Here's an amusing news item from the Times of London. It seems that three researchers investigating the paranormal were allowed to present papers at a recent "science festival" (is this anything like a psychic fair?) in Britain.
Naturally, the ignorant, intolerant skeptics went on the warpath, outraged that anyone would dare to question the conventional wisdom. To hear them tell it, even to give contrarian views a hearing is to open the door to a new Dark Age.
As the Times explains the matter,
The disputed session featured research from Rupert Sheldrake, an independent biologist who is funded by Trinity College, Cambridge, that claims to have found evidence that some people know telepathically who is calling them before they answer the telephone.
Other presentations came from Peter Fenwick, a doctor who thinks deathbed visions suggest that consciousness survives when people die, and from Deborah Delanoy of the University of Hertfordshire, whose work suggests that people can affect the bodies of others by thinking about them.
Actually Fenwick's work involves near-death experiences, not deathbed visions (a separate phenomenon), but what the hey, it's close enough.
Reaction from the upholders of scientific orthodoxy was predictably silly:
“Work in this field is a complete waste of time,” said Peter Atkins, Professor of Chemistry at the University of Oxford. “Although it is politically incorrect to dismiss ideas out of hand, in this case there is absolutely no reason to suppose that telepathy is anything more than a charlatan’s fantasy ... If telepathy were a real phenomenon, evolution and natural selection would have developed it into a serious ability. That has not occurred in this case ...”
So it's only "politically incorrect" to dismiss ideas out of hand? I always thought science was about an open-minded pursuit of the truth. Well, actually, no, I haven't alway thought that. Lately I've come to think that science is mainly about the pursuit of tenure and government grants. And power, of course.
As far as the natural selection argument is concerned, Atkins might just as well say, "If musical genius were a real phenomenon, evolution and natural selection would have developed it into a serious ability. That has not occurred in this case, so musical genius is nothing more than a charlatan's fantasy." (Or choose any other human ability that is rare or hard to develop - the ability to run a four-minute mile, perform complex mathematical equations, influence people through charisma, etc.)
Sir Walter, a geneticist and cancer researcher, said: “I’m amazed that the BA has allowed it to happen in this way. You have got to be careful not to suppress ideas, even if they are beyond the pale, but it’s quite inappropriate to have a session like that without putting forward a more convincing view. "
More convincing to whom?
Lord Winston, the fertility specialist, said ... "I know of no serious, properly done studies which make me feel that this is anything other than nonsense. It is perfectly reasonable to have a session like this, but it should be robustly challenged by scientists who work in accredited psychological fields."
Most scientists working in "accredited psychological fields" know nothing about psi. But they do know how to uphold the status quo. As for the first part of Lord Winston's statement, I am sure it is 100% accurate. He does not know of any serious, properly done studies. That's because he almost certainly does not know anything about the subject whatsoever. He still "feels" it's all nonsense, though. And isn't that what science is really all about? Lord Winston's feelings?
The [presentation of paranormal research papers] was organised by the Scientific and Medical Network, an organisation with about 3,000 members dedicated to “exploring the interface of science, medicine and spirituality”. The Royal Society, Britain’s national academy of science, said it “lies far from the scientific mainstream and the list of speakers reflect this”.
We certainly don't want any people or ideas outside the mainstream! That way lies innovation, which is always dangerous and to be avoided at all cost.
I take away two things from this otherwise forgettable item. First, study of the paranormal must be becoming a tad more acceptable, given that the three researchers were allowed to speak at all. Second, "science," at least as currently practiced by the present crop of technocratic, materialist elitists, is not going to examine or resolve these questions.
And that's okay. Not everything has to be given the coveted stamp of approval of our lab-coated masters. The day when Peter Atkins and Lord Winston get to determine the truth of our deepest metaphysical mysteries would be a new Dark Age, indeed.
Hat tip: FriendsCommunities
Recent Comments