2 Worldviews 5 1.3 Paranormal or Supernatural? 8 1.4 More on Worldviews 13 1.5 Scientific Revolutions 16 1.6 Electrical Engineering 20 1.7 Christian Paradigms 21 2 PSI PHENOMENA IN THE BIBLE 26 2.1 Levitation 26 2.2 Clairvoyance 29 2.3 Weather Control 30 2.4 Materialization 31 2.5 Dowsing 34 2.6 The Medium at En-dor 34 2.7 Tongues 36 2.8 Dreams 39 3 CLAIRVOYANCE 42 3.1 Psychometry 44 3.2 Remote Viewing 49 3.3 Dowsing 53 4 TELEPATHY 64 4.1 Thoughts Through Space 64 4.2 Precognition 69 4.3 Intuition 77 4.4 Being Stared At 80 5 VISUAL EFFECTS 85 5.1 Aura 85 5.2 Ghosts 89 5.3 Phantasms of the Living 97 5.4 Confirmations 100 5.5 Angels 106 6 UFOS — HISTORY 116 6.1 What are the Options? 116 6.2 UFO Size and Shape 118 6.3 Electrical Effects 119 6.4 Other Effects 122 6.5 UFO Occupants 123 i 6.6 Abductions 124 6.7 Conclusions 130 7 UFOS — EXPLANATIONS 135 7.1 The Extraterrestrial Option 135 7.2 It’s All In Your Head 140 7.3 Natural But Unknown 141 7.4 The Terrestrial Option 141 7.5 Psychic Phenomena 143 7.6 Angels and Demons 144 7.7 Sons of God 150 7.8 Conclusions 160 8 PSYCHOKINESIS 166 8.1 Metal Bending 166 8.2 Poltergeists 168 8.3 Levitation 175 8.4 Fort’s Research on Falling Things 182 8.5 Dematerialization 184 9SEANCES,´ ELECTRICITY, AND FIRE 193 9.1 Mediums 193 9.2 PK at S´eances 195 9.3 Electrical Effects 203 9.4 Poltergeist Fire 210 9.5 Fire From Heaven 212 10 REJECTION OF
    [Show full text]
  • The Columbus Poltergeist Case: Parti Flying Phones, Photos, and Fakery James Randi
    The Columbus Poltergeist Case: Parti Flying phones, photos, and fakery James Randi ARCH 1984 CAME in like a lion at the home of John and Joan Resch in the North Side district of Columbus, Ohio. MReporters who were called in to witness the evidence found broken glass, dented and overturned furniture, smashed picture frames, and a household in general disarray. The focus of all this activity seemed to be 14-year-old Tina, an adopted child who had shared the Resch home with some 250 foster children who came and went over the years. Tina, a hyperactive and emotionally disturbed girl who had been taken out of school and was being privately tutored through the Franklin County Children's Services (FCCS), was interviewed by every media outlet _who could, get_near_the two-story frame house where these poltergeist activities were claimed to be taking place. Every day the street outside was jammed with vans and cars stuffed with television crews, reporters, and photographers who joyously tumbled over one another in their enthusiasm for what had become a circus. Mike Harden, a reporter for the Columbus Dispatch, was the first on the scene. He had written an article on the Resch family some five months before, praising their work with foster children. He was aware that Tina was trying to trace her true parents—against the wishes of Mr. and Mrs. Resch, who felt it was not a good idea. One of their other adopted children had found his parents, and it did not turn out very well. In view of his previous encounter with the Resches, Harden considered himself a friend of the family.
    [Show full text]
  • Skeptic's Guide to the Paranormal
    Skeptic's Guide Text 28/6/04 4:06 PM Page i The Skeptic’s Guide To The PARANORMAL Skeptic's Guide Text 28/6/04 4:06 PM Page ii Lynne Kelly has been teaching science and mathematics for over 30 years. She holds degrees in education and engineer- ing and delights in debunking claims of the paranormal. She also delights in all things arachnid and is famous for her spider jewellery. Skeptic's Guide Text 28/6/04 4:06 PM Page iii The Skeptic’s Guide To The PARANORMAL Lynne Kelly Skeptic's Guide Text 28/6/04 4:06 PM Page iv First published in 2004 Copyright © Lynne Kelly, 2004 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher. The Australian Copyright Act 1968 (the Act) allows a maximum of one chapter or 10 per cent of this book, whichever is the greater, to be photocopied by any educational institution for its educational purposes provided that the educational institution (or body that administers it) has given a remuneration notice to Copyright Agency Limited (CAL) under the Act. Allen & Unwin 83 Alexander Street Crows Nest NSW 2065 Australia Phone: (61 2) 8425 0100 Fax: (61 2) 9906 2218 Email: [email protected] Web: www.allenandunwin.com National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry: Kelly Lynne. The skeptic’s guide to the paranormal. ISBN 1 74114 059 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Columbus Poltergeist Case Photos, Film, and Flim-Flam
    the Skeptical Inquirer Columbus Poltergeist Case Photos, Film, and Flim-Flam Moon and Murder: It's Moonshine Investigating the Image of Guadalupe UFOs and Radar / Phrenology and Gullibility Astrology Disclaimer / Animal Senses VOL. IX NO. 3 / SPRING 1985 $5.00 Published by the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal Skeptical Inquirer THE SKEPTICAL INQUIRER is the official journal of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal. Editor Kendrick Frazicr. Editorial Board James E. Alcock, Martin Gardner, Ray Hyman, Philip J. Klass, Paul Kurtz, James Randi. Consulting Editors Isaac Asimov, William Sims Bainbridge, John Boardman, John R. Cole, C. E. M. Hansel, E. C. Krupp, Andrew Neher, James E. Oberg, Robert Sheaffer, Steven N. Shore. Managing Editor Doris Hawley Doyle. Public Relations Andrea Szalanski (director), Barry Karr. Production Editor Betsy Offermann. Office Administrator Mary Rose Hays. Computer Operations Richard Seymour (manager). Laurel Geise Smith. Typesetting Paul E. Loynes. Stan* Stephanie Doyle, Vicky Kunich, Ruthann Page, Alfreda Pidgeon, Vance Vigrass. Cartoonist Rob Pudim. The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal Paul Kurtz, Chairman; philosopher. State University of New York at Buffalo. Lee Nisbet, Executive Director; philosopher, Medaille College. Fellows of the Committee James E. Alcock, psychologist, York Univ., Toronto; Isaac Asimov, biochemist, author; Irving Biederman, psy­ chologist, SUNY at Buffalo; Brand Blanshard, philosopher, Yale; Mario Bunge, philosopher, McGill University; Bette Chambers, A.H.A.; John R. Cole, anthropologist. Institute for the Study of Human Issues; F. H. C. Crick, biophysicist, Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, Calif.; L. Sprague de Camp, author, engineer; Bernard Dixon, science writer, consultant; Paul Edwards, philosopher.
    [Show full text]