Has anything unexplainable ever happened to you or
someone you know? Have you ever had a
dream that has come true? Have you ever
thought about someone[SAL1] whom [SAL2]you have not
seen in a long while, and you spot them [SAL3]at the
grocery store the next day? Are these mere
coincidences, or are there other [SAL4]paranormal
forces at work? There are some who would [SAL5]say yes,
some who would say no, and others who would say maybe. But no matter where you stand on the issue
of extrasensory perception, or ESP, it is undoubtedly a subject that has
captured the minds of believers and skeptics alike for many years.
According to James Alcock in his article “Extrasensory
Perception,” ESP is the ability to connect
[SAL6]in a way
other than using the five senses, which are sight, taste, touch, smell, and
hearing. To communicate using anything other than these five senses would be an
example of ESP[SAL7]. People who study ESP are known as
parapsychologists. They study parapsychology.
Parapsychology is then broken
down [SAL8]into three
separate types of paranormal experiences
[SAL9](1). They
are telepathy[SAL10], which is [SAL11]the ability
to sense “the thoughts or feelings of one person by another in some unknown
way,” (1) clairvoyance, which is [SAL12]“an awareness
of objects, events, or people without the use of the known senses,” (1) and
precognition, which “is [SAL13]knowledge of
a future event by means of telepathy or clairvoyance.” (1) There is also a
separate field of study that is linked to ESP, known as psychokinesis, which
“is the mental control of physical objects” (1).
Telepathy involves communication between individuals
by using the power of the mind. Examples of this are a series of
experiments that [SAL14]J.B. Rhine,
a psychology researcher, and his wife set up that involved the use of [SAL15]telepathy
and Zener cards. Zener cards are “a set of twenty-five cards[SAL16], blank on
one side and containing a symbol on the other.
The set includes five cards of each of five symbols: a square, a circle,
a star, a cross, and three parallel wavy lines” (“ESP” 12). According
to the book, ESP: Fact or Fiction, in
these experiments
It was not until later that
Clairvoyance is the ability to watch people or things
from a distance without the use of sight, meaning that someone who is
clairvoyant does not have to be physically close enough to the person or object
in order to view it. Often times [SAL24]people are placed [SAL25]in isolated
rooms and shown a picture of someone or something that they are to locate. According to James Schnabel, it was once thought [SAL26]that
It seems like a good enough idea, right? A lot of money could be saved [SAL29]if we could
do away with expensive surveillance equipment and use the human brain for
espionage. And the capabilities of so called [SAL30]remote viewers
are limitless. They claim that they can see the past, present, and future. Remote viewers could become a major weapon
in a war with any country. The problem
was that there was not enough evidence to support the theory of [SAL31]remote
viewing. Most of the time the remote viewers were completely wrong[SAL32], or they
were given “subliminal cues or unconscious hints by those involved in the
experiment” (White 122). It also seems unbelievable because if the
U.S. or Russia had a group of people with powers such as these, wouldn’t it
seem likely that one of them would have taken over the world by now? [SAL33]
Precognition is when [SAL34]a person is
able to see events that will happen
sometime in the future[SAL35]. Have you ever heard someone say, I knew that
something bad was going to happen? This
is an example of precognition. This is said [SAL36]to occur
when you know that something is going to happen, and then it happens. There are more cases of this sort than any
other type of ESP.
Dean Radin, president of the Boundary Institute, which
is a parapsychological organization, gives a lot of credit to occurrences such
as these. He writes about a colleague
of his that was cleaning his revolver when he [SAL37]decided not
to load the fifth chamber because he had a bad feeling. Normally Alex left the sixth chamber empty
for safety reasons, but on this occasion he left both chambers empty because he
felt that something bad was going to happen.
A few weeks later, he was at a lodge with his fiancé[SAL38] and her
parents when a fight erupted between her parents. Alex’s soon to be father-in-law pointed the gun at his wife and
pulled the trigger. Luckily, the
chamber that would have fired, the fifth, was empty due to the feeling that
Alex had while cleaning and loading his gun (72). Was this a coincidence or
a case of precognition?[SAL39]
Examples such as these are hard to use to prove ESP[SAL40]. Many times they involve a person’s “personal
experience” (Schick and Vaughn 31). And
along with personal experience comes the individuals
[SAL41]own
interpretations of what occurred. A
question comes to mind. Did Alex really remember feeling scared at
the thought of loading that fifth bullet, or did he remember it that way
because of what happened at the lodge? [SAL42]
People all over the world report having these strange
feelings, but how many times have you had a feeling, and nothing came of
it? Nobody remembers those times. It would be silly to tell people that you
had a feeling that something good, bad or just plain strange was going to
happen, and it never did. Our minds
choose to remember only the times when we are right about something. That
[SAL43]sounds more
like selective memory than precognition.
Psychokinesis is said to be the
ability to move objects with the power of one’s mind. There was a famous Russian psychic, Nina Kulagina, who was
supposedly able to move objects in such a manner. Some said her ability was so strong that she “had moved and
stopped the pendulum of a wall clock, moved plastic cases, water pitchers
weighing a pound, and an assortment of dishes, cups, and glasses. And all without touching the objects”
(Ostrander and Schroeder 33). Nina became very famous to many scientists and
reporters when they saw professional videos of her performing
psychokinesis. They claimed that they
saw her do all these things and there were “no hidden threads, magnets, or
other gimmicks” (Ostrander and Schroeder 34).
The problem with Nina’s talent was
that her videos were often taped in locations in which there was ample room for
trickery and “were far from acceptable by basic scientific standards” (Polidoro
92). Some of the people who watched the
videos and had knowledge of how to use magic to deceive people, felt that she
was using simple magicians [SAL44]tricks to
accomplish many of her so called feats of psychokinesis. Lucky for Nina, there is no way to prove any
of these accusations because “no expert in conjuring techniques was ever
present at Kulagina’s demonstrations” (Polidoro 92). They were probably not invited either.
Some people feel that animals have extrasensory
capabilities. Studies have been done on
dogs, cats, mice, fish, and even cockroaches.
Scott Rogo writes about tests that
were done [SAL45]on mice by
two French scientists in which mice were
placed [SAL46]in an
electrified cage with two sides. One
side of the cage would be randomly electrified at a time, leaving the other
side unaffected. The mice would of
course jump to the other side when the side they were on was electrified. But the scientists were more interested in
the mice that jumped to the other side just before the side they were on was
electrified (47). Could the mice have known when and where the electrical shocks were
going to happen due to some type of animal ESP?[SAL47]
Unfortunately, animal ESP is lacking the strong evidence it needs to back it up[SAL48]. At the time of the previous experiment,
researchers felt that this [SAL49]it was
important because until that point, “the research done with animals was intriguing
but did not show strong results” (Rogo 47).
According to Rogo, this was impressive research to those who wished to
prove that animals have ESP. The proof
seemed undeniable, and the experiment showed promise until it was attempted [SAL50]by another
researcher by the name of [SAL51]W.J.
Levy. Although Levy claimed to have
gotten the same results, he was later found to be making up some of his
findings on other experiments (48). With
the use of false results, out went Levy’s credibility and the credibility of
the experiments. This meant trouble for
the French experimenters. A scientific
experiment that can’t be replicated is not reliable evidence that ESP exists.
Replication is important in the area of scientific
research, especially with ESP. If
parapsychologists could come up with the same results for the same experiments
over and over again, then that might be proof that ESP exists. But according to James Randi, who is [SAL52]a
professional magician and investigator of the paranormal, “none of the
results…have ever stood the test of time” (3). It seems that ESP research is
going nowhere fast. Sure [SAL53]there might
be experiments conducted[SAL54] in which it
seems that something paranormal is happening, but other scientists and
parapsychologists have failed to reproduce those results.
It is easy to see why people would want to believe in something as awesome as paranormal
capabilities[SAL55]. It would give us so many advantages. If ESP was
[SAL56]a legitimate
scientific finding, it could be used [SAL57]in countless
ways. Crimes could be solved [SAL58]and
catastrophes avoided just by asking a psychic a question. Should I invest in the stock market right
now? Will my baby be born healthy? What are my lucky lottery numbers? These along with a myriad of other life
altering questions could be answered [SAL59]just by
asking a few simple questions.
When you look at it from that point of view, ESP seems
like a gift, but to others it is something more dark and sinister. Doug Trouten says that some feel that ESP is
the work of demons. There are some people who [SAL60]stay away
from anything having to do with ESP.
This is not because they don’t believe but because they do believe. People who generally tend to feel this way
are people who have faith in some form of religion. It is easy to see why.
For someone who believes in a being as powerful and almighty as God, it
is not a far stretch for them [SAL61]to believe
that people with ESP are being
controlled [SAL62]by
demons. ESP seems evil and demonic to
them because mere people should not have such powers unless there was some type
of supernatural forces at work (110).
Some see ESP as a gift and others as a curse, but is
it a believable truth[SAL63]? In order for ESP to be a believable truth,
it must pass the tests of logical possibility and physical possibility. ESP is logically possible because we are
able to think about it and have rational discussions about it. In fact, if ESP was not logically possible,
people would not be able to debate about its existence because debating
involves the communication of thoughts.
But “just because something is logically possible doesn’t mean that it’s
real” (Schick and Vaughn 18).
Let’s move onto the next question. Is ESP physically possible? If you were to look at the scientific
theories of today, then you would say that ESP is definitely not possible. But ESP research still goes on today despite
the fact that it defies our current theories about the way the universe
works. Why is this? It is because there are those who feel that
“even if our best scientific theories seem to indicate that ESP is physically
impossible, investigating it still has some value, for our best scientific
theories may be wrong. The only way we
can tell if they’re wrong is to test them, and investigating ESP continues one
such test” (Schick and Vaughn 20).
If it is true that [SAL64]our theories
are wrong, this would cause what is called a paradigm shift. A paradigm is the “theoretical framework
that determines what questions are worth asking and what methods should be used
to answer them” (Schick and Vaughn 14).
In the case of ESP, there would have to be substantial scientific
evidence that would cause scientists to change their views about how the
universe works. If this evidence was presented [SAL65]and taken
seriously, then a paradigm shift would occur.
Scientists would have to formulate new theories or build on already
existing ones in order to explain how ESP is possible. A paradigm shift is not so unheard of in our
scientific past. There was a lot of
controversy when Galileo’s theory of a sun-centered universe challenged the
theory of an Earth-centered universe.
But his “discovery of the moons of Jupiter and the phases of Venus”
(Schick and Vaughn 15) was the proof that he needed. Reliable proof is what
ESP research is lacking[SAL66].
When scientists do research, they must adhere to some
rules. Steps are taken [SAL67]to ensure
that the research is done [SAL68]in a
controlled way so that results are not
flawed [SAL69]by outside
disturbances. Many people who claim to
have ESP do not follow these rules. For
example, Nina Kulagina might be taken [SAL70]more
seriously by scientists if her experiments were carried out in a more
controlled manner. Why didn’t she allow
investigators to watch her first hand with their own eyes? If she truly had ESP, why wouldn’t she want
to prove it? Why wouldn’t anyone who
claims to have ESP want to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt? It just doesn’t make any sense.
Something
else about ESP research that is questionable is when [SAL71]parapsychologists
use the positive and negative results of their research to “prove” that ESP is
real. Positive meaning that it provides evidence that ESP is real and
negative meaning that it doesn’t.[SAL72] James Alcock writes about a parapsychologist
who was not getting positive results from a series of tests she was running, so
her colleagues concluded that it was because she had become somewhat skeptical
of ESP. They felt that she was
affecting her research in a negative way with her own ESP abilities (“ESP
Research” 129). Based on research like
this, any evidence could be proof of ESP.
Where would we be today if scientists conducted research in such a
way?
Another reason for doubting ESP is that many
researchers often have to interpret the meanings of their findings in order to
prove that it[SAL73] is an
example of ESP. Remote viewers often
see things that are simply wrong, but the parapsychologists experimenting will
twist the meaning of this [SAL74]until it [SAL75]fits what
they are looking for. For example, if a
viewer was asked to find a target, and they
[SAL76]said the
target was in a church, when in fact the target was no where [SAL77]near a
church, the parapsychologist might say something like;[SAL78] the viewer
was picking up on the target’s strong belief in God. It seems like they [SAL79]are reaching
for evidence, or perhaps they are
blinded [SAL80]by their
belief in ESP and the paranormal.
Scientists have been researching paranormal activities
for over a hundred years. By now there
should be some compelling evidence of the existence of ESP, but this is not
so. As science and technology have
advanced over the years, so have the ways in which we conduct experiments,
including those done on ESP. It seems
logical that “if the phenomena under investigation are real, improved
experiments should produce more significant results” (“Extrasensory” 3). In the case of ESP, the more advanced and
controlled the research is, the less likely you are to find evidence favoring
the existence of ESP.
Although there is very little
scientific evidence that ESP exists and that we are on the verge of another
paradigm shift, people are still going to believe in ESP and the paranormal
because they want to believe. It is
almost as if people need to believe that there is something extraordinary going
on because it is more fascinating than the truth. Sure so called [SAL81]paranormal
activities are interesting and can be quite believable, but do they really seem
probable? The key to this question lies in the proof[SAL82], and the
proof is just not there.
Works Cited
Schick, Theodore, and Lewis
Vaughn. How to Think About Weird
Things.
Randi, James. “Crusader Against Delusion.” World Book Online.
<http://www.worldbookonline.com/jsp/wbPopup.jsp?/na/sr/cp/sr398018.htm>
Alcock, James. “Extrasensory Perception.” World Book Online,
Alcock, James. “ESP Research Does Not Follow the Rules of
Science.” ESP: Fact or Fiction.
Ostrander, Sheila, and Lynn
Schroeder. “Scientists Have Proven the
Ability of Russian Psychics.” ESP:
Fact or Fiction.
Rogo, Scott. “Animals Have ESP.” ESP: Fact or Fiction.
Schnabel, James. “The CIA Successfully Used Psychic
Spies.” ESP: Fact or Fiction.
Radin, Dean. “Laboratory Studies Suggest That ESP Is
Real.” ESP: Fact or Fiction.
Polidoro, Massimo. “Russian Psychics Exposed.” ESP: Fact or Fiction.
Trouten, Doug. “Christians Should Not Fool Around with
ESP.” ESP: Fact or Fiction.
White, Michael. “The CIA Psychic Spy Experiment Was
Unsuccessful.” ESP: Fact or Fiction.
[SAL1] See comment #SAL3
[SAL2] 10
[SAL3] 3
[SAL4] 10
[SAL5] 10 “some would …”
[SAL6] 25
[SAL7] 10 “Communication … would exemplify …”
[SAL8] 22 Who does this?
[SAL9] 32 Presumably parapsychology is the study of three types of paranormal experiences: it isn’t the same thing as the experiences, is it?
[SAL10] 10, 13
[SAL11] 10
[SAL12] 10
[SAL13] 10
[SAL14] 10 For example,
[SAL15] 10 experiments that used
[SAL16] 10 You could write a lot better than this, I think. The sentences so far are very sloppy.
[SAL17] 12 Better to cite the source away from the main text – citing it here makes it sound like the guy did the experiment “according to the book”
[SAL18] 22 by whom? Your use of passive voice obscures agency, and it’s important here because we need to know who we are being asked to believe.
[SAL19] 10 experimental conditions
[SAL20] 22, 43
[SAL21] 22
[SAL22] 22
[SAL23] 12, 22
[SAL24] 10
[SAL25] 22
[SAL26] 22 who thought this?
[SAL27] 25 whom
[SAL28] 22
[SAL29] 22
[SAL30] 6 so-called
[SAL31] 10 what theory? Or do you just mean remote viewing?
[SAL32] 32 You just said the results were “incredible” …
[SAL33] 38, 39 BTW, I thought the US HAD taken over the world.
[SAL34] 25
[SAL35] 10 future events
[SAL36] 10, 22
[SAL37] 9
[SAL38] 6 fiancee
[SAL39] 38, 39
[SAL40] 12
[SAL41] 2
[SAL42] 38, 39
[SAL43] 9
[SAL44] 2
[SAL45] 10, 22
[SAL46] 22
[SAL47] 38, 39
[SAL48] 10
[SAL49] 9
[SAL50] 22
[SAL51] 10
[SAL52] 10
[SAL53] 13 comma
[SAL54] 22, 10
[SAL55] 3
[SAL56] were
[SAL57] 22
[SAL58] 22
[SAL59] 22
[SAL60] 10 some people
[SAL61] 3
[SAL62] 22
[SAL63] 10 believable
[SAL64] 10
[SAL65] 22 were
[SAL66] 10 ESP research lacks …
[SAL67] 22
[SAL68] 22
[SAL69] 22
[SAL70] 22
[SAL71] 10
[SAL72] 5
[SAL73] 9
[SAL74] 9
[SAL75] 9
[SAL76] 3, 9
[SAL77] 6
[SAL78] 13
[SAL79] 9
[SAL80] 22
[SAL81] 12, 6 “Sure, so-called …”
[SAL82] 32 huh?
Content: B
30% Deduction for tech errors. What happened to your writing here?
Grade: F