MODELS FOR THE EXPLANATION OF EXTRASENSORY PERCEPTION Reprinted from the INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NEUROPSYCHIATRY, copyright 1966 by Research in Organic Psychiatry, Inc. Vol. 2. No. I PRINTED IN BELGIUM 1 MODELS FOR THE EXPLANATION OF EXTRASENSORY PERCEPTION ! CHARLEST. I I One of the difficulties for many scientists listening to fades out, but if he backs up in accepting the existence of extrasensory the reception slowly comes in again. We perception (ESP) is that it does not make may "explain" this by saying it is like sense in terms of what we know about the dropping a stone in a lalte. The radio waves ! physical universe. We do not have any com- are lilte the ripples that spread out, and a prehensive theories, any good models, or rock sticking up from the surface is like the any sort of generally accepted explanation steel buildings : there will be a small area of the phenomena. Unfortunately, I cannot of calmness behind the rock as it interrupts fill this vacuum. I have no model or theory the ripples, but a little further in back of the that will explain the facts of parapsychology. rock the ripples join again. It is the same I shall be concerned then, with problems, for radio waves and the steel building. This rather than attempt to give answers, and is an analogy to something familiar. It maltes point out where models and theories in this us feel more comfortable, it maltes us feel area are needed. we "understand" the behavior of our radio IGIy presentation of models must be rather set. ilnother common example of "hori- .' limited due to space. It will not be possible zontal" explanation occurs in teaching people to cover all the phenomena that have been about the flow of electricity, where we reported in the laboratory, much less those compare it to water flowing through a pipe : reported in spontaneous cases, nor can I the electrical voltage is like the pressure cover all the problems connected with model behind the water, the electrical amperage is making for those phenomena I do talk about. like the quantity of water flowing, and the As a final limitation, in talking- about some electrical resistance is like the effect of past attempts at model building in this field obstructions in the pipe. What we are I cannot be comprehensive, but only men- basically doing is saying that the unknown tion a few attempts. is similar to the known (with the implication To begin, I have to make clear exactly that you understand the known). what I mean by a model and by a theoty, as There is another use of the term explana- I shall discuss both of these. We all want tion, however, which I will refer to as models and theories to "explain" things : "vertical" explanation. This is where you but what exactly does the word "explain" ic explain" the unlcnown by talking about mean in this context? We use the term explain events on a different level than those you in two senses. One of these is what we might want to explain, it is an abstract type of call "horizontal" explanation: it is a matter explanation. For example, to give a vertical of drawing comparisons with something explanation of the flow of electric current familiar, of pointing out that what you are we do not talk about the flow of water in puzzled about is like something else that you pipes: instead we talk about a thing called are already familiar with. For instance, --- -- -- someone may ask for an explanation of the * Asst. Professor of Psychology, Dept. of Psychology, fact that when he carries his transistor radio Univ, of California. Davis. Calif. behind a steel building the station he is Received for pttb/iLatio,l: ~ebnta~I 8, 1966. 488 an electron, about the transfer of electrons if you want to call it a scientjfic theory, your the possibility from one orbital shell to another across inferences and conclusions must have ob- come along tk atoms, about electrical force fields on the servable consequences. That is, your theory for (predict) : atomic level, about number of electrons must say that given conditions A, B, and C, or modifying passing through a unit volume in a unit of you will observe effect D. If you do not to so-called s time as measuring the flow of electric observe D, so much the worse for your I law is simply current, and the like. We have gone to a theory ! I duced data cc 4 more abstract level, a more basic level of Science, then, is a continuous alternation has predicted explanation. between observing things (or, if you prefer, of instances. Now this sort of explanation, vertical finding "facts"), theorizing about the struc- gravity" is sin explanation, is usually of more general ap- ture of things at some more abstract level, of two mass plication than drawing an analogy to some- making predictions based on the postulated absence of int thing familiar, and people generally feel that structure of reality at this more abstract millions of o it is a "truer" or more "basic" sort of ex- level, and then going out and checking your objects fall to planation. In many instances, however, it predictions. The observations may agree is subject to may not be a more tlsef~lsort of explanation. with the theory, which is always rewarding. consistent ob: For example, a man might tell me that he If they disagree, you modify your theory or Now here is is designing a bridge to cross a stream, and abandon it. You are always going back and a theory and s tell me about the nuts and bolts, girders and forth between observing things, theorizing many of the I beams, he will build it from. I could say to from these, and checking the inferences us: it can org: him, "Oh, come on now. You are being about as yet unmade observations: this is "understandin fooled by the surface appearance of things! the essence of scientific method. portant" obsc You know that a beam is not a basic concept. models often You should talk about the molecules of Now a scientific theory is what I have : tage over at steel in these things, or be even more 'basic' been calling vertical explanation, a going to amuse us ! Tl about this and talk of the sub-atomic particles a more abstract level than the one on which build to mo and fields that make up the molecules !" By you make your observations, from which usually much and large, however, I would prefer to cross you predict back to your observation level. But, the cruci a bridge that was built by an engineer who A model in science, on the other hand, is and a theory knows how to calculate stresses in those what I have called a horizontal explanation. predict incorr surface manifestations called girders and I shall make the distinction between them have to redo i beams, nuts and bolts ! The point is to avoid clearer in a moment, but let me first talk to alwq~sbe about what theories do. any idea that a vertical explanation is necess- b predictions. I arily "better" in all instances. Theories perform several functions in tween flowinj In science we use both of these kinds of science. They help us organize observations, in pipes is a1 explanations. This will be clearer if I say what I like to call the "filing cabinet func- purposes, but t a few u-ords about the nature of science. tion." Instead of memorizing ten thousand wrong in sol Science is basically a set of rules for collecting separate observations you memorize a theory you put too data and the kind of inferences you can from which you can predict these obser- the wire will make from these data. If you want to play vations, which is quite a savings in work. of water thro the Science Game, the first basic rule is that They also predict in what areas to look for make it hottc the data you collect must be pmblic, i.e., that "important" data-data of practical or model, thou) any qualified person should be able to repeat theoretical significance. Because of the con- only a mode the steps you took to make your observation tinuous alternation between observation and advantages fc and make the same observation. The second theorizing, their continuous interaction, electricity far - basic rule is that you may make any sort of theories are al~uq~ssubject to revision or short, then, inferences or draw any sort of conclusions disproof. No scientific theory is ever final: models and t on the basis of these data that you wish, but you must always hold your mind open to ., : theory, your the possibility that some observation will thrown out (or take up the humbler status ust ,e ob- come along that the theory cannot account of models). , yc. - theory for (predict) and which calls for rejecting Where do we stand in parapsycho- A, B, and C, or modifying the theory. This applies even 10g.v with resDect to models and theories? U I I you do not to so-called scientific "laws." A scientific I regret to say that we are in a dismal lrse for your law is simply a theory that no one has pro- position. By and large, we just do not have duced data contradictory to, a theory that any good theories or models. I use the has predicted correctly in untold thousands 1s alternation adjective "good" here to mean a theory of instances.