One reading Rao and Palmer Paper, I have questions to ask about the
mind dualism and materialism thing. Am I right in asumming that if
you are a dualist you believe that the brain and mind are separate
things. The brain is a physilogical entity that can be explained by
science and the mind is an enery of its own which can not be
explained by the laws of science. Am I right in assuming this is what
Rao and Palmer think and that is why they present only the evidence
for psi but don't present any empirical evidence for how it occurs.
Also if is not possible to explain it by science, how is it to be
explained and why are they bothering because their evidence seems so
dubious anyway? A materialist on the other hand is someone who
believes that the mind and brain are one of the same thing and that
they are physical in nature, so that psi can be explained rational by
science but the explainations are yet to be discovered. Does it
therefore follow that if you are a materialist you probably don't
believe because it seems so irrational compared to other scientific
laws and seems to defy them all? Are we to assume therefore that
Alcock is a materialist?
Another thing I'd like clarifying is the Gazfeld Studies. What do all
the different experimenters do? It all seems so unclear, compicated
and unconvincing. Does the agent experiementer deliberately try to,
read the mind of the subject which has just been in the light with the
ping pong balls on his/her eyes and then chose the target? Where do
the targets come from are they related to what the subject has
reported on seeing? Are they trying to put forward the view that all
this white light etc causes ESP because it reduces sensory output?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Feb 13 2001 - 16:23:17 GMT