Parapsychology Is the spirit willing? A pentalogue on parapsychology HIS article started life as a review on extra-sensory perception (ESP) some of Test Your Psychic Powers by years ago (Colman, 1987, ch. 7), and T Susan Blackmore and Adam nothing that I have read or heard since Hart-Davis (1995). The author of the re­ then has persuaded me to change it. view, Andrew Colman, felt that one of In spite of this, Susan Blackmore the issues he wished to raise was not and Adam Hart-Davis's (1995) unusual only controversial but also of sufficient and ambitious new book certainly man­ importance and general interest to war­ ages to rekindle interest in the Andrew M. Colman Susan Blackmore rant an open discussion incorporating paranormal without sensationalizing or more than one opinion, so he ap­ distorting the evidence. It is really a proached the editor of The Psychologist brief introduction to psychical research with the suggestion of an article-length together with a laboratory manual for propaedeutic exchange of views, along home use. It covers telepathy, effects of the lines of Bronfenbrenner, Kessel, Kes­ crystals, dreams and lucid dreaming, sen, and White (1986), in which the dowsing, premonitions and precogni­ fundamental issue could be aired and tion, psychokinesis, ouija and planchette discussed among several psychologists phenomena, palmistry, and astrology. with an interest in parapsychology. The Each phenomenon is introduced with Christopher C. French editor agreed to the suggestion, and this startling anecdotal evidence, followed article is the result. by a brief though balanced summary of The opening remarks by Andrew M. relevant research evidence, and (a sur­ Colman were sent to Susan Blackmore prise feature that makes the book for a response, and then both Colman's unique) a detailed explanation of how and Blackmore's contributions were to perform a suitably controlled experi­ sent to Robert L. Morris for further ment, together with clear drawings and comment, and so on, so each of the Blue-Peter-type instructions on how to separate contributions to the discussion construct a planchette from a margarine was written in the light of all the ones tub and a ballpoint pen, or how to make Robert L. Morris Richard Wiseman that preceded it. a deck of ESP cards, a dowsing rod, a box for testing psychokinetic effects on woodlice (no kidding), or other neces­ Andrew M. Andrew M. Colman sary apparatus. The discussions are Most subjects become more interesting superb and the experiments so carefully Colman, Susan the more one learns about them, but the thought out and so clearly explained paranormal seems - in my experience at that this book may well forge general Blackmore, least - to be a striking exception to this readers into amateur experimenters - a rule. People who know little about al­ delightful thought. Robert L. Morris, legedly paranormal phenomena are Now the big question which, like a often intrigued, but the more one learns, 70-year-old rug that has been lying on Richard the less interesting they seem. They all the hearth for too long, deserves a thor­ dissolve under scrutiny, the scientific ough airing. Blackmore and Wiseman, and evidence turns out to be either metho­ Hart-Davis's (1995) readable and bal­ dologically flawed (for example, many anced little introduction to the Christopher C. of Rhine's experiments, Targ and paranormal notwithstanding, what is Puthoff's remote viewing experiments, the point of it all? Why bother carrying French discuss a most psi Ganzfeld experiments), or out more experiments into these obvi­ merely fraudulent (for example, the ously non-existent phenomena? Take central dilemma of Soal-Goldney experiments, several other astrology, for example. Numerous em­ experiments from Rhine's laboratory), pirical studies have shown that research into the and nothing of significance is left to ex­ astrology is humbug - the Gauquelin ef­ plain. That, at least, was the view I fects are irrelevant to conventional paranormal. formed when I reviewed the evidence astrology, may be interpretable as The Psychologist August 1996 361 Parapsychology merely the effects of being born at dif­ and one full one ferent times of the year, and may in any you learn some­ event be artifacts - but the studies were thing new. With pointless anyway, because the theory is no lids the twigs self-evidently ridiculous. Mars is associ­ still jump over the ated with aggression because it is red, water; put lids on but we now know that this is not be­ and they don't. cause of the presence of blood but The inevitable rather of iron-rich clay of the type we conclusion is that have used on earth for building red­ it works only brick universities; Venus represents when YOll know love and beauty because it looks soft the answer in ad­ and pale, but we now know that its vance - and now white mist is made of sulphuric acid; you have really the 12 astrological constellations are as­ learned something sociated with personal qualities by about unconscious virtue of their supposed resemblance to muscular action! a ram, a bull, twins, and so on, but we Similarly, ex­ now know that they would look quite perimenting with different from another angle; and any­ horoscopes and way they cannot have their claimed palmistry reveals effects in far northern latitudes because our willingness to some of the constellations never even accept generalized rise there. The qualities of the constella­ personality read­ tions are, in any event, beside the point, ings, and just because the precession of the earth's thinking through a axis has caused all of them to slip out of controlled test of place during the centuries since astrol­ crystal power may ogy was devised by the Babylonians; at be enough to the Spring equinox, for example, the make you laugh at sun is supposed by astrologers to be in the temptation to Aries but is nowadays actually in Pi­ part with good money for a pretty lump interpretations, including self-deception sces. of quartz. or innocent cognitive mistakes, as well What is the point of carrying out What if some psychic claims are as strategies of deception and exploita­ more experiments on this nonsense, or valid? Then doing experiments is the tion by clever frauds. We also for that matter on other allegedly para­ best way to find out. I hope Andrevv investigate the various factors that af­ normal phenomena? The energies of Colman is right, and this book forges a fect the fonnation, development and curious and intelligent researchers, both few more amateur experimenters. Sci­ maintenance of belief systems. Our ap­ amateur and professional, could surely ence is not just for scientists. Everyone proach thus overlaps considerably with be better spent on less futile pursuits, can benefit from thinking experimen­ Sue Blackmore's and our other col­ such as investigating why people be­ tally - especially about something they leagues in this debate. lieve such things - an interesting care about. We also research the possibility that research area in which the other con­ Finally there are all those psychology there are genuinely new means of envi­ tributors to this discussion have made students who hate experimental design ronmental interaction still to be important contributions. I don't expect and statistics. Using parapsychological uncovered. This is done by exploring that the other contributors will neces­ practicals I have watched the arguments some of the most promising evidence sarily agree with my conclusion, but I change from 'Yes it is!' 'No it isn'tl ' to from other researchers and doing our find it hard to imagine what their 'Could she have heard something7' or best to improve upon it, and we are en­ counter-arguments will be. If someone 'Might he be guessing7' to 'How can we couraged by our own results as well as seriously hypothesized that the moon is find out? ... '. This is why I bother. those of other research units. Methodol­ made of Gorgonzola, would we devote ogy continues to improve, as does our resources to testing it scientifically? If ability to deal with potential fraud in­ not, then why astrology and other pre­ Robert L. Morris terpretations. Our reading of the recent posterous doctrines and theories of the Andrew Colman appears to argue that literature appears to differ from An­ paranormal? studies of an effect are pointless if the drew Colman's. One problem of course theory behind it 'is self-evidently ridicu­ is that opinions about how well or lous'. Unfortunately, it is not alvvays poorly a set of studies has been con­ Susan Blackmore easy to achieve a consensus on the ab­ ducted or what constitutes a serious Why bother7 My answer is the reason surdity of a theory, and also, I don't rather than trivial flaw can be some­ we wrote the book. Twenty-five years think we should confuse an effect with what subjective, as any editor, reviewer ago I was convinced that telepathy was its interpretation. The evidence for an or reviewee knows all too well. This is real, astral bodies could fly, and scien­ effect is independent of a given theoreti­ especially a problem in studies of com­ tists were denying the truth. The reason cal interpretation of the effect. This is plex systems, and we have much to I changed my mind was not the lack of why researchers such as ourselves at learn in this area. I have yet to read a laboratory evidence, nor the sceptics on Edinburgh prefer a bottom-up ap­ study with no Haws at all. Perhaps TV. It was doing experiments for my­ proach, starting with the available data readers can suggest one.