Looking Forward:Looking Forward:The Challenges FacingThe Challenges Facing

Research ParapsychologyResearch Parapsychologyby

Zoltán VassyLaboratories for Fundamental Research

Budapest, Hungary

and

Edwin C. MayLaboratories for Fundamental Research

Palo Alto, California USOctober 2008

Optimism vs. Pessimism

Glass: ½ Full/Empty– 100% Full– No Empty Glass

Optimist: Definition– Pessimist with more

information

YET •••

Future Does Not Look Bright

Our Challenges Fall Into Three Related Categories1. Beyond our control2. Self generated3. Technical

Pessimism Part– I don’t see any obvious near-term solutions

Challenges Beyond Our Control─I

Two Primary Challenges– Money

There isn’t any Important for Ψ Research Important for Ψ Careers in Industry

– Respectability Very little in mainstream academia Important for Ψ Careers at University

Challenges Beyond Our Control─II Lack of Money

– A Counter Example: Ed May enjoyed 20-year Career Industrial Wages Full Health Benefits Generous Retirement Fund

– This is very rare; perhaps unique

Lack of Respectability– Tenure Track University Positions for Parapsychologists are

quite rare– Little Grant Money for University Research

Many foundations do not pay university overhead costs.

What young talented researcher would chose parapsychology as an industrial or academic career?

– Thus, we suffer with a talent filter of not our own making. Currently, we may not have the brightest possible established or new

people. Therefore we may not be cable of resolving our technical challenges

Challenges Beyond Our Control─III

Apparent Bias of the Mainstream– Difficult for

Obtaining grants Getting published in the mainstream literature

One Example– May & Spottiswoode

5-σ Prestimulus Response Effect with Acoustic Stimuli Report (i.e., 2,500 word limit) for Science

Report: A Science Saga

May Wrote Donald Kennedy a Letter– Illustrate my bonafides– Push the Type II Error Concept: Just Because he •••

Had no academic standing Did not work for a “recognizable” institution Investigated a controversial field

– Does NOT mean by definition that his claims were wrong!

– Offered a solution: Give a talk at Stanford– Kennedy Offered a Pre-Review

4 S-Mail Exchanges with some encouragement– Final word nine months later

Kennedy’s 1st ResponseThank you very much for your letter of June 5. Your background is obviously deserving of respect, and I'd like to be helpful. But the idea of marshalling a critical audience to hear you present your experiments seems a difficult and time-consuming way of dealing with what amounts to a pre-submission request. So I think that's asking too much, but I'll certainly look at something if you want to send it to me as an e-mail attachment or in some other way.

Perhaps I should add that my personal history - dating back to the Rhine experiments in the 50s.- I'm pretty skeptical in this area.

President emeritusBing Professor of Environmental Science, emeritusEditor-in-Chief, Science

AAAS Rejection Letter

Dear Dr. May,During your absence, I've had a chance to circulate your proposal around. I'm afraid that the view here is that we will not send it out for in-depth review. I was glad to be of some assistance to you in getting it evaluated, and grateful for your interest in Science.

Sincerely yours,

Editor-in -Chief

The GOOD News!

There is Incontrovertible Evidence for a Statistically-based Information-Transfer Anomaly we Currently do not Understand.– 100% True?

Self-Generated Challenges

Boo Hoo!Why

aren’t we accepted?

Yup, son,We have met

the enemy andthey are us!

Some Challenges:Self-generated & Money Based─I

Replication– Honorton’s Presidential Address (1975) illustrated how

much better we were than experimental psychologists!– However, now mathematically and/or technically

complex studies are rarely replicated. A few examples Central Nervous System Studies Fuzzy Set, Entropy, or other sophisticated models DMILS

– Conceptual Replications that aren't Process oriented studies are often lumped with evidential ones Hardly any overlap with the original intent in some replications of

ganzfeld , RV or DMILS studies

e.g. Moulton & Kosslyn (2008). Using Neuroimaging to Resolve the Psi Debate. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20:1, 182-192

Some Challenges:Self-generated & Money Based─II

Amateur Hour—Downside of Interdisciplinary Research– Physicists pontificating on psychological issues– Psychologists extolling the virtues of quantum physics

“Quantum, of course, is a word that many interpret as permission to make stuff up.” –Ben Goldacre, The Guardian (9-Aug-08) p. 11.

– Non-physiologists doing just that.– Money makes the difference─an SRI International Example

They conducted and published a remote viewing experiment with subliminal feedback. -May, Lantz, and Piantineda (1996). Feedback Considerations in Anomalous Cognition Experiments. Journal of Parapsychology, 60, pp. 211-226.(www.lfr.org/LFR/csl/library/Feedback.pdf)

– Argument by highly-selected “experts”

Experimenter Expectancy Effects– Research is too often conducted to prove a world-view rather than to

develop one As humans we all do this to some degree; however, when ideology begins to trump

alternative hypotheses, we are in trouble.

Some Challenges:Self-generated & Money Based─III

Scientists are Notoriously Terrible Presenters– We are no exception to this general rule– An unforgivable error: Rigor and Detail = Clarity

Far too much stuff on a single slide

Questionable Sales Techniques– “Hello Ms. mainstream physicist. I am sad to report that

the way you think the world works is totally wrong!”– Many of us do not publically offer enough counter

hypotheses to the cherished one– Often interpret criticism as a display of the critic’s

unconscious fear of some kind– Quoting in-the-tail scientists as representing mainstream

thought Failing to acknowledging substantial research that suggests why these

scientists are in those tails

Some Challenges:Self-generated & Money Based─IV

Collapsing Disciplines / Skill Set– Bob Morris rightly should be praised for his obvious legacy

here in the UK and elsewhere– However, the relatively explosive growth of academic PSI

investigators has a serious problem They are nearly totally from psychology! We have an interdisciplinary problem that requires

interdisciplinary science to solve

As an Organization, we seemingly cannot reach a consensus as to what is:– Mostly likely genuine– Maybe genuine but we are not sure– Likely not genuine, but need more investigation– Most likely not genuine

Technical Challenges─I

When, Where, & How Long does PSI Happen?– Unless and until we answer these questions, process-

oriented experiments are difficult or impossible to interpret May stopped (gave the grant money back) a fMRI / skin

conductance study with Morris and similar complex EEG experiment

Collapse the Problem Space– Experiments of the form

If you think that last experiment was weird, look at this new one! We MUST stop this

– Look for organizing concepts Decision Augmentation Theory is just one candidate Is precognition the only form of PSI? Vassy’s Theory XXXXXX

Technical Challenges─II

We Need Never to Conduct an Evidentiary Experiment Again– Anomalous Cognition (e.g. RV, Ganzefeld, ESP)– Random Number Generator– DMILS(?)

Currently, Few if Any of us are Technologically Skilled Enough to Address, let alone, to Conduct the Necessary Experiments that will be Required in the Future – CNS functional explorations– Physiological correlates– Deep psychology that may imply PSI ability– Physics of backward causation

Conclusion

Questions– Should we let the field lie fallow for a decade?

Max Planck: “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”

– Should we focus on applications?– What else should we do?

Let us now have a lengthy discussion about this!

Laboratories for Fundamental ResearchPalo Alto, California

+1 (650) 276-0522 Voice +1 (650) 283-3892 Cell

WWW.LFR.ORGmay@LFR.ORG

Thank you!Thank you!

Questions/Comments?Questions/Comments?