Edward F. Kelly, Chapter 1, Beyond Physicalism, Edward F
Supplemental web material for “Empirical Challenges to Theory Construction,” Edward F. Kelly, Chapter 1, Beyond Physicalism, Edward F. Kelly, Adam Crabtree, and Paul Marshall (Eds.). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015. http://www.esalen.org/ctr-archive/bp © Robert Rosenberg 2015 All rights reserved A SELECT ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY ON PRECOGNITION Robert Rosenberg Introduction Sidgwick, Eleanor 1888–1889: “On the Evidence for Premonitions” Myers, Frederic W. H. 1894–1895: “The Subliminal Self, Chapter VIII: The Relation of Supernormal Phenomena to Time;—Retrocognition” 1894–1895: “The Subliminal Self, Chapter IX: The Relation of Supernormal Phenomena to Time;—Precognition” Richet, Charles 1923: Thirty Years of Psychical Research 1931: L’Avenir et la Prémonition Osty, Eugene 1923: Supernormal Faculties in Man Dunne, J. W. 1927: An Experiment with Time Lyttelton, Edith 1937: Some Cases of Prediction Saltmarsh, H. F. 1934: “Report on cases of apparent precognition” 1938: Foreknowledge Rhine, L. E. 1954: “Frequency of Types of Experience in Spontaneous Precognition” 1955: “Precognition and Intervention” Stevenson, Ian 1970: “Precognition of Disasters” MacKenzie, Andrew 1974: Riddle of the Future Eisenbud, Jule 1982: Paranormal Foreknowledge Conclusions References Introduction Precognition—the appearance or acquisition of non-inferential information or impressions of the future—holds a special place among psi phenomena. Confounding as it does commonsense notions of time and causality, it is perhaps the most metaphysically offensive of rogue phenomena. In the past 130 years, a number of thoughtful investigators—none of them either naïve or foolish—have studied a growing collection incidents, all carefully vetted (excepting Rhine’s popularly solicited cases [below]). With the exception of the first author, Eleanor Sidgwick, who drew on a scant six years of evidence and found it tantalizing but insufficient, these investigators have repeatedly come to the generally reluctant conclusion that true precognition (or something identical to it with a different name) exists.
[Show full text]