Is parapsychology a pseudoscience?

[madurobob]

Yes, it is possible to approach parapsychology scientifically. One can also approach Christianity scientifically. That does not make Christianity "science".

 

[DoomMetal]

Or, am I wrong? Have there been some important breakthroughs in parapsychology by scientists studying it? Have they proven the existence of something paranormal?

The usual claim of the psi believers is that the skeptics have not read the parapsychological material proving psi. I could equally turn around and say the believers have not read the skeptical material. But to be honest the skeptical literature of psi is very slim, for every 100s of woo books there will only be a single debunking book. It amazes me how the psi believers still peddle the nonsense that their beliefs are being supressed... they have mainstream publishers and media attention and promotion all the time. I have been researching this field for a few years now and read many books and there are only a handful of skeptical books written on psi. Of course there are many books debunking general paranormal claims or spiritualism etc, but not specifically psi experiments from the parapsychologists.

The only main skeptical book of psi experiments is ESP: A Scientific Evaluation by C. E. M. Hansel published in 1966 and a revised edition in 1980, most psi believers ignored the book. Another one is Pseudoscience and the paranormal : a critical examination of the evidence published in 1988 by Terence Hines. It would be interesting if a new book was released.

anyway even if the skeptical material was available online, the believers wouldn't even read it they have no interest in any evidence contrary to their belief and just call anything and anyone who opposes them a pseudoskeptic.

 

[madurobob]

The usual claim of the psi believers is that the skeptics have not read the parapsychological material proving psi. I could equally turn around and say the believers have not read the skeptical material. But to be honest the skeptical literature of psi is very slim, for every 100s of woo books there will only be a single debunking book. It amazes me how the psi believers still peddle the nonsense that their beliefs are being supressed... they have mainstream publishers and media attention and promotion all the time. I have been researching this field for a few years now and read many books and there are only a handful of skeptical books written on psi. Of course there are many books debunking general paranormal claims or spiritualism etc, but not specifically psi experiments from the parapsychologists.

The only main skeptical book of psi experiments is ESP: A Scientific Evaluation by C. E. M. Hansel published in 1966 and a revised edition in 1980, most psi believers ignored the book. Another one is Pseudoscience and the paranormal : a critical examination of the evidence published in 1988 by Terence Hines. It would be interesting if a new book was released.

anyway even if the skeptical material was available online, the believers wouldn't even read it they have no interest in any evidence contrary to their belief and just call anything and anyone who opposes them a pseudoskeptic.

See, thats a read flag to me.

When you publish a book you are going after the wallets of the credulous. When you publish research in a peer -reviewed publication you are seeking consensus among scientists with similar specialites. When there is plenty of the former and a paucity of the latter then there is a good change you're dealing in pseudoscience.

 

[GhostofHume]

Not having an actual demonstrable object of study certainly makes Parapsychology unique among the sciences (at the very least).

That IS what makes Parapsychology special, it's adaptation of the scientific method in the absence of an actual object of study makes it the control group for science.

 

[Vinegar Tom]

Since I live in Edinburgh, I volunteered out of pure curiosity to be tested for psychic ability by the Koestler Chair of Parapsychology (this is something that you can do simply by sending them a polite letter). I have been tested twice. In one test I achieved no results whatsoever, but I was told afterwards that I was a control subject and that was the expected result.

The other experiment was rather more interesting. I was supposed to use "micro-PK" to influence the random generation of pixels on a screen in such a way as to make them less random. I scored precisely zero. This confused the postgrad student who had designed the experiment, because every other subject had scored slightly above chance, thus making my result simultaneously the most and least interesting! I tried to involve him in a discussion of how these amazing abilities were supposed to work, since I had no idea which of the numerous bits of kit scattered about the room was the random number generator. He looked at me as if I was a very stupid person indeed and patiently explained that all computers have a built-in random number generator. I thought the best revenge was to quietly agree with him and walk out without attempting to explain that those built-in algorithms are not in fact random, and always give results a little above chance if you repeat them long enough.

Incidentally, does that impossible score of zero ironically make me psychic after all?

And if so, can I have a million bucks?

Please...?

 

[GhostofHume]

I was supposed to use "micro-PK" to influence the random generation of pixels on a screen in such a way as to make them less random. I scored precisely zero. This confused the postgrad student who had designed the experiment, because every other subject had scored slightly above chance, thus making my result simultaneously the most and least interesting! I tried to involve him in a discussion of how these amazing abilities were supposed to work, since I had no idea which of the numerous bits of kit scattered about the room was the random number generator. He looked at me as if I was a very stupid person indeed and patiently explained that all computers have a built-in random number generator. I thought the best revenge was to quietly agree with him and walk out without attempting to explain that those built-in algorithms are not in fact random, and always give results a little above chance if you repeat them long enough.

THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Why do parapsychology experiments using random number generators never seem to address this issue? How many tiny-but-significant effects are caused by just this thing?

 

[Donn]

Is pseudopsychology a parascience?

 

[Dr B]

That IS what makes Parapsychology special, it's adaptation of the scientific method in the absence of an actual object of study makes it the control group for science.

No - it does not make it special at all - it makes it non-scientific.

Science has its own control groups....no need for para-woo.

 

[Dr B]

That IS what makes Parapsychology special, it's adaptation of the scientific method in the absence of an actual object of study makes it the control group for science.

You also assume that parapsych adapts the scientific method. I would say that only occurs in the minority of cases and so does not typify or represent the field on the whole.

Most of the para-woo i read is logically fallacious and yes, logic is a part of science.

 

[DoomMetal]

When you publish a book you are going after the wallets of the credulous. When you publish research in a peer -reviewed publication you are seeking consensus among scientists with similar specialites. When there is plenty of the former and a paucity of the latter then there is a good change you're dealing in pseudoscience.

I am in agreement, but most scientists have no time to debunk paranormal claims. Remember the psi believers get mainstream media coverage and their material outweighs the sceptical material by far.

If you go to any paranormal section in a book shop critical or sceptical books are never found in that section. Most folk (the typical layman) does not have access to peer-reviewed scientific papers. In newspapers or on the TV all the time are claims or paranormal activity and they are usually presented without sceptical coverage.

If a couple of "big names" wrote some mainstream books critical of psi, they may find themselves in bookshops. That is only the way to get the word out, as there is little coverage of scepticism of psi in the media.

 

[DoomMetal]

Here is one of the few scientific papers that was written on a scientific experiment into psi:

Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was used in an effort to document the existence of psi. If psi exists, it occurs in the brain, and hence, assessing the brain directly should be more sensitive than using indirect behavioral methods (as have been used previously). To increase sensitivity, this experiment was designed to produce positive results if telepathy, clairvoyance (i.e., direct sensing of remote events), or precognition (i.e., knowing future events) exist. Moreover, the study included biologically or emotionally related participants (e.g., twins) and emotional stimuli in an effort to maximize experimental conditions that are purportedly conducive to psi. In spite of these characteristics of the study, psi stimuli and non-psi stimuli evoked indistinguishable neuronal responses-although differences in stimulus arousal values of the same stimuli had the expected effects on patterns of brain activation. These findings are the strongest evidence yet obtained against the existence of paranormal mental phenomena.

Moulton, S. T., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2008). Using neuroimaging to resolve the psi debate. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 182-192.

http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~moulton/Moulton_Kosslyn_2008_Neuroimaging_Psi.pdf

 

[Sherman Bay]

... those built-in algorithms are not in fact random, and always give results a little above chance if you repeat them long enough.

I am aware that most computer algorithms are formulas and not random, but what would make them give results a little above chance if you repeat them long enough? Or are you just cherry-picking results and ignoring the ones below chance? Please explain.

 

[DoomMetal]

It is a usual claim by the psi believers who say scientists do not test their claims, but this is contradicted by Taylor and his colleagues.

See:

Taylor, J. G. & Balanovski, E. (1978). Can electromagnetism account for extra-sensory phenomena? Nature 276, 64-67.

Taylor, J. G. & Balanovski, E. (1979). Is there any scientific explanation of the paranormal? Nature 279, 631-633.

Taylor as a physicist came to the conclusion that if "psi" or "psychic" (PK) forces exist then they would have to have a physical mechanism, only four possible forces could account for psi: gravitation, the weak force, the strong force, and electromagnetism.

With the first three ruled out, the only scientifically feasible explanation for psi would be electromagnetism.

Taylor and Balanovski set up many investigations into supposed psi phenomena and using test subjects etc and used all kinds of scientific equipment to measure EM fields. But in conclusion the EM fields were too weak to explain any "paranormal" activity and nothing "paranormal" was observed.

Modern day psi believers claim quantum physics explains their psi, however, the Standard Model of physics (recently the Higgs particle was detected in proof) can predict particle values to 10 or more decimal places, so there can be no new psi forces. Everything is therefore contained within physical reality and there is no room for Psi, unless of course they invoke some non-physical dimension outside of time and space.

If psi exists in the material world like the psi believers claim it would have to have a physical basis, but as seen above there is no evidence for this. In response all psi believers can do is claim psi is totally non-physical, very few of them accept that psi is out of time and space. But If that is the case then psi is metaphysical in nature but every single modern day psi believer claims that material science has proven their "non-physical" psi

Perhaps they are not deep thinkers and do not see their own contradictions, but these contradictions go very deep.

Science is also about repeatability but psi has never been repeated, and most psi believers even claim it is not predictable yet they still claim their psi is science it gets to the point where it is downright dishonesty... why can't the psi believers accept their beliefs are metaphysical and beyond empirical science? Instead they feel the need to lie and claim their psi is scientific and call anyone who disagrees with them a "pseudoskeptic".

Psi is no different than creationism, it is a form of denialism.

 

[DoomMetal]

Basic physics leaves it not looking good for parapsychology as a field in any way. Sean Carroll points out that both human brains and the spoons they try to bend are made, like all matter, of quarks and leptons; everything else they do is emergent properties of the behaviour of quarks and leptons. And the quarks and leptons interact through the four forces: strong, weak, electromagnetic and gravitational. Thus either it's one of the four known forces or it's a new force, and any new force with range over 1 millimetre must be at most a billionth the strength of gravity or it will have been captured in experiments already done. So either it's electromagnetism, gravity or something weaker than gravity.

This leaves no force that could possibly account for telekinesis, for example. Telepathy would require a new force much weaker than gravity that is not subject to the inverse square law, and also a detector in the brain evolved to use it for signaling. Precognition, the receipt of information transmitted back in time, would violate quantum field theory.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Parapsychology#Fundamental_scientific_problems

Not seen any response to that from the psi believers

 

[Belz...]

It's not a science. It's magic.

 

[Sherman Bay]

Taylor as a physicist came to the conclusion that if "psi" or "psychic" (PK) forces exist then they would have to have a physical mechanism, only four possible forces could account for psi: gravitation, the weak force, the strong force, and electromagnetism.

To a little boy with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

Once of the postulates to explain paranormal phenomena is that there is some new, undiscovered force at work. This is usually advanced when known ones have been exhausted.

Not that I believe it for a moment. I just wanted to clarify that your argument could be accused of having an excluded middle.

 

[BobR]

Interesting discussion. Just out of curiosity, how might a scientific test of this phenomenon go? I had a friend who was an occupational therapist. One of her clients was an autistic 15-year-old boy. She mentioned to me that she would play chess with him (she doesn't play well), and while she was thinking about her move, he would interrupt her and say that's a terrible move, make the move she was thinking about and show her why. She was quite nonplussed about it. I suggested that she take a deck of cards, look at each one, and ask him what the card was. She said that he got 34 right out of the deck. I suggested that he attempt to guess the cards without her looking at them, and she told me that he only got a couple.

While these are hardly scientific evidence of mind reading, it certainly is interesting. What suggestions might you have to test something like this more scientifically?

 

[Steve001]

Interesting discussion. Just out of curiosity, how might a scientific test of this phenomenon go? I had a friend who was an occupational therapist. One of her clients was an autistic 15-year-old boy. She mentioned to me that she would play chess with him (she doesn't play well), and while she was thinking about her move, he would interrupt her and say that's a terrible move, make the move she was thinking about and show her why. She was quite nonplussed about it. I suggested that she take a deck of cards, look at each one, and ask him what the card was. She said that he got 34 right out of the deck. I suggested that he attempt to guess the cards without her looking at them, and she told me that he only got a couple.

While these are hardly scientific evidence of mind reading, it certainly is interesting. What suggestions might you have to test something like this more scientifically?

Just a thought. Perhaps he was watching her eye movements and realized what she was planing. I can comment on anything else that took place.

 

[Aepervius]

It's not a science. It's magic.

 

[Aepervius]

To a little boy with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

Once of the postulates to explain paranormal phenomena is that there is some new, undiscovered force at work. This is usually advanced when known ones have been exhausted.

Not that I believe it for a moment. I just wanted to clarify that your argument could be accused of having an excluded middle.

It was mentionned , read again what he quoted :

Thus either it's one of the four known forces or it's a new force, and any new force with range over 1 millimetre must be at most a billionth the strength of gravity or it will have been captured in experiments already done.