Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-0qt87R000700090017-0
processes for perception and oftentimes,
rational or semirational knowledge
processes
to
interpret those perceptions.
This
is not
to say that the
rational component
is absolutely necessary,
but
it did seem to be useful
for me.
In any
event,
since the experiment covers thousands of trials
(button selections)
it required thousands of translations
from one knowledge
mode to another.
Although the rational mode did seem helpful for inter-
pretation,
it was also "costly"
(i.e.,
by shifting to a rational mode,
I could be thrown slightly off-balance in maintaining contact with the
subtle and delicate intuitive processes—thereby introducing an additional
element of ambiguity and error)
.
Related to the problem of differential knowledge processes
is the
problem of having
to translate between states of consciousness
in order
to act upon extrasensory perceptions.
LeShan* analyzed the experiential
properties of what he has termed Clairvoyant Reality and found that while
certain events
(such as telepathy,
precognition,
and clairvoyance)
are
"normal"
to
this reality,
certain other events
(such as being able to take
•
directed action toward a goal)
are "paranormal."
For me this was manifested
experientially as
the feeling that when
I obtain extrasensory perceptions,
I am so much
a part of,
and immersed
in the Clairvoyant Reality that in
order to act,
I must causally separate myself from
the Clairvoyant Reality
and enter the dualistic,
subject/object Reality that LeShan terms "Sensory
Reality."
Encouragingly,
the "pattern recognition" process
seemed to
offer a means of both perception and action,
which did not require the
same degree of transfer between these subtly different states of con-
sciousness.
.
.
*
Lawrence LeShan,
The Medium,
The Mystic,
and
the Physicist
(Viking Press,
New York,
1974)
.
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090017-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-0q787R000700090017-0
The preceding points suggest
that one difficulty in testing and
assessing extrasensory perception may be the apparent need
to translate
it into .an output
that
is not isomorphic with the perceptions themselves—
a person must translate
the perceptual
"language" to
a familiar
form,
across rational and intuitive dimensions,
and relatedly,
from one state
of awareness to another.
Is
it possible,
then,
that our means for testing
ESP may not be highly congruent with the nature of the phenomenon,
and
this may inherently reduce the significance of the test results that
can
be obtained?
\
'
\
*
*
.4
4.
Two Views of the ESP Proces s
I suspect
that,
to an external observer,
my work with the ESP machine
might appear as
fairly consistent scoring slightly above chance—the
logical inference could then be made that
a
small, amount of extrasensory
perception was mixed with
a substantial amount of pure guessing.
' While
the scoring data may support this
inference,
my awareness of the input
process does not.
Consider .the following:
on the
first
run,
a person
could get
six "hits" out of twenty-five by pushing buttons
at random;
then
on the second run,
he could get six "hits" out of twenty-five
by using
extrasensory perception.
To the statistician who looks only at the output,
the scores are identical— they are no more
than would occur
by chance—
and the logical inference would
be that
the input processes were
identical
least very similar.
However alike they might appear externally,
internally they could
feel like quite different runs.
In the second
instance,
the chance level of scoring would be the result of an imperfect
but operative extrasensory perception process.
Obviously,
then,
measure-
ment of ESP by statistical output alone obscures
the nature and extent
extrasensory input.
A relatively modest score on the ESP machine
think—substantially understate
the amount of learning and perceptual
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090017-0
Approved For Refease 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00^87R000700090017-0
development., that actually occurs.
The foregoing
is consistent with my
impression that my
scores,
though statistically significant,
still did
:.i. notrefloct
thc
. actual amount of learning that had occurred.
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090017-0
.
Approved For Re(ease 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00^87R000700090017-0
5 •
Supportive Mind Set
There emerged,
after
a
time,
what seemed
to
be a series of pre-
conditions
to good performance
in terms of mind
set.
These were:
•
A high level of motivation seemed essential.
The task of
pushing one of four buttons over thousands of trials could
be rather boring-enough
to allow one’s attention
to wander.
each
trial,
it was necessary to have a high level of
motivation
to ensure adequate levels of concentration and
focused attention.
Although motivation,
concentration,
and attention were
mportant,
it was also necessary not to
be too concerned
_
*
suc
^
ess or failure associated with each selection.
whe+h
eCame
attached
to
the outcome of a previous
trial
whether
a success or
a
failure,
it could divert a significant
amount of attention from the present trial.
Therefore,
each
trial must
be separate/fresh/clear/unconditioned
by the actual
irrr
failUre ° f PreVioUS trials
a»d separate from
the
imagined successes or failures of upcoming trials.
^t
al
1r
ly
T
Stab1^
Undisturbed motional state also seems
.
.
portant.
I noticed the most substantial fluctuation
in
•
Zd
S
so
r
on)
When
1 WaS
em° ti0nally stressed
(angry,
hassled,
Feeling rested physically also seemed important.
This was
particularly true
if
I were to work with the machine
for an
hour or two-as
this required
a substantial amount of energy.
•
A positive attitude-a feeling that
I could do well and could
•
*lways ^ore a * least at the chance level-was also important
A corollary
to this was that
found
I
did better when
I
always
liked myself” even
if
I did poorly.
Self-deprecation
seemed
to be
a sure way of rapidly diminishing the accuracy
of
the perceptual processes.
6 • The Environment
"
There were attributes of the surrounding environment
that
seemed
to enhance the accuracy of my selections.
The more significant factors
seemed
to
be
the
following i
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090017-0
I
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-0C(787R000700090017-0
•
-
'
^J
:_ was helpful
to have a relatively quiet working environ-
ment.
Or,
if there were noises,
to have them of
a
sort
fairly constant ones
that remained
in the background—that
could
be readily filtered out of my consciousness.
My
impression was
that external sensory information—particularly
sounds
could readily overload/override subtle and delicate
internal sensory information.
•
It also seemed
to help
to have low light levels— I would
always turn out the overhead lights
in the testing room.
I
-
experimented with closing my eyes
to further reduce external
sensory stimulation and
I
found
that this would
increase the
•
‘
sensitivity of sensory cues,
but
this increase
in sensitivity
was offset by a lack of visually based feedback to verify
the accuracy of
the selections.
As
a consequence,
I chose
‘
to
keep my eyes open.
.
.
•
I
found
it essential
to work with the ESP machine
by sitting
somewhat above
it
so
that
I could look down on
the face of
the machine.
For some reason,
perceptual discrimination seemed
much more difficult when
I would
sit at
a lower level which
placed the buttons in a plane more nearly horizontal
to my
, face and upper body.
The perceptual learning gained
in this experiment seemed generally
transferable to other situations where
I might use ESP abilities,
in
particular,
telepathy,
precognition,
and clairvoyance.
The inference
is that
a process or faculty
is being developed which has numerous appli-
^
*
cations
in other situations which would rely upon ESP.
Analogously,
just
as jogging could exercise muscles
to make
a person more adept at
playing football,
dancing,
swimming,
and
the
like,
the use and development
of these
psychic
muscles seems
to have some degree of transference to
other situations.
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090017-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-0^787R000700090017-0
8.
Conclusions
I
found the experiment
to
be
a very substantial learning experience
in which,
I
feel,
learned much more
than was reflected
in
the scores.
It allowed me
to begin to
identify an ability which
I
presume was
largely
latent within
never having had
a prior opportunity for overt
expression.
Finally,
it suggests
to me
that
this must
be
a common" ability among many
people that they simply do not recognize—primarily because they have
never had the opportunity to explore
it as
a legitimate and "real"
phenomenon.
•I
.1
V
-
>
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000700090017-0