Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mmintl.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka From: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) Newsgroups: net.philosophy Subject: Re: Parapsychology Message-ID: <755@mmintl.UUCP> Date: Fri, 1-Nov-85 20:21:57 EST Article-I.D.: mmintl.755 Posted: Fri Nov 1 20:21:57 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 5-Nov-85 04:55:33 EST References: <1148@decwrl.UUCP> Reply-To: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) Organization: Multimate International, E. Hartford, CT Lines: 22 Summary: Reasons for doubt In article <1148@decwrl.UUCP> cooper@pbsvax.DEC (Topher Cooper) writes: >It is true that psychic phenomena cannot be produced on demand, but then >neither can a local supernova or ball lightning . It is true that it takes >certain skills and talents to be a successful experimenter but it also takes >skills and talent to do experiments depending on microsurgery. A skilled >experimenter can elicit parapsychological phenomena somewhere between one >experiment in three and one experiment in two. This is not reproducibility in the ordinary (scientific) sense of the word. The problem is not that the phenomena can only be elicited sometimes, but the dependence on the experimenter. What are these skills and talents required to be a successful parapsychic researcher? As far as I can tell, the only available description of them is that one gets positive results from parapsychology experiments. As long as that is the case, one must suspect the methodology or technique of those who get results. In particular, one must suspect that they are, intentionally or not, somehow giving the subjects access to information which biases the results. Unless you can describe what these skills are, you really are coming up with a variant of "the results only manifest in the proper environment," as originally charged. Frank Adams ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka Multimate International 52 Oakland Ave North E. Hartford, CT 06108