The Parapsychological Association

Carlos S. Alvarado, PhD, Research Fellow, Parapsychology Foundation

One of my most recent publications is an article about Sylvan J. Muldoon and Hereward’s Carrington’s The Phenomena of Astral Projection that appeared in the online encyclopedia of the Society for Psychical Research (The Phenomena of Astral Projection (1951). In R. McLuhan (Ed.), Psi Encyclopedia. London: Society for Psychical Research, 2016.) The book, a modern classic about what today is generally referred to as out-of-body experiences, was published in 1951 and consisted of discussions of the “doctrine of astral projection,” and of presentations of cases.

Today there are many books about out-of-body experiences, but this was not the case when The Phenomena of Astral Projection appeared. Muldoon and Carrington’s work became an important reference work that presented many cases.

As I wrote: “Muldoon and Carrington believe ‘astral projection’ implies that the mind is independent of the physical body, something that supports the idea of an etheric brain. This, they write, ‘certainly seems but a short step to the acceptance of an etheric body, separate and apart from the physical, which body we may inhabit at death, and which constitutes the vehicle of the mind in astral projections.’ ”

Muldoon and Carrington discussed evidence for the existence of a subtle body:

“First, there is the massive weight of human belief and testimony, from the earliest times to our own day, in all parts of the world, and among civilized and uncivilized peoples. Second, we have those cases of apparitions in which the phantom-form seems to exhibit a mind of its own—often imparting information unknown to the seer at the time, but afterwards verified. Third, we have those cases in which material effects are apparently produced by the phantom, or its image appears upon photographic plates. Fourth, we have instances of materialization, at séances… Fifth, we have cases of astral projection, in which the subject sees his own phantom body, and is occasionally seen by others. In these last instances especially, we have evidence that the phantom form possesses a mind of its own, separate and distinct from the physical brain and body, which latter may be seen resting upon the bed. The cumulative mass of such testimony is, we submit, most impressive, and gives us the right to believe that such a ‘spiritual body’ exists—as St. Paul long ago stated.”

The authors present many cases classified as those of deliberate projections, and those that took place while using drugs, in emotional conditions, as well as during accidents, various illnesses, sleep, and during physical activity, a topic I have discussed before.

One of the physical activity cases they presented was the following:

“I was conscious of rising higher and higher, with each gliding step, until I ‘levitated’ about the height of a one-storey building…I was dumbstruck to see ‘myself’ left behind some distance… Looking down at my physical body… I had a great pity for it… I was…fully conscious in my astral body…and saw the eyes in my physical body moving and scrutinizing ‘me’ with a look of wonderment… A moment later my consciousness suddenly shifted to my physical body and, looking through its eyes, endeavouring to figure out the situation, I saw my astral body in space… This occurred several times…”

They also had a chapter entitled “Projections at the Time of Death” in which they presented the testimony of people around deathbeds that saw lights, mista and subtle bodies come out of the body of the dying persons. There is also a chapter with cases in which spirits were seen.

Muldoon and Carrington felt that the cases they presented supported the idea of survival of death:

“The universe seems to be, at basis, rational and spiritual in nature, and there is assuredly a narrow gulf between these phenomena and death itself. As Myers expressed it years ago, ‘death is but the irrevocable projection of the spirit.’ In the one case it is temporary; in the other permanent. But death is no more ‘terrible’ and no more ‘miraculous’ than these projection phenomena, and we have seen that, in many of these cases, the experience proved so delightful that the subject did not want to return to earth life at all! The transition into the spiritual world proved both easy and pleasant, while the experience in that world was little less than ‘blissful.’ ”

Carlos S. Alvarado, PhD, Research Fellow, Parapsychology Foundation

In a recent article Chris Roe stated: “A powerful means of imposing scientific dogma is through textbooks, which do not passively and transparently describe a discipline, but instead actively circumscribe it. By the presence or absence of topics and by the way they are represented, the authors determine for the reader the boundaries of legitimate concern and appropriate practice. In this way the boundaries are policed and transmitted from generation to generation” (What are psychology students told about the current state of parapsychology? Mindfield, 2016, 7(3), 86-91, p. 86). I believe this has affected negatively views of the historical role of parapsychology in relation to psychology and psychiatry, as seen in the traditional historiography of these fields. In the rest of these comments I will discuss this issue, focusing, to a great extent, on some of the articles I have published during the last 15 years or so.

Unfortunately many historians have contributed to perpetuate the view that psychical research was not important to psychology or to psychiatry. An early example was Edwin G. Boring’s (1886-1968) highly influential A History of Experimental Psychology (2nd ed.). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1950), a book that influenced most of our older teachers of psychology and that was a standard textbook for many years. In this book psychical research was considered to be at the periphery of psychology, and it was only mentioned in the book in notes at the end of a chapter (p. 502). The lack of importance of psychical research is also assumed by many other writers who do not even mention the field in their writings, among them Daniel Robinson in An Intellectual History of Psychology (3rd ed., Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1995).

Fortunately there are indications in the last decades that the situation is changing. Perhaps this is related to the attention historians of science and medicine have payed to “marginal” disciplines and movements, some of whom argued that these movements, and the ideas that came from them, contributed to science and to culture at large. Although not all historians agree, many oppose the view that occult and mystical views were a factor that always hindered the development of science. In fact, the opposite has been argued, considering such topics as contributing factors to the development of science (see the overview of W. Applebaum, (2005). The Scientific Revolution and the Foundations of Modern Science. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press).

An important early work bringing such a perspective to psychic phenomena was Henri F. Ellenberger’s (1905-1993) The Discovery of the Unconscious (New York: Basic Books, 1970). Although the emphasis of the book was on the more conventional work of individuals such as Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), Pierre Janet (1859-1947), and Carl G. Jung (1875-1961), which led to the development of ideas about the unconscious mind and psychotherapy, Ellenberger gave a place to ideas coming from mesmerism, psychical research, and Spiritism affecting the study of the mind. Not only did he acknowledged the work of Frederic W.H. Myers (1843-1901), but he wrote: “Automatic writing, . . . was taken over by scientists as a method of exploring the unconscious . . . . A new subject, the medium, became available for experimental psychological investigations, out of which evolved a new model of the human mind’ (p. 85).

Later writers have argued for the importance of the study of psychic phenomena for the development of ideas about non-conscious activities of the mind, thus placing psychical research as a positive influence, not as a mere obstacle in the development of psychology as a science, or as an absurd field. Examples include Adam Crabtree’s From Mesmer to Freud (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1993), Régine Plas’ Naissance d’une Science Humaine (Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 2000), and Eugene Taylor’s William James on Consciousness Beyond the Margin (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), among others.

In her book Plas (2000) resists the image of psychic studies as an “infantile malady” or as an “amusing bizarreness” of some psychologists (p. 13). Interest in the “marvelous” (including psychic phenomena) shown by psychologists is presented by Plas as an influential force in French psychological studies, particularly in terms of the development of ideas about the unconscious mind.

Of course we have to acknowledge that not everyone accepts this view. But it is encouraging to see the above mentioned publications, and the fact that some mainstream historians argue that it would be a mistake to exclude psychic phenomena and other “marginal” topics from the canon, and that they “contributed mightily to the constitution of modern psychological medicine” (M.S. Micale, The modernist mind: A map. In M.S. Micale (Ed.), The Mind of Modernism: Medicine, Psychology, and the Cultural Arts in Europe and America, 1880–1940 (pp. 1-19), Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2004, p. 11).

In my own work, consisting of various articles, I have tried to provide information about some of these issues, hoping to influence psychologists and psychiatrists. I do not write to defend the existence of psychic phenomena, nor the validity of their research findings, my intention is rather to present psychical research as an agent of influence, of change, just as so many have written about the role of fields such as neurology or concepts such as materialism, on ideas about the mind. The way I see it the more that the practitioners and researchers in psychology and psychiatry see papers about psychical research in their journals about issues of historical relevance, the more they will get used to the “new” way of seeing these topics as part of the histories of psychology and psychiatry. In any case, at least they will be exposed to the topic, and to arguments defending the idea that psychical research is not an example of a peripheral or a useless pseudo-science.

With this purpose in mind in recent years I have published several papers in the Sage journal History of Psychiatry. These are contributions to a section of the journal called “Classic Text” devoted to presenting excerpts or whole articles or chapters relevant, in a broad way, to the history of psychiatry:

Alvarado, C.S. (2010). Classic text No. 84: ‘Divisions of personality and spiritism’ by Alfred Binet (1896). History of Psychiatry, 21, 487-500.

Alvarado, C.S. (2014a). Classic Text No. 98: ‘Visions of the Dying,’ by James H. Hyslop (1907). History of Psychiatry, 25, 237-252.

Alvarado, C.S. (2016). Classic Text No. 105: William James’ “Report of the Committee on Mediumistic Phenomena.” History of Psychiatry, 27, 85-100.

Alvarado, C.S. (2016). Classic Text No. 107: Joseph Maxwell on mediumistic personifications. History of Psychiatry, 27, 350-366.

Alvarado, C.S., & Zingrone, N.L. (2012). Classic Text No. 90: ‘The Pathology and Treatment of Mediomania’, by Frederic Rowland Marvin (1874). History of Psychiatry, 23, 229–244.

In the “Classic Text” section of the journal the reprinted text is presented with an introduction that provides contextual, biographical and other information that justifies the inclusion of such material in the journal. This is not limited to mental illness, but includes much more, such as general psychological topics, and topics of general cultural and social concern believed to be relevant to the study of the mind and behavior. The journal, edited by historian of psychiatry German Berrios, is also open to psychic phenomena. I have never noticed any prejudice against the topic, as judged by my submissions, which to this day have all been accepted. I have presented much information about psychical research in these contributions.

The point of some of my papers, including those published in other journals, has been to identify the psychical research writings of well-known psychologists (e.g., Alvarado, C.S. (2009). Ambroise August Liébeault and psychic phenomena. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 2009, 52, 111-121). In one of the articles I discussed, with three colleagues, the work of Swiss psychologist Théodore Flournoy (1854-1920), which included his study of medium Hélène Smith, as reported in his famous book Des Indes à la Planète Mars (translated as From India to the Planet Mars: A Study of a Case of Somnambulism. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1900; Alvarado, C.S., Maraldi, E. de O., Machado, F.R., & Zangari, W. (2014). Théodore Flournoy’s contributions to psychical research. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 2014, 78, 149-168). My colleagues and I wrote in this paper:

“His main contribution, both to psychology and to psychical research, was conceptual, and referred to the development of the concept of the capabilities of the unseen mind. This he did mainly through his study of Smith’s mediumship . . . , but also with a few other case studies . . . His contribution of the construction of this idea, while purely psychological, was developed and nurtured in the context of psychic investigations, as were the psychological ideas of Myers, and to some extent, those of others such as Janet and Richet . . . From the early days after the publication of Des Indes to more recent developments, Flournoy’s investigation of the Smith case has been cited by many to illustrate the capabilities of the subconscious mind for producing fictitious manifestations. It is an example of the vast influence that exemplary cases can have on the development of ideas and research, as seen both in psychology and in psychical research” (pp. 162-163).

Another example is William James (1842-1910), who of course has been widely discussed by others. A colleague and I discussed William James as another example of how psychical research contributed to the study of dissociation (Alvarado, C.S., & Krippner, S. (2010). Nineteenth century pioneers in the study of dissociation: William James and psychical research. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2010, 17, 19-43., but in some studies accepting the existence of the supernormal. “Unlike Janet and others, James did not use dissociation to explain mediumship and other phenomena in the sense of reducing everything to suggestion and the workings of a secondary consciousness. Instead he adapted ideas, such as Myers’, that assumed the existence of a secondary consciousness and that were not only relevant to pathology, but to the supernormal and the transcendental. James’ acceptance of the supernormal in the case of Mrs. Piper represents a break with Janet and other conventional explorers of dissociation. It was in fact a plea to study and accept the possibility that dissociation and consciousness in general could transcend bodily limitations . . .” (p. 37 ). 

More recently I reprinted most of James’ initial study of medium Leonora E. Piper: Classic Text No. 107: ‘Report of the Committee on Mediumistic Phenomena,’ by William James (1886)” (History of Psychiatry, 2016, 27, 85-100. As stated in the abstract:

“The purpose of this Classic Text is to present an excerpt of an article about the topic that William James . . . published in 1886 in the Proceedings of the American Society for Psychical Research about American medium Leonora E. Piper (1857–1950). The article, an indication of late nineteenth-century interactions between dissociation studies and psychical research, was the first report of research with Mrs Piper, a widely investigated medium of great importance for the development of mediumship studies. In addition to studying the case as a dissociative experience, James explored the possibility that Piper’s mentation contained verifiable information suggestive of ‘supernormal’ knowledge. Consequently, James provides an example of a topic neglected in historical studies, the ideas of those who combined conventional dissociation studies with psychical research.”

In my first paper exploring the contributions of psychical research to psychology I focused on the work early members of the Society for Psychical Research conducted regarding dissociation. Because I wanted to inform contemporary dissociation researchers, I sent the paper to dissociation journal (Dissociation in Britain during the late nineteenth century: The Society for Psychical Research, 1882-1900. Journal of Trauma and Dissociation, 3, 9-33). In the paper I focused on work about mediumship and hypnosis, and summarized aspects of Myers’ contributions. I concluded that “it is far too simplistic in historical terms to dismiss psychical research as pseudoscientific or as an example of irrational or plainly wrong ideas that have been superseded as psychiatry and psychology have advanced and have become more scientific. Apart from the fact that psychical research deserves serious consideration, we need to realize that in the context of nineteenth-century developments this field made important contributions to the study of dissociation and to the development of the idea of a secondary self . . . Such considerations remind us that much of our current understanding of the history of dissociation has been itself ‘dissociated’ in the sense of becoming separated from aspects of its origins” (p. 28). 

I continued to explore dissociation in other articles. In one I focused on French psychologist Alfred Binet (1857-1911) and his discussion of mediumship to illustrate that, similarly to hypnosis and various cases apparently showing the existence of a secondary consciousness, this phenomenon was used in the psychological discourse of the nineteenth-century to argue for the existence of dissociation as a psychological process (Alvarado, C.S. (2010). Classic text No. 84: ‘Divisions of personality and spiritism’ by Alfred Binet (1896). History of Psychiatry, 2010, 21, 487-500).

Mediumship, I wrote in an essay published in the Brazilian psychiatry journal Revista de Psiquiatria Clínica with other colleagues, provided the context for the development of various ideas about the subconscious mind (Alvarado, C.S., Machado, F.R., Zangari, W, & Zingrone, N.L. (2007). Perspectivas históricas da influência da mediunidade na construção de idéias psicológicas e psiquiátricas [Historical perspectives of the influence of mediumship on the construction of psychological and psychiatric ideas]. Revista de Psiquiatria Clínica, 2007, 34 (supp.1), 42-53). Mediums, and others such as the hypnotized, “became part of a small group of special individuals who led students of the mind to see invisible regions of the psyche. This . . . had implications for dissociation and for diagnostic matters” (p. 50). An example was the work of Pierre Janet, who did not accept the parapsychological aspects of mediumship, but used the phenomena (and the writings of Myers) to support the concept of dissociation and secondary personalities.

In some papers published in History of Psychiatry, I, and other colleagues, discussed pathological diagnoses informed by mediumship (Alvarado, C.S., & Zingrone, N.L. (2012). Classic Text No. 90: ‘The Pathology and Treatment of Mediomania’, by Frederic Rowland Marvin (1874). History of Psychiatry, 23, 229–244; Le Maléfan, P. Evrard, R., & Alvarado, C.S. Spiritist delusions and spiritism in the nosography of French psychiatry (1850-1950). History of Psychiatry, 2013, 24, 477-491).

Interestingly, and complicating the issue, there were also several formulations of the relationship between dissociation, the subconscious mind and mediumship, as discussed in another of my papers: Alvarado, C.S. Mediumship, psychical research, dissociation, and the powers of the subconscious mind. Journal of Parapsychology, 2014, 78, 98–114. I wrote in the conclusion of this paper:

“Although most medical men held a closed model of the mind (and of dissociation) in which the phenomena were explained mostly by internal resources and a few external influences such as suggestion, few accepted a more open model of mind, such as the one some psychical researchers upheld based on powers that extend sensory and motor capacities beyond the confines of the body. Nonetheless, and as seen in the writings of some such as James . . . . , these psychic or supernormal concepts were part of the same general interest in understanding the mind and its myriad of layers as the more accepted ideas of individuals such as Janet . . . Interestingly, these ideas about the powers or capabilities of the subconscious mind were also connected in some cases to pathology. This was not only the case with those, like Janet . . . reduced everything to intrapsychic concepts, but also with those like Lombroso . . . and Morselli . . . who admitted the existence of the supernormal as a process related to pathologies such as hysteria. But most of the persons discussed here did not write about pathology” (p. 108).

Together with other authors mentioned above, I have been arguing for a more complete history of psychology and psychiatry. That is, one which represents better the past by recovering from the historical record research and ideas that have been neglected by many representatives of the traditional historiography of these fields. This includes other phenomena and issues not emphasized here, such as the study of hallucinations, hypnosis, eyewitness testimony, institutional developments, and other things. While we should not forget that the past of these disciplines was influenced by multiple aspects, and not only by psychical research, interest in the psychic or supernormal was a factor affecting positively some past inquiries about the mind.

*This is a slightly changed version of an article first published in Mindfield, the newsletter of the Parapsychological Association. It has been reprinted here with permission of its editor.

Carlos S. Alvarado, PhD, Research Fellow, Parapsychology Foundation

The Parapsychology Foundation has released information about their second Book Expo (the first was held on November 14, 2015; click here).

Here are the details.

* * *

Course Description

The live sessions of the PF Book Expo 2016 will take place on the afternoons of Saturday, April 23rd, 2016 and Sunday, April 24th, 2016. Five authors will talk about their recent books, including the content, the goals, why they got involved in the process, what they learned along the way, and more, followed by a question and answer session involving the registrants. Two of the books are aimed at serious researchers in and students of parapsychology and anomalistic psychology who are interested in the methodology, theory and the various phenomena under study. Two bridge the gap between the interests of serious researchers and field investigators and the intelligent general reader. The fifth book is one that would be called a popular book, but as a very high quality representative of that genre, is written clearly and flows from the investigative point of view of a well-trained and open-minded journalist.

Guest lecturers at the Parapsychology Foundation Book Expo 2016 will be:

Dr. Jim Carpenter is a board certified clinical psychologist who formerly taught at the University of North Carolina and who remains in private practice. He received the 2012 Charles Honorton Integrative Contributions Award from the Parapsychological Association for his work over the years in the field and on his innovative First Sight theory and is a past-President of that same organization. Carpenter will talk about his recent bookFirst Sight: ESP and Parapsychology in Everyday Life;

Dr. Zofia Weaver is a linguist who is a past editor of the Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, the co-author (with Mary Rose Barrington and Dr. Ian Stevenson) ofA World in a Grain of Sand: The Clairvoyance of Stefan Ossowieckipublished in 2005. She will talk about her book,Other Realities? The Enigma of Franek Kluski’s Mediumship;

Patricia Pearson, an investigative journalist who has written for The New Yorker, theNew York Times, theGuardian and the Daily Telegraph, among other publications, will discuss her most recent book,Opening Heaven’s Door: What the Dying are Trying to Say about Where They’re Going;

Dr. Stephen E. Braude, an emeritus Professor of Philosophy from the University of Maryland-Baltimore County, past-President of the Parapsychological Association, author of six previous books, and the editor of the Journal of Scientific Exploration, will discuss his most recent book, Crimes of Reason: On Mind, Nature and the Paranormal; and

Callum E. Cooper, a doctoral student and instructor at the University of Northampton, co-author of two previous books, a recipient of both the Alex B. Tanous Scholarship Award from the Alex Tanous Foundation for Scientific Research, and the Eileen J. Garrett Scholarship from the Parapsychology Foundation, will cover his recent book, Telephone Calls from the Dead that provides a new case collection of after death communication experiences.

The course is aimed at people interested in scientific parapsychology, in its theory, and phenomena, in mediumship and the experiences that both the dying and bereaved people encounter. You don’t need any particular level of education to enjoy the Expo, just curiosity about the topics.

The Parapsychology Foundation Book Expo series is the only place on the internet where you can get a “meet the author” experience for recommended academic and popular books on the topics of scientific parapsychology. So if you’re a student hoping to do research, a new researcher with an interest in the theory and the problems in persuading your colleagues, a field investigator interested in the phenomena of mediumship, death-bed experiences or after death communications, then the PF Book Expo 2016 is for you.

Each individual will have a PowerPoint that will be uploaded as a tutorial in WizIQ. Each live lecture will also be recorded and besides being available on WizIQ, will be edited and uploaded to the PF’s YouTube Channel.

By attending you will meet the authors of books we think are among the best published in recent years on their topics.

While the course doesn’t prepare registrants for any certification or exams, if you’re seriously interested in these topics, the PF Book Expo 2016 will point you towards some really good books that can help you in your quest to learn more!

And the PF?

The Parapsychology Foundation, located in New York City, is a not for profit organization that is celebrating its 65th year in operation this year, 2016. For the last 65 years the PF has provided a worldwide forum supporting the scientific exploration of psychic phenomena. The PF also maintains the Eileen J. Garrett Research Library in Greenport on Long Island. The PF’s online events on WizIQ, which include conferences like this one and the PF Forum: Advances in UK Parapsychology which was offered last May, are designed to further the education of individuals who are working in or interested in learning more about the scientific side of the field.

Lisette Coly, who will guide the proceedings on April 23rd and 24th, is the President of the Parapsychology Foundation, daughter of the previous President, Mrs. Eileen Coly, and granddaughter of PF Founder Irish American intellectual, entrepeneur, author and medium, Eileen J. Garrett. Dr. Carlos S. Alvarado and Dr. Nancy L. Zingrone, who will co-moderate the day’s events, are not only Research Fellows of the Parapsychology Foundation, but both two-time past Presidents of the Parapsychological Association, the international society for scientists and scholars who investigate what seem to be psychic phenomena from a variety of disciplinary perspectives.

To register (free): http://pflyceum.wiziq.com/course/151412-parapsychology-foundation-book-expo-2016

Course Schedule:

April 23

2:15-3:00pm Eastern time Opening

3:00-4:00pm Eastern time Jim Carpenter: First Sight

4:00-5:00pm Eastern time Zofia Weaver: Other Realities

5:00-6:00pm Eastern time Patricia Pearson: Opening Heaven’s Door

6:00 Closing

April 24

1:15-1:30pm Eastern time Opening

1:45-2:30pm Eastern time Steve Braude: Crimes of Reason

3:00-4:00pm Eastern time Cal Cooper: Telephone Calls from the Dead

4:00pm Eastern time Closing

Carlos S. Alvarado, PhD, Research Fellow, Parapsychology Foundation

In the article commented here Nancy L. Zingrone and I focus on the reception of Swiss psychologist Théodore Flournoy’s most important work,Des Indes à la Planète Mars: “Note on the Reception of Théodore Flournoy’s Des Indes à la Planète Mars” (Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 2015,79, 156-164).

As stated in the introduction:

“The book is generally considered a classic of mediumship literature, and was devoted to the mediumship of Hélène Smith, the pseudonym of Catherine Élise Müller (1861–1929). Those who are familiar with the book . . . will be aware that Flournoy presented psychological analyses of the medium’s phenomena. These included her control Leopold, as well as communications about her presumed previous lives in India as a princess and in France as Marie Antoinette, and her travels to and descriptions of Mars, including the development of a Martian language. At the end of his book Flournoy refers to various psychological processes that he believed explained the manifestations, such as the effect of early traumatic events on dissociation, latent emotional tendencies, the suggestibility and auto-suggestibility surrounding mediums in general, and cryptomnesia.”

Des Indes made an impact soon after it was published. Flournoy’s case ‘became a key addition to the other paradigm cases of mediumship and multiple personality that defined the era’ (Taylor, 2009, p. 41). For those convinced of Flournoy’s arguments, the book soon became an exemplar of psychological explanations of mediumship. But for others Des Indes represented an unwarranted and hostile analysis of mediumship.”

Some comments about the book, which was translated into English, appeared in popular publications, such as newspapers and magazines. An example was an article in the North American Review by American philosopher and psychical researcher James H. Hyslop (1900). Who wrote: “Leopold, Marie Antoinette, and the Martian inhabitant ought to have given us some evidence of personal identity, as in the ‘communicators’ of the Piper case, if Mlle. Smith expects us to believe in spirits, and it is their absolute failure to satisfy this demand that justifies M. Flournoy’s sceptical position” (p. 745).

Many others praised the book in scholarly publications. As we wrote:

“Des Indes, wrote anthropologist Giuseppe Serge (1841-1936) in his book Animismo e Spiritismo, should be seen as a model of research about phenomena supporting the belief of spiritists (Sergi, 1903, p. 54). In this author’s view, while Flournoy had not explained everything, he had explained much, and his approach provided a ‘starting point for research and analysis’ (p. 55).”

Praise also came from Frederic W.H. Myers. First in a review of the book published in the Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, which was later incorporated in his Human Personality and Its Survival of Bodily Death. “In his view Flournoy had confirmed his (Myers’s) belief that the action of the subliminal was a continuous process and not a mere sporadic action. Myers argued that it was to be expected that the subliminal mind presented such cases of ‘pseudo-possession,’ cases similar to the action of discarnate spirits. Most of his review of Des Indeswas incorporated later into his last work (Myers, 1903), in which it provided support for his conception of the subliminal mind. Here Myers referred to the case as his ‘culminant example of the free scope and dominant activity of the unassisted subliminal self’ ” (Myers, 1903, Vol. 2, p. 144).”

Finally, we mentioned the critiques of spiritists, among them French engineer Gabriel Delanne. He was “sceptical of the capabilities of the subconscious mind and considered Flournoy an ‘adversary of spiritism’ (Delanne, 1902, p. 463).

In the Revue Spirite another critic stated: “More changing that Proteus, more subtle than X-rays, more learned that a psychologist, the ‘Subconscious’ of M. Flournoy has all the skills, all the faculties, all knowledge. A child of the scientific imagination, gifted at birth with all talents by the wand of the ‘Glossolalia’ fairy, it has been created to respond to all the spiritist objections, and you can be assured that it will not abandon its mission” (Conscient, 1902, p. 187).

Overall the reception to Des Indes reflected the multiple conception of the mind existing at the time. For some psychologists it was an affirmation of the powers of non-conscious levels of the mind, and an incredible argument for spiritists, who felt threatened by Flournoy’s use of psychological ideas.

“Paying attention to the reception of Flournoy’s work both adds to our understanding of his research, and allows us to situate him in a wider historical context. By illustrating the complex way in which philosophers, physicians, and psychologists—from those skeptical of the notion of spirit agency and those who defended it—thought about mediumship and the subconscious mind, we can better understand the competing interests and theoretical views that were prevalent in the era . . . Knowledge of these issues may be useful to students of intellectual history and the history of science and medicine, as well as to current students of mediumship in their attempts to evaluate the reception of modern claims about the source of such ‘communications.’ ”

References

Conscient, H. (1902). La Société d’Études Psychiques de Genève. Revue Spirite: Journal d’Études Psychologiques, 45, 187.

Delanne, G. (1902). Recherches sur la Médiumnité. Paris: Librairie des Science Psychiques.

Hyslop, J.H. (1900). “From India to the Planet Mars.” North American Review, 171, 734–747.

Myers, F.W.H. (1903). Human Personality and Its Survival of Bodily Death (2 vols). London: Longmans, Green.

Sergi, G. (1903). Animismo e Spiritismo. Turin: Fratelli Bocca.

Taylor, E. (2009). The Mystery of Personality: A History of Psychodynamic Theories. New York: Springer.

Carlos S. Alvarado, PhD, Research Fellow, Parapsychology Foundation

We are glad to see that the Society for Psychical Research, founded in London on February 20, 1882, is still around after 134 years. The SPR, I am happy to say, is still very useful to workers in psychical research providing publications, conferences and funding.

Below you will find a short bibliography of works about the early period of the Society that I hope will help readers to obtain information about this important organization.

Alvarado, C. S. (2002). Dissociation in Britain during the late nineteenth century: The Society for Psychical Research, 1882-1900.Journal of Trauma and Dissociation, 3, 9-33. 

Bennett, E. T. (1903).The Society for Psychical Research: Its Rise & Progress & a Sketch of its Work. London: R. Brimley Johnson.

Cerullo, J. J. (1982). The Secularization of the Soul: Psychical Research in Modern Britain. Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues. 

Gauld, A. (1968). The Founders of Psychical Research. London: Routledge & Paul.

Haynes, R. (1982). The Society for Psychical Research, 1882-1982: A History. London: Macdonald.

Nicol, F. (1972). The founders of the S.P.R. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, 55, 341-367.

Rogo, D. S. (1987). The founders of the Society for Psychical Research: A retrospective look.Parapsychology Review, 18(4), 5-9.

Salter, W. H. (1948). The Society for Psychical Research: An Outline of its History. London: Society for Psychical Research.
 

Carlos S. Alvarado, PhD, Research Fellow, Parapsychology Foundation

 The Parapsychology Foundation http://www.parapsychology.org (PF) announces a new online conference featuring five presentations about parapsychology in various countries. It will take place in January 23-24, 2016. For a more detailed schedule and to register (for free) go here.

If you can’t join the conference on the 23rd or 24th, not to worry; all presentations will be recorded and if you register, you will be able to revisit the presentations at your leisure.

The PF has released the following information about the event:

The Parapsychology Foundation is celebrating its 65th year in operation this year. Dedicated to providing support for students and researchers in the field of scientific and academic parapsychology, the PF decided to launch the Parapsychology Foundation Online Academy on WizIQ with its first online International Affiliates Conference. For unprecedented access to this elite group of scientists and researchers, join us for this conference by clicking the link above!

The Parapsychology Foundation International Affiliates program was inaugurated in 2000 and includes 27 extraordinary individuals from 26 different countries around the world. For this inaugural event, five international affiliates will talk about institutional, educational and research developments in their own countries over the last 40 years.

Here are the International Affiliates who will be speaking at the conference:

• Dr. Alejandro Parra, the PF International Affiliate for Argentina, is a clinical psychologist in Buenos Aires, the director of the Instituto de Psicología Paranormal, and a past President of the Parapsychological Association.

• Hideyuki Kokubo, the PF International Affiliate for Japan, is the editor and director of the Journal of the International Society for Life Information, the Journal of the Japanese Society for Parapsychology, and the Journal of Mind-Body Science, as well as the director of the International Research Institute in Chiba, and a researcher at the Bio-Emission Laboratory of Meiji University.

• Dr. Chris Roe, the PF International Affiliate for England, is Professor of Research at the University of Nottingham and the Director of its Centre for the Study of Anomalous Psychological Processes, past and current President of the Parapsychological Association, and the editor of the Journal of the Society for Psychical Research.

• Dr. Mario Varvoglis is the PF International Affiliate for France, the Director of the Institut Métapsychique International in Paris, a past-President of the Parapsychological Association and the author of La Rationalité de l’Irrationnel, an analysis of contemporary psi research and its social and theoretical implications.

• Dr. Wellington Zangari and Dr. Fátima Regina Machado are joint PF International Affiliates for Brazil. Dr. Zangari is Professor of the Social Psychology of Religion at the University of São Paulo, Dr. Machado is a Postdoctoral Fellow in Psychology at the Pontifical Catholic University also in São Paulo, and both are founders of Interpsi: Laboratory of Anomalistic Psychology and Psychosocial Processes at the University of São Paulo.

In addition, Lisette Coly, the President of the Parapsychology Foundation, and PF Research Fellows Dr. Carlos S. Alvarado and Dr. Nancy L. Zingrone will conduct the opening and closing sessions for the conference, focusing on the breadth of the PF International Affiliate program, its goals and accomplishments, and, in the closing session, on such upcoming activities as the Parapsychology Foundation Online Academy that will debut later in the spring of 2016 on WizIQ.

To register for free go here (click enroll now).
 

Carlos S. Alvarado, PhD, Research Fellow, Parapsychology Foundation

Those of you who have followed this blog may be aware of the parapsychology MOOC (Massive Open Online Course) Nancy L. Zingrone and I organized in 2015 (click here). We are now organizing the ParaMOOC2016. This is the joint effort of our organization The AZIRE  and the Parapsychology Foundation (PF), which is well-known in the field for its long history of supporting parapsychology via conferences, grants, and in other ways (click here for information about the PF).

The 2016 MOOC is being organized following our previous thinking, that, in addition to the few currently available introductory and popular information offerings about parapsychology on the Web, there is a need to present high level scientific and scholarly discussions of parapsychological topics to inform the general public and interested others. These discussions are presented by individuals with recognized academic credentials (doctoral degrees), and with research experience.

The ParaMooc2016 was approved by the administration of the WizIQ learning platform this morning and Nancy has been uploading the schedule as we know it at the moment, as well as welcoming the dozen students who have already signed up. WizIQ is the social media teaching platform that we and the Parapsychology Foundation are using in our online teaching/online conference activities. The benefit of getting approval is that the course is marketed by WizIQ to it’s 500,000 or so teachers, and 4.5 million students already using the system worldwide. Because of the system’s reach we are hoping to get the word out about the scientific side of the field to as many newcomers as we did in last year’s MOOC.

Registration is definitely open. Just create a free account by using your Facebook log-in or creating a new one that’s just for the WizIQ system, then click this link: http://the-azire.wiziq.com/course/139659-parapsychology-research-and-education-paramooc2016.  The MOOC is free and live presentations are scheduled at 2:00pm Eastern time for the majority of the speakers. The presentations will be recorded and available soon after (usually within 24 hours). Later on, as we finish uploading the edited versions of the lectures from last year’s MOOC on our YouTube Channel, Parapsychology Online, we will start editing and loading up the lectures from this year.

While the ParaMOOC2016 schedule may still change, we have received confirmation for the participation of such persons as Drs. Bernard Carr, Arnaud Delorme, William Everist, Renaud Evrard, Erlendur Haraldsson, Janice Holden, David Luke, Antonia Mills, Ginette Nachman, Serena Roney-Dougal, Stefan Schmidt, and Patrizio Tressoldi. A few others may join us soon.

Some of the topics discussed include hyperdimensional and quantum theory ideas related to psychic phenomena, clinical perspectives of psychic experiences, and studies of recollections of previous lives, near-death experiences, mind-body medicine, distant intentions, the psychophysiology of mediumship, meditation and psi, and apparitions.

The complete (so far) information on the course is available on the enrollment link, so feel free to click just to check out the information at this link: http://the-azire.wiziq.com/course/139659-parapsychology-research-and-education-paramooc2016

Carlos S. Alvarado, PhD, Research Fellow, Parapsychology Foundation

Several laboratory experiments have presented evidence to the effect that changes in some physiological measure correspond to a remote stimuli, suggesting ESP may manifest physiologically while the person is not aware of the process. In an article I published recently I discussed a generally forgotten nineteenth-century example of this.

Here is the reference and the abstract:

Carlos S. Alvarado (2015). Note on an Early Physiological Index of ESP: John E. Purdon’s Observations of Synchronous Pulse Rates.Journal of Scientific Exploration, 29, 109–123. (Available on request from the author:carlos@theazire.org)

Abstract

The purpose of this Note is to rescue from oblivion the nineteenth-century researches of physician John E. Purdon with measures of pulse rate synchrony between two persons. This was done using a sphygmograph, an instrument that measured pulse and provided graphic tracings on paper. According to Purdon, he found some persons reproduced the tracings of others in conditions that he considered to imply a telepathic transfer. Purdon speculated that one person produced emissions of nervous force that were propagated to others via the ether. While this research may be criticized from the point of view of modern research standards, it is presented here as an interesting and generally unknown early instrumental study of the concept of the detection of ESP via a physiological response.

“John Edward Blakeney Purdon was a physician who was born in Dublin in 1839. He was educated and trained in medicine at Trinity College, Dublin . . . Purdon lived in India serving as a surgeon in the British Army starting in 1865 . . . In 1881, when he made his first observations of synchronous pulse rates, he was in charge of a military hospital in Guernsey, the Channel Islands. After retiring from the Army in 1883, Purdon lived in the United States.”

The observations were done in informal ways. The first one took place in a hospital between a soldier and a woman separated by a wall. “During the ten days that my observations continued, I took many scores of traces with the sphygmograph finding the likenesses between the curve of Private W . . . and the young woman next door to be often remarkable. On one occasion I found that Private W . . . Private L . . . and myself were showing the same pattern almost exactly. That night our neighbour was eliminated as a disturbing cause, for she was laid up with a very bad sick headache . . .”

In another instance recorded in 1881: “I was taking the tracing of a young lady who was lying down with a menstrual headache, her hand being held by an older lady, her first cousin, when I suddenly saw the pulse curve change to that of the other, which I had more than once taken that morning. There could be no mistake about the resemblance, for the tracing of the other person was very characteristic and so familiar to me that such would have been a moral impossibility under the circumstances.”

Another example: “I was taking the tracing of a young lady who was lying down with a menstrual headache, her hand being held by an older lady, her first cousin, when I suddenly saw the pulse curve change to that of the other, which I had more than once taken that morning . . . I repeated the observation, taking the tracings of each woman repeatedly, and found more or less resemblance between the tracings of the elder and one side of the younger. . . . This relation had to do in my mind with the state of susceptibility to change, disturbance, or irritation of the nervous system of the younger, as depending upon the presence of the catamenia.”

I concluded the paper pointing out some problems with Purdon’s research when seen from the point of view of modern standards: “The evaluation of the results depended on visual inspection of the tracings, something that does not seem to have been done blindly. Furthermore, the reports lack information about checks on the proper functioning of the sphygmograph, potential artifacts related to how the instrument was attached to the arm, the position of the arm and its movements, and environmental stimuli that could have affected the tracings of both subjects.”

However, my interest to write this paper was not to present evidence for ESP via pulse rate change, but to acknowledge the pioneering efforts of Purdon.

Carlos S. Alvarado, PhD, Research Fellow, Parapsychology Foundation

I recently published a review of the first volumes of three journals that were historically important in the study of psychic phenomena. The review article is entitled “On First Volumes and Beginnings in the Study of Psychic Phenomena: Varieties of Investigative Approaches” (Journal of Scientific Exploration, 2015, 29, 131-153; if you want a copy write to me at: carlos@theazire.org). The journals in question were:Revue Spirite: Journal d’Études Psychologiques, 1858, Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, 1882–1883, and theJournal of Parapsychology, 1937.

In my introduction I mentioned different research styles in the history of psychology, including, for example case studies and experiments. “A similar situation and the topic of this Essay Review is the different approaches in the study of psychic phenomena over time. The purpose of this Essay Review is to introduce to modern readers some of these approaches in the forms of summaries of the contents of three different journals from the past. These are comments about the first volumes of influential publications concerned with the study of psychic phenomena that are probably not familiar to current students of psychic phenomena.”

The Revue Spirite, produced by Allan Kardec, was an important resource in the spreading of Spiritism in France, and elsewhere. Most of the content of the Revue was devoted to mediumistic communications that were seen as authoritative as regards moral, philosophical and scientific issues. There was no attempt at external verification and many of the communications were not verifiable in principle. “In a two-page paper entitled ‘Utilité de Certaines Évocations Particulières’ (Utility of Some Particular Evocations . . .), it was stated that these messages were valuable because the spirits in question ‘have acquired a high degree of perfection’ . . . that allowed them to ‘penetrate the mysteries that exceed the vulgar reach of humanity. . .’ ”

The cases described in this volume were not original investigations, but accounts reprinted from popular sources. “Examples include ‘Visions’ . . . , ‘Le Revenant de Mademoiselle Clairon’ (The Ghost of Miss Clairon . . .), ‘L’Esprit Frappeur de Dibbelsdorf—Basse-Saxe’ (The Rapping Spirit of Dibbelsdorf—Lower Saxony), . . .), and ‘Phénomène d’Apparition’ (Apparition Phenomena, . . .).”

I argued, “to consider the content of the Revue, and Kardec’s work, as a scientific research program . . . begs the question of what science is. It is one thing to observe nature and develop hypotheses based on observed patterns, or to be tested by further observations or actual experimentation, and another thing to use communications through seances, which source is uncertain, as shown in this volume of theRevue, to get teachings and answers to questions about the nature of topics such as the workings of psychic phenomena and a variety of moral and philosophical issues. Similarly, it is one thing to report on non-evidential spirit communications and on cases of apparitions and other phenomena discussed in the press and other sources, and it is another to study these phenomena with attention to evidence.”

A very different approach was that found in the first volume of the Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research. “ThePSPR was the main organ of the Society for Psychical Research (SPR), which was of basic importance for the development of parapsychology. Its work . . . systematized research into psychic phenomena in England, but it was also influential in other countries.”

Some of the authors in the first volume of the PSPR were William F. Barrett, Edmund Gurney, Frederic W. H. Myers, and Henry Sidgwick. “The first volume, containing four issues appearing in 1882 and 1883, was formed of papers reporting on the collection and analysis of evidence for psychic phenomena coming from accounts and from experiments. Some of these were . . . Barrett, Gurney, and Myers’ ‘First Report of the Committee on Thought-Reading’ (1882 . . .) . . .Barrett, Keep, Massey, Wedgwood, Podmore, and Pease’s ‘First Report of the Committee on ‘Haunted Houses’ ‘ (1882 . . .), and Barrett, Massey, Moses, Podmore, Gurney, and Myers’ ‘Report of the Literary Committee’ (1882 . . .). These, and other reports such as Barrett’s ‘On Some Phenomena Associated with Abnormal Conditions of Mind’ (1883 . . .) and Malcolm Guthrie and James Birchall’s ‘Record of Experiments in Thought-Transference, at Liverpool’ (1883 . . .), point to the empirical approach prevalent in the SPR even if such attempts seem methodologically crude by modern standards.”

Different from the Revue, the SPR had high evidential standards with cases. As stated in the “First Report of the Committee on ‘Haunted Houses’ ”, published in 1882: “In the first place, we . . . begin by tracing every story to the fountain-head. But we do not consider that every first-hand narration of the appearance of a ghost, even from a thoroughly trustworthy narrator, gives us adequate reason for attempting further investigation. On the contrary, our general principle is that the unsupported evidence of a single witness does not constitute sufficient ground for accepting an apparition as having a prima facie claim to objective reality. To distinguish any apparition from an ordinary hallucination . . . it must receive some independent evidence to corroborate it. And this corroboration may be of two kinds; we may have the consentient testimony of several witnesses; or there may be some point of external agreement and coincidence—unknown, as such, to the seer at the time—(e.g., the periodic appearance on a particular anniversary, or the recognition of a peculiar dress), to give to the vision an objective foundation.”

The volume also had the beginnings of an experimental tradition in the study of ESP, something that would be developed in later volumes. An example was “Records of Experiments on Thought-Transference, at Liverpool,” by Malcolm Guthrie and James Birchall (1883). Furthermore there were instructions about precautions to follow in conducting such experiments.

“While the PSPR included some reports of experiments (and this became more frequent in later volumes), this approach was not the main one taken by SPR researchers. But it was the research style predominant in theJournal of Parapsychology.” This is clear in the first volume of this publication, appearing in 1937. 

The Journal of Parapsychology (JP) came from Joseph Banks Rhine research group at Duke University and represented an experimental and quantitative research tradition. “According to my count of types of paper in the first volume, excluding correspondence and notes, there were 16 experimental reports, 4 editorials, 3 reviews of specific topics, 3 summaries and reviews of specific experiments, and 3 discussions of statistical issues.”

“Examples of experiments include ESP studies such as J. G. Pratt’s . . . ‘Clairvoyant Blind Matching’ . . . , J. L. Woodruff and R. W. George’s ‘Experiments in Extra-Sensory Perception’ . . . , Lucien Warner’s ‘The Role of Luck in ESP Data’ . . . , and Vernon Sharp and C. C. Clark’s ‘Group Tests for Extra-Sensory Perception’ . . . The experimental approach was not limited to proving the existence of ESP. TheJP carried interesting experiments to study ESP in relation to other variables, such as J. B. Rhine’s ‘The Effect of Distance in ESP Tests’ . . . , Margaret H. Pegram’s ‘Some Psychological Relations of Extra-Sensory Perception’ . . . , and Edmond P. Gibson’s ‘A Study of Comparative Performance in Several ESP Procedures’ . . . In addition, several studies were reported about ESP tests with special participants.”

In conclusion: “The journals discussed here . . . had to carve out their own territory, so to speak, when they started. TheRevue appeared in a context in which mesmerism was better known, a movement that was not always open to spiritism . . . Similarly, to some extent thePSPR and the JP represented ‘new’ beginnings in terms of spiritualism and psychical research, respectively. However, it would be wrong to reduce everything to breaks and discontinuities. In fairness, the issue was more one of general trends, and it is important to recognize that there were clear conceptual and methodological connections between the movements.”

“While different, the three journals presented in their pages material showing empirical attempts to study psychic phenomena, even though they represent different research styles. Of the three approaches—the teaching of the spirits, the analyses of testimony, and the conducting of experiments—only the last two are still pursued in parapsychology. In fact, I doubt that today many parapsychologists . . . will consider the use of mediumistically obtained teachings as a reliable approach to study psychic phenomena, although one may argue that it may be useful to generate hypotheses that may be put to test by other means. But leaving aside modern standards and practices, we must admit that Kardec saw his work as empirical, different from faith, an attempt to collect information from the natural world, albeit from an unusual source.”

“Different from the above, the PSPR and the JP, not to mention other journals . . . , emphasized cases and experiments as the means to generate knowledge for psychical research. Later developments within the SPR and the Duke group, as articulated in the PSPR and the JP, significantly affected the study of psychic phenomena, transforming it into a more systematic endeavor . . .”
 

Carlos S. Alvarado, PhD, Research Fellow, Parapsycholgy Foundation

One of my last published articles, written with colleagues Michael Nahm and Andreas Sommer, is a historical note about early nineteenth-century examples of explanations of mediumistic phenomena via the psychic powers of the living medium.

Here is the reference and abstract:

* * *

Alvarado, C.S., Nahm, M., & Sommer, A. (2012). Notes on early interpretations of mediumship. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 26, 855-865.

Abstract

The purpose of this note is to dispel the notion that ideas of human agency to account for the veridical mental phenomena of mediums began with persons associated with the Society for Psychical Research (SPR) in England, or with certain later individuals. In fact, the appearance of these ideas preceded the founding of the Society in 1882. Examples of earlier writers who discussed these ideas include Carl Gustav Carus, Edward W. Cox, Justinus Kerner, Asa Mahan, André-Saturnin Morin, Maximilian Perty, B.W. Richmond, and Edward C. Rogers. In contrast to the speculation by later SPR authors and others, the concepts that appeared in the old literature often involved belief in physical forces.

* * *

Here is an example of the ideas mentioned in the paper: “The well-known American clairvoyant Andrew Jackson Davis (1826-1910) believed in different agencies . . . In his book The Present Age and Inner Life (1853) Davis wrote that ‘owing to the extraordinary attributes of man’s mind, many experiences are by some individuals regarded as spiritually originated; which in truth, are only caused by the natural laws of our being . . . .’ Davis believed that 40% of the phenomena were due to discarnate spirits. The remaining possibilities included a variety of medical explanations, with 18% being accounted for by what would later be referred to as the psychic powers of the living.”

Another example: “The German zoologist Maximilian Perty (1804-1884) was another critic of belief in spirit communication in mediumship . . . Perty argued that the “guides” of somnambulistic mediums, often assuming the appearance of deceased loved ones, were usually dramatized personifications from the somnambulist’s own psyche . . . Rather than suggesting evidence of spirit identity, Perty held that supernormal knowledge emerging in “spirit guides” was due to the somnambulist’s own unconscious clairvoyance or “magic excitation.”

We concluded:

“The material discussed in this note could be extended. It shows that explanations of veridical elements arising from the living medium rather than from discarnate influence preceded the founding of the SPR. . . Nonetheless, the early ideas were often not exactly equivalent to those held by SPR workers and later writers engaged in controversies . . . and discussions of the so-called hypothetical construct referred to as super ESP . . . Instead early ideas were frequently associated with unorthodox concepts of force not discussed by the SPR workers who wrote about mental mediumship . . . In addition, although earlier writers knew about such processes as those akin to unconscious cerebration, the SPR (and later) workers laid more emphasis on less physiological conceptions of subconscious processes that had a wider scope.”