• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

What is "paranormal"?

icerat

Philosopher
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
6,022
Location
sweden
I was reading the wikipedia article on "paranormal" and it begins with this quote from Terence Hines, Pseudoscience and the Paranormal (2003) -

The paranormal can best be thought of as a subset of pseudoscience. What sets the paranormal apart from other pseudosciences is a reliance on explanations for alleged phenomena that are well outside the bounds of established science. Thus, paranormal phenomena include extrasensory perception (ESP), telekinesis, ghosts, poltergeists, life after death, reincarnation, faith healing, human auras, and so forth. The explanations for these allied phenomena are phrased in vague terms of "psychic forces", "human energy fields", and so on. This is in contrast to many pseudoscientific explanations for other nonparanormal phenomena, which, although very bad science, are still couched in acceptable scientific terms

The article then goes on to break down "Paranormal" into the categories of Ghost Hunting, Ufology, and Cryptozoology. Of which only the first fits into the Hines description. Personally I wouldn't have included Ufos and Crypto under "para", though some examples may fit in the category and there's no real referencing in the article to support the claim.

Thoughts?

 
I was reading the wikipedia article on "paranormal" and it begins with this quote from Terence Hines, Pseudoscience and the Paranormal (2003) -



The article then goes on to break down "Paranormal" into the categories of Ghost Hunting, Ufology, and Cryptozoology. Of which only the first fits into the Hines description. Personally I wouldn't have included Ufos and Crypto under "para", though some examples may fit in the category and there's no real referencing in the article to support the claim.

Thoughts?

It is a special brand of woo that asserts that the mind has impossible powers due to the presence of impossible spirits.
 
It's also a way of ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ your way into looking cool and getting dummies to pay you for it.
It seems like professional but is just playacting a part for fulfilling wishful thinking.
 
It should be possible to map out a kind of paranormal landscape, but it would be a big undertaking. I would place the field of parapsychology at the center of the "purely or almost purely" paranormal, encompassing "psi" phenomena such as ESP, remote viewing, precognition, and telekinesis. At the farther fringes of "slightly paranormal" or "paranormal-adjacent" are the realms of unfound things such as cryptids or Atlantis, whose existence wouldn't necessarily require or imply any paranormal phenomenon if they could actually be repeatably observed, but for which the ongoing absence of repeatable observation is often given paranormal explanations. In between are "unexplained" experiences consistently attributed to paranormal phenomena, such as ghost sightings, prophetic dreams or visions, some UFO encounters, curses, crystal healing, divination, and a very long list of others. Embedded within this space is a large region of experiences and narratives associated with conventional religion, and another of experiences and narratives associated with occult magic. Of course, concepts that might seem specific at face value can span large areas of the paranormal map and/or recur in different portions of it. For instance, is an "angel" a frightening Eldritch creature that delivered announcements in Biblical times, one of your own ancestors living on in the afterlife, another name for an alien who helped build ancient monuments, a helpful invisible spirit that protects you from harm, a lucky trinket you can buy in a crystal shop, or a cosmic force invoked by name in a ceremonial magic ritual?

Some science crackpottery is almost entirely outside the paranormal space. For instance, over unity energy is hardly ever attributed to actions of spirits or hidden powers of the mind. The Bermuda Triangle is usually given SF-like explanations (like"magnetic vortex" or "dimensional portal") that are pseudoscientific and often impossible but not really (in my preferred usage) paranormal.
 
It should be possible to map out a kind of paranormal landscape, but it would be a big undertaking. I would place the field of parapsychology at the center of the "purely or almost purely" paranormal, encompassing "psi" phenomena such as ESP, remote viewing, precognition, and telekinesis. At the farther fringes of "slightly paranormal" or "paranormal-adjacent" are the realms of unfound things such as cryptids or Atlantis, whose existence wouldn't necessarily require or imply any paranormal phenomenon if they could actually be repeatably observed, but for which the ongoing absence of repeatable observation is often given paranormal explanations. In between are "unexplained" experiences consistently attributed to paranormal phenomena, such as ghost sightings, prophetic dreams or visions, some UFO encounters, curses, crystal healing, divination, and a very long list of others. Embedded within this space is a large region of experiences and narratives associated with conventional religion, and another of experiences and narratives associated with occult magic. Of course, concepts that might seem specific at face value can span large areas of the paranormal map and/or recur in different portions of it. For instance, is an "angel" a frightening Eldritch creature that delivered announcements in Biblical times, one of your own ancestors living on in the afterlife, another name for an alien who helped build ancient monuments, a helpful invisible spirit that protects you from harm, a lucky trinket you can buy in a crystal shop, or a cosmic force invoked by name in a ceremonial magic ritual?

Some science crackpottery is almost entirely outside the paranormal space. For instance, over unity energy is hardly ever attributed to actions of spirits or hidden powers of the mind. The Bermuda Triangle is usually given SF-like explanations (like"magnetic vortex" or "dimensional portal") that are pseudoscientific and often impossible but not really (in my preferred usage) paranormal.
Fire with fire, eh? ;)
 
Paranormal is very like paraplegic. It doesn't have a leg to stand on.
 
Crypto-zoology is interesting.

It is estimated that Australia has millions of species that haven't been scientifically documented (mostly very small things).

Every now and then, someone discovers a 'new' bird, or finds evidence that a formerly thought to be extinct species, still exists in small, isolated populations.

So I can see why people are attracted to the idea of shy, semi-mythical creatures hiding in wilderness areas.

Most recently I was blown away by a televised interview with a very old person from Indonesia, who had childhood memories of the 'monkey people' that used to raid their crops at night. There has been some speculation that there may have been a remnant population of homo floresiensis among the islands...

NB. It is hard to believe though, fossils that have been found suggest that this human species, a close relative, but not an ancestor, was active in the region from 190,000 to 50,000 years ago.

It's difficult to imagine people being able to hide for 50,000 years, but...

... Australia has recently found living examples of a pine tree that was thought to have been extinct 2 million years ago.

Here's a nifty little Australian Geographic article about our weird 'living fossil' species...

 
The thing is, the existence of a remnant population of a creature that was once thought extinct would not require any bending or breaking of the laws of the universe as we know them. Therefore cryptozoology does not necessarily fall under the term "paranormal". Now if you're talking about psychic invisible bigfoots, that's paranormal.

On the other hand, telepathy, which operates inconsistently and according to no known scientific principles, would require some kind of bending or breaking of the way we know the universe to work. The best explanation anyone's got is "science we haven't discovered yet" but then the obvious question is why not? These phenomenon have been claimed for decades - centuries, probably. Why have the cleverest species of animal on the planet, who can hit a rock with a rocket from 2 million kilometres away, who have discovered cures or treatments for dozens of diseases that used to ravage the population, who have probed the origin of the universe to 10-12 seconds after its appearance, not been able to explain psychic phenomena?

That's what "paranormal" means.
 
What about UFOs? In general they require faster-than-light travel, which would require no known scientific principles, yes?
 
Well, a lot of UFO reports include claims that the observed object was making "impossible maneuvers", and therefore must be alien. "Impossible maneuvers", as in defying the known laws of physics. So I guess you could describe that as a paranormal claim, though I doubt those who make it think of it as such. They're just assuming the aliens know stuff about the laws of physics that we don't.

The real explanation, of course, is almost certainly that they're making assumptions about the size and/or distance of the object which are incorrect.
 
What about UFOs? In general they require faster-than-light travel, which would require no known scientific principles, yes?
Only when you make certain assumptions about UFOs, which seems like a leap beyond any evidence. A UFO is simply a flying object that has not been identified. That doesn't mean that it must be aliens or that the aliens must come from outside of our own solar system. Most UFOs turn out to be mundane terrestrial objects that have been misidentified by the observer.
 
Only when you make certain assumptions about UFOs, which seems like a leap beyond any evidence. A UFO is simply a flying object that has not been identified. That doesn't mean that it must be aliens or that the aliens must come from outside of our own solar system. Most UFOs turn out to be mundane terrestrial objects that have been misidentified by the observer.
Hence my comment "in general" - and we're talking here about paranormal, which I think most of us here agree noneof which is actually outside normal, merely misidentified
 
No, I would not say that UFOs - UAPs - are paranormal. as Puppycow said, it's just a lack of identification. With telepathy there's a person who is saying "I can do a thing". With a UAP, it's just "I don't know what that is". The UAP phenomenon exists entirely in the ambiguity of images.
 
When people are babbling about alien ghosts, or being telepathically controlled or telepathically contacted by aliens, I'd drop the people making claims in the paranormal bucket.
 
Agreed. There's a world of difference between the claims "I saw a weird thing in the sky" and "aliens abducted me, stuck things up my bum, and that's why I was found wandering around town with no trousers and am now starting a new religion"
I'm in! Where do I sign up for the "things up my bum"?
 
I thought paranormal was just a credible sounding euphemism for ghosties and magic? Kind of like the UFO nuts rebranded as UAP so they wouldn't sound quite so much like loons?
 
I thought paranormal was just a credible sounding euphemism for ghosties and magic? Kind of like the UFO nuts rebranded as UAP so they wouldn't sound quite so much like loons?
Yes, but sometimes it's helpful to have a more precise definition.
 
Monsters that are Paranormal:

Vampires
Zombies (horror movie versions)
Werewolves
The Mummy
Demons

Monsters that are Not Paranormal

Frankenstein's Monster
Nessie
King Kong
Godzilla
The Creature from the Black Lagoon
 
You don't think it's important to be precise in philosophy?
With the exception of the law, no, I don't.

I certainly don't think it's important to be precise about paranormality as a philosophical distinction.

Put it another way: I'm sure there's any number of precise definitions out there. But practically speaking, it's a colloquialism. A figure of speech. Precision would be counterproductive.
 
With the exception of the law, no, I don't.

I certainly don't think it's important to be precise about paranormality as a philosophical distinction.

Put it another way: I'm sure there's any number of precise definitions out there. But practically speaking, it's a colloquialism. A figure of speech. Precision would be counterproductive.
All models are wrong, but some are useful. - George Box
 
Monsters that are Paranormal:

Vampires
Zombies (horror movie versions)
Werewolves
The Mummy
Demons

Monsters that are Not Paranormal

Frankenstein's Monster
Nessie
King Kong
Godzilla
The Creature from the Black Lagoon
The story of Frankenstein's Monster examines the moral implications of ensoulment through science. It's entirely paranormal.

King Kong and Godzilla both violate strength to weight limitations on size and mass.

Your categorization had problems.
 
The story of Frankenstein's Monster examines the moral implications of ensoulment through science. It's entirely paranormal.

King Kong and Godzilla both violate strength to weight limitations on size and mass.

Your categorization had problems.

The symbolism and morals of the Frankenstein narrative don't change the fact that within the narrative, Frankenstein uses entirely material means (body parts, surgery, chemicals, and electricity) to create and animate the monster. The overwhelmingly likely fact that those methods could never actually work in real life don't make them paranormal.

Likewise with the structural mechanics of King Kong and Godzilla. Being impossible in real life doesn't make a fictional concept paranormal.

The Warp Drives and Transporters in Star Trek aren't paranormal, even though they do things that we believe are almost certainly impossible and even though they sometimes malfunction in eerie ways. Technicians, not psychics or wizards or exorcists, are assigned to repair them after such malfunctions. But some of Spock's and Troi's powers are paranormal, along with those of many aliens such as the Q.

(In other SF, the word "psionic" or just "psi" is often used as code for "just like paranormal, but somehow scientific instead," just as in real-world academic parapsychology. "Psionic" is closest to what paranormal phenomena would be if they were even partly empirically verifiable. Hence, "psionic technology," "Psi-Corps" of psionically empowered police, etc.)

These are exactly the distinctions my categorization was intended to point out. "Paranormal" is often used to modify "phenomena," as if paranormal is a type of phenomenon. But that doesn't hold up under close examination. Paranormal doesn't describe a phenomenon itself so much as the explanation or model of the phenomenon's cause. Doctor Frankenstein, Ron Weasley's mother, and Thomas Edison can all make nonliving matter speak, but only one of those cases is paranormal.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom