Originally posted by Frankidealist35
Is the reason why the psychic phenomena is under so much scrutiny because of people like her?
No, I think it's because it's a human experience so pervasive that all the effort in the world over time from immensely powerful sources, ranging
from The Church to modern Scientism, can't seem to stamp it out.
From the book I read by her she seemed so into-herself and so narrow in her views that she couldn't think of natural explanations for things
which she thought was psychic phenomena.
Well I haven't read it.
I have read some Hans Holzer stuff that used her as the psychic that I found quite intriguing (I had never much thought about Lincoln's assassination
before but he revolutionized my thinking on it), but then Hans was making an effort to do it right, to keep info even from himself until after her
work was secured so she wouldn't be influenced or able to pick it up from him, etc. so perhaps the setting made it more seemingly reputable.
One problem with the whole topic is this: that the definition of "psi" essentially is forced to amount to, "the acquisition of information which we
could not have acquired through _known_ means." That means everything we learn about physiology chips away at the definition of what can actually be
considered "psychic" because the "known" means of information acquisition keep growing as we keep learning more about the human body and mind.
What was "definitely psychic" at one point, with science controls as good as anybody knew how to make them at the time, is considered basic
subconscious processing of information later. This is why science protocol in field evolves but especially in one like psi research (which now is
almost entirely based in remote viewing; free-response psi has a small but consistent effect-size when studied well, unlike forced-choice psi, the
primary approach of the past, which in lab terms has a much less robust effect size.
Two studies/technologies most people know about now example science vs psi: that of pheremones, and that of the frequencies within the human voice.
Both of these provide information that is completely unmeasurable "consciously" by a human being; only technology can really tell you of it; yet
both transmit potentially huge amounts of information (and by proxy, based on experience patterns giving us much info based on subconscious assumption
of similar things) without 'seeming' to, to the human body.
You can put a psychic in a pitch black room with another person. The other person can be in the darkness, with their back turned, across the room,
utterly silent, utterly immobile, and the psychic may not even know they exist. Yet if they have information about something the psychic is being
asked -- or even an opinion about it, even if they don't have real info -- the psychic has access to information from them.
How much info, what kind, and how good that psychic is at pulling that 'through' the normally subliminal pathways, is another story... pretty much
impossible to measure. We only know that while they MIGHT be psychic, if the person in the dark knew thing X, and the psychic in the same room came up
with thing X, that there are ways of this happening that do not qualify by our current level of science definition for "what is psi".
The irony is that the psychic may, in fact, have gotten data on Thing X through nothing but sheer, total psychic ability. It's simply that there is
no way to know this unless all the physiological (etc.) factors are controlled for; hence the whole point of a science protocol in the investigation
or controlled utilization of psi.
But in her defense I must say this: something merely being 'possible' to know or predict via 'natural' means does not mean psi is not present.
People who do psi work must as part of the skill learn to "allow and accept" some degree of it.