The Florida star. (Titusville, Fla.) 1880-1917, 1901-10-18

Is something like our hypnosis or active
secondary personality. This condition
Ii known to disturb the memory and to
result most often in the recall Of the
least important and more trivial events
In ones experience.
When it comes 10 the argument for
the spiritistic theory. Professor HyslOp
is confronted with telepathy or mind
| reading as an objection to communica-
ton with spirits. But he seems not TO
be seriously disturbed by this objection.
He shows first that 1t was the Society
For Psychical Research which pro.
posed telepathy to explain a very diff
ferent set of facts and that those who
advanced this theory for that purpose
ought TO know something of its limita
tons. Moreover he also shows that
| there is not one iOta of scientific evi-
dence for the kind of teiepathy which
must be invoked TO disprOve the spirit
origin Of the Piper phenomena. He RE
marks also that the scientific world IL
not convinced of any telepathy whatev-
er and that it is mostly the general
public that appeals so confidently to te
| lepathy, so that the scientific man is re-
duced to the dilemma of either accept
| ing spiritism or adopting telepathy as
an apparent escape from 1t.
| AS against those who affect to know
so much about telepathy he recalls tht
fact that il is not an explanation of any
kind, but that it is a name for an un
known cause Science always appeals
TO the known for true explanation. anG
Professor Hyslop claims that the ap
peal to spirits is an appeal to knowL
cause. He makes out his case in thi,
way. We know nothing about the eX
istence of other minds in the materia
world except what is obtained Indirect
| ly. We ascertain their existence by in
ference from the physical movements
of the organism.
/ Professor HyslOp presents some
eleven specific points against teleplthy
| In addition to the general difficulties
| just remarked. The first is its selec
tive character. He shows that Il
| telepathy accounts for the facts il must
| be assumed to be exactly as Selectivr
| as a living Consciousness w0Sed be
| Professor Hyslop insists that il ii is tC
explain the facts away ii must show
tendency not to discriminate between
| the incidents in the memories of the
| sitter In his own case the selective-
ness OF the process obtaining the hun
dreds OF incidents Is SO perfect that
| there is not one incident that belonged
to his own memory or knowledge
alone. but was common to him and the
alleged communication" while living
or common to some one living and the
'communicator."
A second argument against telepathy
| is the incompatibility of certain mis-
takes with the enormous powers which
must be ascribed 10 il In order to ac-
| count for the successes. Professor
Hyslop shows here that the believer in
| telepathy does not reckon with his
host when talking so glibly of his pet
doctrine. He appeals to IL in all sorts
of situations without asking the ques-
| ton why power OF such unlimited
capacities should always be commit
ting such mistakes and be accompanied
with so much confusion when il can
| be.so clear.
Professor HyslOp also advances as a
| strong argument against telepathy that
there ought not TO be Oh that hypOthe-
sis such a difference of clearneSs be-
| tween different communications"
Some OF the Communicates" could
| hardly make n message clear, and 9th
ers exhibited no confusion worth not
| ing. The memories Of the sitter are
the same for all persons when it comes
to considering the trivial nature of the
! incidents actually indicated. Hence
| telepathy ought TO be as clear in its
| deliveranceS about one person as an
other. But this is not the case in Pro
| lessor HySlOpS record. Some cannot
| communicate at all. and others are per
fectly clear.
A most interesting objection TO telep-
| athy TO which Professor HyslOp calls
attention is the fact that the "commu-
nicators" have no conception of time.
| They know events only as before and
after. No definite dates or periods of
| time can be assigned by them. Now
| telepathy ought 10 be quite as able 10
get dates and times from the SitterS
memory as the little trivial incidents of
another kind which 1t is supposed to
secure.
The spiritistic hypothesis is support
| ed by three facts: First, the cOmplexity
Of the incidents which show exactly
that kind of intelligence which living
mind would show in recalling or select
ing incidents tor proving identity. See
ondly, the dramatic play of personality
which represents the INTERROGATION and
conversation apparently occurring on
the other side" among the group Of
persons trying 10 communicate with
the terrestrial world. These messages
slip through Internationally, as il We're.
and show NO traces OF the telepathy
process, as the facts have nothing 10
| do with the memories or the living.
| Thirdly. the mistakes and COMMISSIONS