Psychology studies bizarre experience in the aspect that the experience is a by product of our own mental processes. NOT in the aspect that the bizarre experiences were real.
Well it's not, it just disagrees with your point.
There is no other way to diagnose certain psychological issues than by the subject describing it. This is a limitation of the science. These issues are occurring inside someone's mental construct so we cannot measure them, we can only ask for their description. However this does not mean that what the person claims to have seen is real and cannot be assumed to be so.
However parapsychology refers to things that, by their very nature, can be tested. They are claimed to exist outside mental condtructs and in reality. Thus they can be tested. Yet they are not found.
The Ganzfeld would indeed by a proper test. It stands by itself with no need to justify itself with regards to other sciences. However the results are far from what would be called definitive. A discussion about those results is not the subject here and deserves (yet another) thread of its own.
The Ganzfeld experments are trying to create clear results (but still suffer hugely from the level of interpretation required). This is not enecdotal evidence and is a step forward to try and show some clearer result.
But again whether it has or not is very debatable.
The skin conductance, EEG or fMRI show nothing useful as they could be triggered by all sorts of mental processes - imagination, delusion etc. It's hardly proof of a real ability.
Now this is just misunderstanding by you david whether deliberate or not. I was referring to Open Mind's reference to "developing a theory" about the mechanism behind psi, which is entirely unnecessary to conduct an experiment. A hypothesis can be a tentative explanation for an observation.
So an overall theory is not required to perform experiments, indeed you can do them even without a hypothesis.
I could test a psychic tomorrow scientifically, without a hypothesis.
You're arguing for the sake of arguing now. Cognition is defined clearly as I described above. That's what it means. New theories won't change this meaning.
Well technically that's not what it means at all. It would clearly refer to memory disorders, halucinations etc.
But presumably you're referring to the way it is used by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) to refer specifically to Psi.
These experiments you refer to hardly undisputed scientific fact. Those who want to see it as support fo parapsychology will.
It is just simply not a clear replicable effect.
Hardly. I'm not exactly the first person to doubt the validity of 'parapsychology'.
davidsmith73
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2001
- Messages
- 1,697
Ashles said:
What on earth do you mean when you say that parapsychology assumes that psi experiences are "real"?
The fact remains that psychology studies "stories" as you call them, just like parapsychology.
yes it is missing the point as I have explained. I'll explain again. Psychology and cognitive neuroscience can study aspects of conscious experience. This conscious experience may well have physical correlates and associated behaviours but the cognition is a fundamental aspect of the discipline. The same is the case with parapsychology. The anomalous cognition is a fundamental part of the study and physical correlates and associated behaviour included as a means to measure the nature of the cognitive process.
What are you talking about? "real"? I smell straw.
At least you now admit that parapsychology is studying something that does not just exist as "stories". Yes, I agree that psi phenomena can be tested and familiar techniques used in conventional psychology and neuroscience can be used in psi experiments. So parapsychology is not completely unlike normal science contrary to your assertion.
But we're not discussing the results are we! We're discussing the extent to which parapsychology is similar to other scientific fields. You originally claimed that it was completely different. I have shown you that your assertion is wrong.
Psiload
Master Poster
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2001
- Messages
- 2,102
Getting back to the point of jambo's original "haunted place" post:
I recently read an account of a family who'd moved into a new house. The husband left on a week long business trip, and left his wife and three kids at home. The wife started having strange experiences... hearing and seeing strange noises, feelings of fear and unease. She noticed that her children were also having strange experiences, and that they seemed to be moody, distracted, and listless, and thay had lost their usually hardy appetites. The wife decided that evil entities inhabited the house and their negative energy was effecting the family.
Her husband returned home at the end of the week, she told him about the experiences she'd been having, and she told him that she feared they'd purchased a haunted house.
The husband quickly herded his family ouside, and then he used his cell phone to call Ghostbusters...
actually, he called the gas company, and they sent a service technician out to repair the faulty furnace that was leaking carbon monoxide into the house.
And then they sent a short, freaky looking lady who said, "This house has been cleansed."
Note: Your reality may be different from my reality, but carbon monoxide doesn't give a rat's behind for anybody's reality.
I recently read an account of a family who'd moved into a new house. The husband left on a week long business trip, and left his wife and three kids at home. The wife started having strange experiences... hearing and seeing strange noises, feelings of fear and unease. She noticed that her children were also having strange experiences, and that they seemed to be moody, distracted, and listless, and thay had lost their usually hardy appetites. The wife decided that evil entities inhabited the house and their negative energy was effecting the family.
Her husband returned home at the end of the week, she told him about the experiences she'd been having, and she told him that she feared they'd purchased a haunted house.
The husband quickly herded his family ouside, and then he used his cell phone to call Ghostbusters...
actually, he called the gas company, and they sent a service technician out to repair the faulty furnace that was leaking carbon monoxide into the house.
And then they sent a short, freaky looking lady who said, "This house has been cleansed."
Note: Your reality may be different from my reality, but carbon monoxide doesn't give a rat's behind for anybody's reality.
Incorrect calling of strawman argument.
Or are you now claiming you don't understand what I mean by "real" when it refers to an experience that an individual perceives (i.e. it is real and happened, vs they imagined it)?
Oh this is ridiculous. I can't believe you are now resorting to pretending I am saying things I am not.
I am (of course) refering to what parapsychology would be studying if the phenomena were real. If they were real then they are things that could be tested.
If they aren't real then the tests may still be carried out, but they aren't going to find anything. Much like what has happened.
I claimed parapsychology is attempting to study phenomena that have never been shown to exist. Unlike all other scienific fields.
I think you might have forgotten to post the part of your argument the shows this is wrong.
davidsmith73
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2001
- Messages
- 1,697
Ashles said:
I debunked that often used argument against ganzfeld here:
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=49622
These steps forward from anecdotal evidence have been going on for more than half a century. Are you not aware of this?
Really, how so? I doubt you have read the experimental protocol Ashles.
Do you think that a mechanistic hypothesis is needed to show that psi exists?
Does psychology study only the physical and chemical changes in the brain?
How? What's your reasoning here?
I'm refering to most ways of defining psi. Psi certainly isn't defined to include memory disorders or hallucination, although you seem to think so. I'm curious as to why you think that.
Replications aside, I have shown your original assertion to be nonsense. Parapsychology is similar to other fields of science. The phenomena does not simply exist as "stories".
And your not the first to be shown to be wrong
davidsmith73
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2001
- Messages
- 1,697
Ashles said:
I don't understand what type of psi experience can be regarded as "real" and in what context. For example, how is ESP real in this context?
Regardless of the results of the experiments (which we are bound to differ on), the fact is that your initial assertion that parapsychology is the only field of science where the phenomena exists only as "stories" is complete rubbish.
I'm not going to do that. Been there too many times before. I doubt you would objectively examine the experiments so I'm not going to waste my time. I mean, I gave you an abstract from a study showing neural correlates of presentiment and there have been various other papers linked on this site and your response was that it is simply not evidence, an assertion you make without any further justification. It appears as if some people will never be convinced.
Actually this is getting quite tedious. Your attitude that you have somehow "proved" Ganzfeld to be significant and that you have "demonstrated" parapsychology to be a valid science equal to others is arrogant, and incorrect. Declaring something to be fact will not make it so.
You may have decided to accept parapsychology to be a valid science on a par with other scientific fields but it is not considered so. I have (as others have previously) attempted to explain to you why but you won't listen or change your viewpoint.
Your misinterpretation of Psychology and what it is studying is wilful and apparently deliberate.
No as explained previously. But these are parts that are measurable and directly observable.
Some of your other comments are too pointless to go into as if the answers are not quite clear to you then nothing I can say will explain it to you as I am using language and definitions as they are commonly used. If you aren't, then communicating itself is an issue.
"Replications aside" - ah the mantra of the parapsychology apologist.
And you have shown nothing of the sort. These phenomena have not been shown to exist. They continue to exist as stories.
Stories about great big clear effects that are described by people as obvious and impressive and common. Those are the stories.
Compared to the reality of the statistical wrangling over Ganzfeld and debate over what skin galvonometers might or might not be measuring.
Parapsychology just can't show any useful evidence of any of the phenomena it is trying to study.
You have not shown otherwise.
The Mighty Thor
Muse
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
- Messages
- 961
Psiload said:
Well put. Psiload. jambo273 has been warned that many of the things he says he experiences sounded a lot like carbon monoxide poisoning. But apparently he doesn't "have gas". I wonder if you could get poisoned by unmaintained Calor appliances. I believe these are used in his church, but I might be wrong.
I know that CO can be a killer. But what would be the effect if one were getting "small doses" over a period of time?
The Mighty Thor
Muse
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
- Messages
- 961
To parapsychologists "imagination" and "delusion" don't exist, Ashles.
Seriously, the phenomena claimed that we are most familiar with are usually bigger effects than those that parapsychologists find (disputable) evidence for. And they claim to effect things in the physical world in a BIG way. Objects are reputed to have moved by a mechanism unknown to science. People read other people's minds, see into the future, detect illnesses, see inside bodies like X-RAY, heal by touch, and so on. These are BIG effects. Yet the parapsychologists come up with TINY, inconclusive, supposed anomalies.
I mean, seeing 4.2 seconds into the future when staring at photos in a test might be a handy trait -- but it is a far cry from what Sylvia says she can do.
I'm not a scientist, so maybe david could put on his ultra-sceptic hat and explain where there might be problems in the presentiment tests. And anyone else, of course.
Psiload
Master Poster
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2001
- Messages
- 2,102
I've often pondered this curious line of thought myself...The Mighty Thor said:To parapsychologists "imagination" and "delusion" don't exist, Ashles.
Seriously, the phenomena claimed that we are most familiar with are usually bigger effects than those that parapsychologists find (disputable) evidence for. And they claim to effect things in the physical world in a BIG way. Objects are reputed to have moved by a mechanism unknown to science. People read other people's minds, see into the future, detect illnesses, see inside bodies like X-RAY, heal by touch, and so on. These are BIG effects. Yet the parapsychologists come up with TINY, inconclusive, supposed anomalies.
I mean, seeing 4.2 seconds into the future when staring at photos in a test might be a handy trait -- but it is a far cry from what Sylvia says she can do.
I'm not a scientist, so maybe david could put on his ultra-sceptic hat and explain where there might be problems in the presentiment tests. And anyone else, of course.
If the parapsychologists have proven anything, it's the fact that psi powers work NOTHING at all like how we would expect, or want them to.
If parapsychology has produced a single fact, it would be something along the lines of...
Psi powers are extremely unpredictable, barely detectable, and for all intents and purposes, completely worthless in the scope of daily application.
What parapsychologists insist they've "proven", bears not even a passing resemblance to what the average person on the street would consider "psychic" or "paranormal" abilities.
If you said to someone, "Hey, you see that guy over there? He can influence a random number generator through anomolous cognition at a deviation of .0043 over mean chance prediction." They'd probably be like, "So, he's like a math teacher or something?" But if you showed them David Blaine "levitating" on TEEVEE, they'd be like, "Hey! He's a psychic!"
davidsmith73
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2001
- Messages
- 1,697
Ashles said:
I object to the usual criticisms of ganzfeld, namely that the procedure is prone to judging interpretational problems. This critisicm is invalid, although it doesn't stop people like you from continuing to pretend that you have debunked the technique.
And you're right it's not fact, it's just my opinion. Just like it's your opinion that parapsychology is completely unlike any other science. However, we can both take an objective look at what parapsychology actually does. When we do this we see that it, like other conventional sciences that study cognition, measures physical correlates and observable behaviour that are described as anomalous. You continue to ignore this point.
Yes, you have tried to explain why and I have shown you why your argument is invalid. Please address my point above!
I see no misinterpretation. I have always said that it is studying cognition and associated behaviour and neural processes. Parapsychology does this too.
Right, so you agree that psychology studies cognition and its associated behaviors and measurable neural processes. Parapsychology measures the behaviour of participants and also some neural processes associated with anomalous cognition. So what's the problem?
http://www.psy.gu.se/EJP/EJP ULT AP GB.pdf
I never claimed to have debunked Ganzfeld. I was pointing out that the data is not hard or clear enough, or the experiment unbiased or univerally accepted enough for it to be unequivocal evidence for psi.
If I had done so or conversely you had shown my "argument is invalid" then there would be no debate.
But there is. It's hardly just you and I deciding overall opinion on these matters. Parapsychology is not considered a real science by many many people.
Now this doesn't prove anything in itself of course, but it remains a fact that it is very much a controversial field because many people don't believe it has anything to study as a field i.e. there are no paranormal effects to research.
And parapsychology has not shown otherwise.
The study of cognition and associated behaviour and neural processes are the remit of psychology. If parapsychology does this then it is actually just psychology it is studying.
To sum up (and I feel I'm repeating almost my first line on the subject):
If, by anomolous cognition you are referring to unusual mental processing of information or stimulus (i.e. matters occurring entirely within the subject's mind) then this is the field of psychology. If parapsychologists are doing this then they are just duplicating the work that belongs in another field.
If you are referring to unusual phenomenon that are external to th subject's brain and affecting or reacting to real-world events (e.g. precognition, telekinesis, mind-reading etc.) then these are the firld of parapsychology. And these are the abilities that are quesioned to exist.
Can we at least agree on that?
davidsmith73
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2001
- Messages
- 1,697
Ashles said:
You pointed out that the ganzfeld suffers greatly from the "level of interpretation required". However you have not indicated how this is so. You can't just make claims like that without evidence.
Have you read the paper I just linked? There are clearly effects to research. How you can say there aren't is beyond me.
Erm, Ashles, you do realise that when you say "stimulus" this refers to real-world events that are external to the subjects brain so psychology studies the brain's reaction to external events. Parapsychology does the same, only the difference is that the method by which the information from the stimulus gets into the brain is by anomalous means.
So you declare parapsychology to be a separate field from psychology based on your definitions above. So what. You can delcare genetics to be a separate field from embryology but that says nothing about the validity of either's methods. Stop playing games with the arbitrary definitions of which field belongs to another and start focusing on why you claim parapsychology to be unlike any other scienctific discipline.
Errm, as I said. Of course, first parapsychology should really demonstrate that these anomolous methods of information transfer actually exist.
That's obvious.
And as Psiload points out the very paper you link to starts by categorically saying:
So how you can quote this paper as anything that clearly shows evidence of Psi is beyond me.
Pot? Kettle on line one for you.
The only games are being played by you. They are different fields and the difference is what they are studying (as should be self evident).
What parapsychology studies as its field (i.e. paranormal abilities) have not been shown to exist.
The fact that they use some techniques used by the field of psychology means nothing in terms of validating these claimed phenomena.
I can search for ghostly cold spots using a thermometer, but it doesn't mean that ghosts exists just because I use accepted physics to search for them.