------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/jyXolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~->
September 23, 2004 Things in perspective by Tony Manela Around 900 B.C.E., a Greek shepherd named Magnus walked on rocks that mysteriously plucked the iron nails from his sandals. Three hundred years later, the philosopher Thales discovered that amber, rubbed with cloth, inexplicably attracted feathers. These two phenomena, with a few millennia of human curiosity and ingenuity, eventually led to supercomputers, telecommunications and innumerable other �miracles� of technology that define our society today. Imagine going back in time, demonstrating these things to Thales and Magnus�showing them the tree that grew from the seed they planted. Hopefully that thought will help put things in perspective for what follows. Science has changed a great deal in the last 2,600 years. Much of the �science� performed today is what philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn would call �normal science,� a process of puzzle-solving. In a �mature science,� like physics, most scientists spend their careers basically confirming the underlying assumptions that form the paradigm of the field. The vast majority of scientists today don�t look for, or expect to discover, revolutionary new phenomena. According to this view, only an infinitesimal fraction of those practicing science in our age will become Newtons or Einsteins. The rest will live out their careers unnoticed and not remembered by history; Kuhn�s term �puzzle-solving� seems to suggest that the work of such scientists has more in common with completing a crossword puzzle than actually exploring nature. While the role of such �normal� scientists is necessary, it is not at all glorious or even, arguably, meaningful. Not all sciences, however, are mature ones. A prime example of a burgeoning science is parapsychology (the study of the transfer of information and energy through means inexplicable by physics). Duke University actually has a legacy in this field of which most Duke students aren�t aware. In 1927, a scientist named J. B. Rhine joined the faculty and began studying �the unexplained powers of the mind.� He coined the term �extrasensory perception� (ESP). He revolutionized the field with his famous card-reading experiments�controlled experiments held to the most rigorous scientific standards. Basically, Rhine noticed a phenomenon in nature, and began thoroughly exploring it. Unfortunately, the Rhine Research Center (which used to be located in the West Duke Building) is no longer affiliated with the University. While parapsychology research was intriguing when it first became prominent back in the 1920s and 1930s, it quickly fell from grace in academia. In order to conduct experiments in the field, scientists like Rhine needed the approval of various University institutions (like Internal Review Boards) in order to work with human subjects, get funding, etc. Such institutions tend to be dominated by practitioners of mature sciences. I don�t purport to be an expert in the sociology or philosophy of science, but it seems to me that perhaps there was an element of jealousy in the decision to exile parapsychology from academia; perhaps the normal scientists who controlled the powerful institutions in the University realized the momentum of Rhine�s work, and decided that if they couldn�t shift or establish a scientific paradigm, nobody could. Why exactly does parapsychology have such a bad rep? I am not talking about the �study� of UFO�s and Bigfoot sightings. I am talking about the statistical analysis of data collected in legitimate, controlled scientific experiments. Modern-day parapsychology experiments involve electromagnetic shielding, Random Event Generators based on quantum processes, computer-randomized image selection and many other rigorous protocols employed throughout the sciences. They yield evidence that is extremely statistically significant (evidence that wouldn�t be questioned if it appeared in a psychological or pharmacological context). They yield evidence of a phenomenon in nature that cannot be explained away by our current body of knowledge�a phenomenon for which there is not yet a paradigm. This is the only reason why the field is abhorred by the �scientific community.� Parapsychologists today find themselves in the same place as Thales did 2,600 years ago, having just touched on something strange and intriguing. They need the support of the rest of the scientific community, not its spite and jealousy. After all, look at all we�ve created on the basis of some magnetic rocks and amber that attracted feathers. Imagine what technologies could be brought about in the next 2,600 years if we had the wisdom to recognize and cultivate burgeoning sciences. The Rhine Research Center is still in operation today a mile off campus. If you�re interested in volunteering or learning more about parapsychology and its history at Duke, visit www.rhine.org. http://www.chronicle.duke.edu/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/09/23/4152b829f3ffc __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/E-MAIL_TRIVIA/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
