Psi journals

A new issue of the Parapsychological Association's bulletin, Mindfield, has appeared. Here is the blurb from the PA:

This issue of Mindfield 11.1 makes accessible the essential aspects of several contemporary models of psi. In line with Mindfield 10.3 titled Physical Theories of Psi, we now present models derived from human sciences. Using the same approach as the previous issue, we asked several theoreticians of parapsychology to briefly respond to a common structured interview explaining the foundations and applications of their models. With this approach, we aim to provide Mindfield readers with a glimpse of these complex ideas in a manner that facilitates comparison.

This issue focuses mainly on psychological theories of psi presented by Lance Storm & Michael Thalbourne, Jon Taylor, Lance Storm & Adam Rock, Rupert Sheldrake, and James C. Carpenter.  Also included is Part 2 of Carlos A. Alvarado's Articles about the History of Parapsychology and Related Matters and the 27th installment of Articles Relevant to Parapsychology in Journals of Various Fields.

https://mailchi.mp/parapsych/download-volume-11-issue-1-of-mindfield-the-bulletin-of-the-parapsychological-association-744453

Here is the current issue of the Journal of Scientific Exploration (volume 33, issue 2; 2019), which is freely downloadable:
https://www.scientificexploration.org/jo...sue-2-2019

The main contents are:

Research Articles

Imagination and Reactance in a Psi Task Using the Imagery Cultivation Model and a Fuzzy Set Encoded Target Pool
    LANCE STORM
Homeopathy and the Action of Meaning: A Theoretical Approach
    WALTER V. LUCADOU
A Camera-Based Tracking System for Ouija Research
    ECKARD KRUSE

Also book reviews and news.

I appreciated Braude's opening argument for why apparitions can't just be telepathic in nature.

I appreciated Braude's opening argument for why apparitions can't just be telepathic in nature.

Surely your joking...? Braude’s ideas in that article are frankly... a terrible muddle. He’s totally out of date. A much better analysis and argument about Apparitions is made in Celia Greens book of the same name “Apparitions”.

Surely your joking...? Braude’s ideas in that article are frankly... a terrible muddle. He’s totally out of date. A much better analysis and argument about Apparitions is made in Celia Greens book of the same name “Apparitions”.

I thought his basic argument was sound? That telepathy alone cannot account for shared apparitions, and especially seems unlikely for OBE apparitions?

Curious what your issues are, and what is better in Celia Green's book?

I thought his basic argument was sound? That telepathy alone cannot account for shared apparitions, and especially seems unlikely for OBE apparitions?

Curious what your issues are, and what is better in Celia Green's book?

Why shouldn't telepathy-type ideas account for shared apparitions? When we see groups of apparitions (Roman Soldiers, horses etc passing by), or a cart going by with no people, or a full form apparition of a person moves across a room and disappears - but the bottom of the legs & feet can still be seen, as if the top is obscured by opening a cupboard door. It's far more likely we are experiencing what somebody else experienced. Telepathic-type ideas are a much better explanation for time-slip type experiences too.

Once one opens the door to a telepathic-type idea as a way of trying to understand apparitional phenomena (of some type of locking-on to information that appears dislocated to us in spacetime), that immediately opens the door to a telepathic-type local phenomena occurring between the shared experients of an apparition.

A rough sketch below, shows a triangular relationship in spacetime, which is relative to each participant.



Braude’s ideas are stuck in the past, it's like he has not heard of quantum mechanics, and phenomena like quantum entanglement. He appears to be a realist, and also appears stuck in the classical world, with naive ideas about perception. Honestly, I find it really hard to read such utter crap as I've quoted from him below...

The alternative approach I’ve argued for, particularly for collective cases, is  that  apparitions  in  these  cases  are  products  of  living-agent,  or  possibly  postmortem,  PK, continuous with (if not similar to) other reported examples of  ostensible  materialization.  Clearly,  an  objectivist  approach  handles  the  troublesome  issues  of  simultaneous  and  concordant  experiences  with  no  strain whatever. If the various percipients are responding sensorially to an object located in the region of space apparently occupied by the apparition, then it’s easy to understand why their experiences would occur at the same time  and  correspond  in  content.  After  all,  ordinary  sensory  responses  to  objects  in  one’s  environment  seldom  (if  ever)  display  the  dramatic  forms  of  deferment  noted  in  telepathic  cases.  Moreover,  if  the  objects  observed  are  less  like  solid  bodies  and  more  like  colored  wisps  of  gas,  rainbows,  mirages, or electromagnetic fields, it’s no mystery why only some potential percipients report experiencing the apparition. The major mystery, of course, would concern the precise nature of the apparitional objects and their means of  production.  But  since  PK  is  no  better  understood  than  telepathy,  that  nagging mystery poses no problem unique to objectivist accounts.

And it’s not just collective cases that may be particularly amenable to an  objectivist  interpretation.  Reiterative  cases  are  also  easily  explained  in  terms  of  the  persisting  presence  at  a  location  of  some  kind  of  entity.  Of  course, it’s no easy matter to say what that entity is, and accounts may have to vary between apparent postmortem cases (i.e. ghosts) and ante-mortem cases.  But  if  it  seems  unparsimonious  to  posit  an  enormously  complex  and  arguably  miraculously  successful  web  of  telepathic  interactions  and  responses to explain why different percipients on different occasions—often independently—have  similar  apparitional  experiences  at  a  given  location,  then  we  may  have  no  choice  but  to  swallow  the  bitter  pill  and  posit  the  existence of an appropriate entity at that location.

Braude’s ideas are stuck in the past, it's like he has not heard of quantum mechanics, and phenomena like quantum entanglement. He appears to be a realist, and also appears stuck in the classical world, with naive ideas about perception. Honestly, I find it really hard to read such utter crap as I've quoted from him below...

Sorry, I don't understand why it's crap...though I do like your idea of dislocated information to explain time-slips.

Also, what do you mean by "realist" here?

Sorry, I don't understand why it's crap...though I do like your idea of dislocated information to explain time-slips.

Also, what do you mean by "realist" here?

Crap is my own personal opinion, because his ideas simply don't get anywhere near to fitting our observations. You could tell me what specific parts you particularly like, and then I can try and respond to those... because I can't deconstruct the whole article, the whole thing is rubbish (crap)...

By realist, I mean he seems to believe in some form of Realism...

The two quotes of his I copied tell us much... he thinks repetitive type apparitions/haunting's are easily explained in terms of the persisting presence at a location of some kind of entity. One has to think seriously about what the definition of a 'location' might be, and why *the* entity (which weirdly can apparently consist of cart, horses and soldiers etc ?  ) keeps repeating itself. He suggests collective apparitions are best explained by an objective-type object at the same point in space. Why on some occasions, some people can see these apparitions, and others standing right next to them can't, he suggests is because these objects might be more like colored wisps of gas, rainbows, mirages, or electromagnetic fields. How weak is that last bit...!

Crap is my own personal opinion, because his ideas simply don't get anywhere near to fitting our observations. You could tell me what specific parts you particularly like, and then I can try and respond to those... because I can't deconstruct the whole article, the whole thing is rubbish (crap)...

By realist, I mean he seems to believe in some form of Realism...

The two quotes of his I copied tell us much... he thinks repetitive type apparitions/haunting's are easily explained in terms of the persisting presence at a location of some kind of entity. One has to think seriously about what the definition of a 'location' might be, and why *the* entity (which weirdly can apparently consist of cart, horses and soldiers etc ?  ) keeps repeating itself. He suggests collective apparitions are best explained by an objective-type object at the same point in space. Why on some occasions, some people can see these apparitions, and others standing right next to them can't, he suggests is because these objects might be more like colored wisps of gas, rainbows, mirages, or electromagnetic fields. How weak is that last bit...!

I ordered his book Limits of Influence, as I find this interesting enough to look deeper into it.

Also, it's funny but despite reading about various metaphysical "isms" I'm not too familiar with Realism.

I guess what I am unsure of is I thought you also believed telepathy to be a field effect? I assumed Braude's argument was about mental communication without any physical type medium, so was surprised to see you so vehemently disagreeing with him. Admittedly I may just not understand your or his arguments...

I ordered his book Limits of Influence, as I find this interesting enough to look deeper into it.

Also, it's funny but despite reading about various metaphysical "isms" I'm not too familiar with Realism.

I guess what I am unsure of is I thought you also believed telepathy to be a field effect? I assumed Braude's argument was about mental communication without any physical type medium, so was surprised to see you so vehemently disagreeing with him. Admittedly I may just not understand your or his arguments...

honestly, get Celia Green's book... Apparitions... it's really worthwhile... it's the last proper study of apparitions in the UK, where they put ads in newspapers asking for phenomena IIRC, although she also incorporates data from past SPR cases.