Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 10001 0004-6
136
PROCEEDINGS OF THE IEEE, VOL. 70, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 1982
The Persistent Paradox of Psychic Phenomena:
An Engineering Perspective
ROBERT G. JAHN
Invited Paper
Afosfrocf-Although a variety of so-called psychic phenomena have at-
tracted man’s attention throughout recorded history, organized scholarly
effort to comprehend such effects isjust one century old, and systematic
academic research roughly half that age.
Over recent years, a sizeable
spectrum of evidence has been brought forth from reputable laboratories
in several disciplines to suggest that at times human consciousness can
acquire information
inaccessible by any known physical mechanism
(ESP), and can influence the behavior of physical systems or processes
(PK), but even the most rigorous and sophisticated of these studies
display a characteristic dilemma: The experimental results are rarely rep-
licable in the strict scientific sense, but the anomalous yields are well
beyond chance expectations and a number of common features thread
through the broad range of reported effects. Various attempts at theoret-
ical modeling have so far shown
little functional value in explicating
experimental results, but have served to stimulate fundamental re-exam-
ination of the role of consciousness in the determination of physical
reality.
Further careful study of this formidable field seems justified,
but only within the context of very well conceived and technically im-
peccable experiments of large data-base capability, with disciplined at-
tention to the pertinent aesthetic factors, and with more constructive
involvement of the critical community.
Prologue
The world of psychic phenomena might be likened to a vast,
fog-shrouded swamp, wherein are reported to dwell a bewilder-
ing array of bizarre phenomenological creatures,
all foreign to
our normal perceptual and analytical catalogs.
Some scholars
who have explored this clouded domain have returned to an-
nounce categorically that all such
life is illusory—mere sunken
stumps and swirling subsurface shadows, inviting misperception
by the gullible and misrepresentation by the purveyors.
But
others of comparable conviction have described in minute de-
tail
their observations
, of a variety of extraordinary beings of
awesome dimensions and capability. Some ofthese are claimed
to appear unexpectedly,
erupting from
the
roily
depths
to
flash momentarily
in
the sunlight of human experience, only
to disappear again before any systematic calibration of their
characteristics can be taken.
Others are reportedly enticed to
more replicable and controlled behavior, but only by persons
of special
talent or extensive
training.
Much
invalid, even
fraudulent evidence of such activity has been touted by ex-
ploiters of these mysteries, thereby casting deep suspicion on
all other testimony.
When fully sifted, only a very few legiti-
Manuscript received July
15, 1981; revised October 26, 1981.
This
work was supported
in part by the McDonnell Foundation, Inc., and
by the John E. Fetzer Foundation, Inc., The Explorers Club, the Insti-
tute of Noetic Sciences, and the Little River Foundation.
The author
is Dean of the School of Engineering/Applied Science,
Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544.
mate specimens seem to have been captured, by tediously de-
liberate
trolling of the brackish domain,
or by more incisive
invasion of its turbid interior, and even these have proven so
incomprehensible and so delicate to exposure, and the imposed
criteria for their credibility have been so severe, that they have
not been fully persuasive.
Yet the goal remains alluring, and
the search continues.
Introduction
W
ITH THIS unlikely bit of allegorical musing,
I venture
to begin the most extraordinary writing task I have yet
attempted;
to respond to the request of the Editors
of this journal for a critical review of the status and prognosis
of scientific research into so-called psychic phenomena.
I do
so with some trepidation,
first because the topic is far from
my principal line of scholarship and my involvement with it
has been brief and tightly circumscribed, and second, because
of the intensity of reactions any commentary on this subject
tends to call forth from many quarters.
For these reasons,
it may be well at the outset to specify my
perspective on the field and the purpose that I hope this article
will serve. My formal training is that of an engineer and applied
physicist, and the bulk ofmy research has concerned a sequence
of topics in the broad domain of the aerospace sciences: Fluid
mechanics, ionized gases, plasmadynamics, and electric propul-
sion.
In my present position as Dean of the School of Engineer-
ing and Applied Science of Princeton University,
I have occa-
sion to be involved with an even broader selection of topics
selected
for undergraduate independent
projects, and
it was
in that context some four years ago that
I was requested by
one of our very best students to supervise a study of psychic
phenomena.
More specifically,
this young lady proposed to
bring her talents and background in electrical engineering and
computer science to bear on some experiments in controlled,
low-level psychokinesis. Although I had no previous experience,
professional
or
personal,
with
this
subject,
for
a variety of
pedagogical reasons I agreed, and together we mapped a tenta-
tive scholarly path, involving a literature search, visits to appro-
priate laboratories and professional meetings, and the design,
construction, and operation of simple experiments. My initial
oversight role in this project led to a degree of personal involve-
ment with it, and that to a growing intellectual bemusement,
to the extent that by the time this student graduated,
I was
persuaded that this was a legitimate field for a high technologist
to study and that I would enjoy continuing to do so.
0018-9219/82/0200-0136$00.75 © 1982 IEEE
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 10001 0004-6
1982
de-
rive
i so
>sed
>ave
and
iure
yet
tors
osis
do
om
ti it
tuse
ject
my
icle
lied
nee
uid
ml-
;er-
xa-
ucs
was
by
hie
1 to
uid
ed,
ice,
of
lta-
iro-
gn,
tial
ive-
nt,
was
gist
|
,
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 1 0001 0004-6
i
JAHN.rPSYCHIC PHENOMENA: ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE
I have since assembled a small professional staff, secured the
requisite funding from a few private sources, and undertaken
a modest experimental program in selected aspects of the field
that could ultimately have some engineering implications.
I
should emphasize
that my
fractional involvement with
this
program remains quite minor in comparison to my other re-
sponsibilities, and that the work
is
still very preliminary and
tentative, but it provides the base of cognizance for my broader
observations on the field as a whole.
The intention of this article is to provide some balanced per-
spective on the modem status of this conceptually and logis-
tically difficult subject.
Certainly no field of scholarly endeavor
has proven more
frustratingi nor has been more abused and
misunderstood, than the study of psychic phenomena.
Dealing
as it does as much with impressionistic and aesthetic evidence
as with analytical substance, and carrying by its nature strongly
subjective and numenistic overtones,
it has been incessantly
prostituted by charlatans, lunatics, and sensationalists, catego-
rically
rejected by most of the scientific establishment, and
widely misunderstood by the
public
at
large.
Interspersed
with this, and greatly encumbered by it, a pattern of legitimate
effort
to comprehend and utilize the purported phenomena
has evolved to a point where some dispassionate assessment of
its accomplishments can be attempted. The questions addressed
by this review are whether, once the overburdens of illegitimate
activity and irresponsible criticism are removed, there remains
sufficient residue of valid evidence to justify continued research
and, if so, how this research might most effectively be styled,
facilitated, and evaluated.
Before addressing these issues directly,
it may be helpful to
review briefly the historical evolution of the field, its contem-
porary
nomenclature
and conceptual
organization, and
the
dimensions of current activity.
This can then be followed by
a general overview and critique of the modem research, and
that
in
turn by more detailed description of a few specific
efforts, drawn
primarily from our own work.
Toward the
close, we shall attempt to survey several theoretical approaches
to modeling of psychic processes and comment briefly on po-
tential implications and applications of the phenomena.
In all
of this, no tone of advocacy is intended, other than for objec-
tive assessment of the evidence in hand.
History
In a sense, the study of psychic phenomena
is one of the
oldest of human endeavors
1 1 ]-[7]
.
As
far back as can be
traced, mortal man has pondered the supernatural in one form
or another.
Cave
drawings
at
Lascaux and Altamira, circa
20 000
B.C.,
reflect
this
preoccupation,
and
the
religious
rites of early societies of both the eastern and western worlds
were
heavily
loaded
with
psychic
formalisms.
The
classic
civilizations of Egypt, Greece, and Rome dealt extensively in
psychic process.
The Delphic Oracle was politically important
from the
earliest Hellenic times to the age of Alexander the
Great, and was consulted on problems as diverse as the proper
measures to stop a plague, the constitutions of Greek city-states,
and the best locations for new colonies. Even Aristotle, one of
the most empirical of the classical philosophers, examined the
causal links in prophetic dreams.
Virtually every form of organized religion practiced by man
has been thoroughly laced with various forms of psychic mech-
,
anism.
The Bible, like most other basic theological texts, treats
Psychic process as a central ingredient, in a tone so matter-of-
fact that one is inclined to believe that people of those times
accepted such events rather routinely.
Indeed, the Bible is an
excellent catalog of psychic phenomena; virtually every cate-
gory of effect identified today is illustrated there in one form
or another.
Christian
writers and philosophers, from Augustine to the
Reformation, recount many purported instances of psychic
phenomena,
usually
attributed
to visitations of divine grace
or demonic posession.
Secular medieval writing also abounds
with
supernatural and
mystical
reference, and even
in
the
Renaissance period it is still difficult to separate psychic allu-
sion from religious dogma, although both were then translated
into more organized forms in art and literature.
Early in the
16th century the celebrated Swiss physician and philosopher
Paracelsus wrote
extensively on psychic capabilities and po-
tentialities.
In his words:
The mind of man
is the microcosmic counterpart of the uni-
versal mind
One man may communicate his thoughts
to another with whom he is in sympathy, at any distance however
great it may be, or he may act upon the spirit of another person
in such a manner as to influence his actions
[8]
.
Perhaps the
first major scientific commentaries on the topic
were offered near the turn of the 1 7th century by Sir Francis Ba-
con, widely regarded as the originator of the scientific method.
In The Advancement of Learning he suggested that “supersti-
tions and
the
like
should not
be excluded from scientific
study,
and
in
his posthumous
book,
Sylva
Sylvarum,
he
proposed deliberate investigation of telepathic dreams, psychic
healing, and the influence of “imagination” on the casting of
dice
[9]
.
Some years
later,
a group of British intellectuals
including Henry More and Joseph Glanvill met regularly to
discuss
paranormal
topics,
and
in
1681
Glanvill
published
the substance of these studies in a book entitled Saducismus
Triumphatus
1 10].
Meanwhile, some four centuries of public and church hysteria
oyer sorcery and witchcraft,
as manifested in a sequence of
trials,
tortures, and executions, had begun to subside, and by
the mid-1 8th century, the Roman Church authorized Prospero
Lambertini, who
later became Pope Benedict XIV, to carry
out a scholarly investigation of reports of psychic events.
His
conclusions, recorded in De Canonizatione [11], were surpris-
ingly
unecclesiastical:
namely,
that
1)
psychic experiences
were not necessarily divine miracles, but could occur to “fools,
idiots, melancholy persons, and brute beasts”; 2) apparitions
had little to do with sanctity or demonic entities; 3) prophesy
occurs more often in sleep than in waking; 4) it is difficult for
a prophet to distinguish his own thoughts from extrasensory
messages; and 5) predictions frequently take. symbolic forms.
In
all of these, he presaged to some degree modem thoughts
on these topics.
At roughly the same time, Anton Mesmer ’s discovery of hyp-
nosis opened an alternative route to demonstration and study
of unconscious psychic process that has continued to this day.
Early reports of hypnotized subjects performing telepathic or
clairvoyant tasks were common
[ 1 2] , [1 3 ] , and although much
of this evidence might now be discounted on the basis of in-
adequate experimental control, interest in hypnosis specifically
and
in various
altered
states of consciousness
generally,
as
facilitators of psychic experience
persists into some of the
modem experimentation.
Also in
this
mid-1 8th century period, a spiritualist move-
ment focused on extrasensory contact with the dead, possibly
influenced by the work of Emanuel Swedenborg [14], [15],
germinated in
this country
as well as in England, and by the
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 10001 0004-6
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 10001 0004-6
PROCEEDINGS OF THE IEEE, VOL. 70, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 1982
r 138
19th
century had reached the dimensions of an
organized
religion.
Symbolic of the popular preoccupation with thetopic,
Mary Todd Lincoln was reported to have held seances in the
White House in the early
1860’s [16]. A classic two-volume
work by F.W.H. Myers, entitled Human Personality and the
Survival of Bodily Death [17], brought the topic to its acme
of sophistication, but eventually the fanaticism the movement
attracted and
its
fraudulent exploitation
created
a negative
attitude in the scholarly community which prevails yet today.
Despite these millennia of human concern with the paranor-
mal, orderly and organized scholarly search for verification and
understanding
of psychic phenomena began only
a century
ago, with the establishment in London in
1 882 of the Society
for Psychical Research, in whose Proceedings appeared the first
formal publication of controlled experiments in telepathy and
clairvoyance [13], [18], [19]. Three years later the counter-
part organization in
this
country, the American Society for
Psychical Research, was founded in Boston by several distin-
guished
scientists
and
philosophers.
Because
of
financial
difficulty,
this shortly merged with the British group, but re-
emerged in 1905 as a separate entity with its own professional
journal, and has continued as such to the present [20]
.
Although the SPR attracted a barrage of criticism from the
scientific
and
intellectual
communities,
it
also
attracted
significant participation of eminent scholars from established
fields.
Numbered among
its presidents are three Nobel Lau-
reates, ten Fellows of the Royal Society, one Prime Minister,
and a substantial list of physicists and philosophers, including
Henry Sidgwick, Frederic W. H. Myers, Lord Rayleigh, Sir J. J.
Thomson, William McDougall, Edmund Gurney,
Sir William
Crookes,
Sir William
Barrett, Henri Bergson, Arthur,
Earl of
Balfour,
Gardner Murphy,
G.N.M.
Tyrell,
Charles
Richet,
Gilbert Murray, and one of the most articulate contributors to
the evolution of critical thought on this topic in this period,
the
Harvard
psychologist
and
philosopher,
William
James.
One of the founders of the ASPR, James wrote extensively
and eloquently on behalf of objective and disciplined study of
psychic phenomena [21 ] — [25]
:
Any one with a healthy sense for evidence, a sense not methodi-
cally blunted by the
sectarianism of
‘science,’ ought now,
it
seems to me,
to
feel that
exalted
sensibilities and memories,
veridical phantasms, haunted houses, trances with supernormal
faculty, and even experimental thought-transference, are natural
kinds of (phenomena) which ought, just like other natural events,
to be followed up with scientific curiosity
[ 25 ]
.
Entering the 20th century, anew perspective on psychic phe-
nomena was proyided by the emergence of psychology
as a
scholarly discipline, and especially by the early efforts in clinical
psychology and psychoanalytic therapy.
The patriarch of this
evolution, Sigmund Freud, was a member of the SPR and con-
tributed, albeit somewhat reluctantly, to its publications [26]
,
[27]
.
His
recognition and exploration
of the unconscious
mind and of the function of dreams prompted Myers to suggest
a possible explication of various psychic effects which is
still
of theoretical value [17]
.
Freud’s interest in parapsychology
increased toward the end of his life, and he is reported to have
conceded informally that were he to begin his career anew, he
would focus on this topic.
Freud’s former protege, Carl Jung, who had written his Ph.D.
thesis on the psychology of occult phenomena, pursued ex-
ploration of the unconscious to deeper dimensions of para-
normal experience, publishing widely on such subjects as telep-
athy, mediumship, synchronicity, the collective unconscious,
and
theoretical models
of psychic
process
[28] -[30].
In
Memories, Dreams, Reflections, he stated:
... the
relationship between
doctor and
patient,
especially
when a transference on the part of the patient occurs, or a more
or less unconscious identification of doctor and patient, can lead
to parapsychological phenomena.
I have frequently run into this
[30].
Jung’s collaboration with the eminent physicist Wolfgang Pauli
on the topic of synchronicity clearly influenced the subsequent
evolution of both careers and of fundamental concepts in both
disciplines [31]. Although much of the established psychologi-
cal community has
since rejected parapsychology
as a valid
discipline, some interest has been retained by a few
clinical
practitioners, presumably because
of the demonstrated con-
comitance
and
similarities
of apparent
psychic experiences
with certain psychological processes [32]
, [33]
.
It was
also
early
in
this
century
that the
first organized
academic studies of psychic phenomena were mounted.
One
of the more visible of these devolved from gifts and a bequest
from Thomas W. Stanford, brother of the founder of Stanford
University, to endow psychic research at that institution, and
to this day the university provides support of a “psychic research
fellow” and retains a collection of so-called “apports” indicative
of the donor’s long personal involvement with the field. Modest
research programs were also undertaken at Harvard and a few
European universities in the
first decades of this century, as
evidenced by
occasional
publications
in various
established
journals.
The benchmark
academic
effort, however,
germinated
at
Duke University in the late 1920’s, when William McDougall,
who had been James’ successor at Harvard, arrived to chair the
department
of
psychology
and
appointed
J.
B.
Rhine and
Louisa Rhine, “to study the claims to scientific value of the
field
known
as
psychical
research.”
Their
early
tentative
efforts in the study of postmortem survival gradually evolved
into a laboratory for controlled research in “extrasensory per-
ception,” as they first termed the process.
In this laboratory
were established many of the basic concepts and protocols of
modem psychic research, as well as the
first extensive and sys-
tematic data bases of several types of psychic experimentation.
The professional and personal history of the Rhines and their
laboratory is a fascinating saga in its own right, but would take
us too far afield here [34]-[37]
. A few excerpts from a 1967
address of J. B. Rhine to the American Psychological Associa-
tion, in which he attempted to summarize his first two decades
of intensive study,
give hint of the inherent attractions and
frustrations of this field, and of the man’s optimistic vision:
The phenomena that were being studied began to show lawful
interrelations and even a degree of unity. One by one the major
claims, based originally only upon spontaneous human experi-
ences, were subjected to laboratory test and experimentally veri-
fied....
Certain general characteristics of the psi process became
clear during this period.
The most revealing of these is the sub-
ject’s lack of conscious control over any type of psi ability, a
characteristic which accounts for its elusive nature.
It was new
methodological ground, even for psychology
Also, we were
surprised to find that psi ability
is widespread, probably even a
specific human capacity rather than a capability possessed by a
few rare individuals as had been the popular belief.
Evidence
that
psi
is not linked with
illness or abnormality was another
welcome advance
By 1951 ... a healthy young science was
emerging [38].
In
1937,
the
Rhines began
publication
of the Journal o]
Parapsychology
,
which remains a leading journal in the field
today.
A professional organization calling itself the Parapsy
chological Association was formed in 1957, and in 1969 was
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 10001 0004-6
jahn: psychic pAppffiMed<EififEReh0a8fi>^0£Mi/O8/O7
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001100010004-6i39
V
accepted as an
affiliate by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science.
At the present time, there are eight English language publica-
tions covering this field [39], supplemented by numerous less
formal magazines and countless books of widely varying quality
and relevance.
Research activity is reported from some twenty
U.S. universities and colleges and at least as many institutions
in Western Europe [40]
, but in most cases
it
is of very small
scale.
There are very few academic programs of study, although
some fifty M. A. and Ph.D. theses have been accepted on psychic
topics at reputable universities over the past forty years [41]
.
Some ten research institutes and private corporations in the
United States have also authorized publications and reports in
the field [42]
.
The extent of Eastern Bloc and Oriental efforts
[43 ] — [ 54] and of classified research in this country are matters
of considerable speculation on which
I cannot comment with
authority.
Further review of contemporary programs will be attempted
in subsequent sections, following an outline of modern nomen-
clature and conceptual organization of the topic.
In closing this
historical overview, we might simply observe that in many re-
spects the growth pattern of this
field resembles that of the
natural sciences in
their earliest days, or perhaps even more
the incubation
of
classical
psychology,
in terms
of the ab-
sence of replicable
basic experiments and useful theoretical
models, the low level of financial support and internal profes-
sional coordination, and the low credibility in the academic
establishment and public sectors.
Also like those fields, the
survival and early growth of psychic research can largely be
attributed to the efforts of a few scholars of sufficient convic-
tion,
stature, and courage to withstand the rejection of the
orthodox communities.
Nomenclature and Conceptual Organization
Before turning to an assessment of contemporary research,
it may be useful to specify some notation and delineation of
the
field,
to an
extent
consistent
with
the
present limited
comprehension
of the phenomena.
First,
let us agree to a
global definition of “psychic phenomena” (frequently denoted
by “psi” or “\p”) to include all processes of information and/or
energy
exchange
which involve animate consciousness
in
a
manner not currently explicable in terms of known science.
Similarly, let “psychic research” imply any scholarly study of
such phenomena employing scientific methodology, as opposed
to any dogmatic, ritualistic, or theological approaches. Within
these definitions, the
field may then be roughly divided into
two
major
categories:
extrasensory
perception
(ESP)
and
psychokinesis (PK).
ESP refers generally to the acquisition of information from
sources blocked from ordinary perception. Under this category
are included such subdivisions as telepathy, which refers to
detection
of another
person’s thoughts; clairvoyance, which
refers to contemporary perception of remote physical objects
or
events;
precognition
and
retrocognition, which refer to
perception of future events and events in the past not accessible
by normal recollection; and animal ESP, which encompasses a
variety of seemingly inexplicable capabilities, such as homing,
psi-trailing, collective behavior, communication, etc.
PK (occasionally termed telekinesis, or psychoenergetics) re-
fers to a palpable influence of consciousness on a physical or
biological system.
The interaction may be deliberate or spon-
taneous,
and
the energy
transfer involved may range from
microscopic
disturbance
of
atomic-level
processes,
through
macroscopic
distortion
or levitation of objects, up to some
very drastic
“poltergeist”
effects.
Psychic healing and man-
plant interactions would be two examples of PK in biological
systems.
Note that in its major subdivision into ESP and PK, the field
conforms to two of the main categories of present-day science
and high technology, i.e., that encompassing the extraction, con-
version, transmission,
storage, and utilization of information,
and that comprising the same sequence of processing of energy.
Other domains of psychic research can be identified which do
not fit into these major categories of ESP and PK and with which
we
shall not be further concerned in
this
article.
Examples
would include research into survival of death, and the family
of “out-of-body experiences (OBE),” including astral projec-
tion, autoscopy, and bilocation. The following table attempts
to summarize the subdivisions in a concise form.
Categories of Psychic Phenomena
I.
Extrasensory Perception (ESP)
A.
Telepathy
B.
Clairvoyance
C.
Precognition/Retrocognition
D. Animal ESP
II.
Psychokinesis (PK)
A.
Physical Systems
B.
Biological Systems
III.
Survival
A.
Reincarnation
B.
Apparitions
C. Mediumship
IV.
Out-of-Body Experiences (OBE).
Clearly
this
particular arrangement
is
neither unique nor
orthogonal.
Elements of one category frequently appear in
the context of another,
e.g., precognitive clairvoyance; tele-
pathic healing, etc., and occasionally an assignment is ambigu-
ous,
e.g., a particular effect may be regarded as precipitated
by PK, or simply to be
forecast by precognition.
Notwith-
standing, the table may aid in keeping the subsequent illustra-
tions in some order.
Pattern of Contemporary Research
By its nature and heritage, modern psychic research remains
rather diffuse and lightly structured, making any attempt to
catalog the work by institution or laboratory, or by tracing
developments of given lines of effort, rather ineffective and pre-
mature.
Instead,
it may be more useful to comment on the
pattern of attention to this field by academic disciplines, noting
the variations in emphasis, methodology, representation, and
interpretation brought to bear, using specific projects only as
illustrations with no implications of hierarchy or attempt at
completeness.
Even in this format, no recitation of specific
research results or conclusions
will be attempted, since these
can be misleading or incomprehensible when extracted from
the detailed context of their experimental arrangements and
protocols.
In later sections, an effort will be made to follow a
few sample experiments through to their particular results and
conclusions.
By
far the most sustained and broadcast attention to this
field has been given by a cadre of scholars with professional
backgrounds in classical psychology, comprising a controversial
subdiscipline termed “parapsychology.” This group has tended
to approach the field with the traditional psychological proto-
cols and vocabulary, and to interpret results in the context of
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788R001 100010004-6