The Detroit times., 1917-08-06
Telepathy Problem
nv N. .ppiSaroN BRrcE
Author OF The Riddle OF Person
atty" Psychology and
Parenthood," etc.

Lately have been reading a sin.
gular and unconrnonly interesting
book II is Prof. Emile Boirac's
La psychologist inconnue." entitled
In its American version Our hid
den forces"
In this book Prof. Boirac deals
{ particularly. tho not exclusively.
With the phenomena which We usu
ally have IN mind when We speak OF
rsychical research Naturally nc
has a good deal 10 say about telep-
sthy
But. most unfortunately. he begins
his discussion OF this horderland
problem OF science by giving a mis-
definition OF telepathy. To be sure,
IN doing so he has the excuse that
his definition OF II Is the one com.
monty accepted both by men OF sci.
erce and hy laymen.
Ne' the fact is that. were not
felepa,hy thus generally mlsdenned
the skeptical attitude OF most scien.
tiAc men with regard TO It might
long since have been overcome
Here Is how Prof Boirac. follow.
ing many predecessors. defines telep-
sthy
"Tclepa,hy is clearly designated TO
, specify the action OF the transfer.
cnce ~ thought from one person 10
another by the exercise OF the
Nil
Now. on this definition OF telep
athy IL ought 90 be simple mat
ter 10 verify its actually b. expert.
mental means Thousands 81 tele
pathic experiments have been tried
sometimes az great distances
The results have been disappoint.
ing A FEW sNncrimepters notably
two English ladies. the Misses Miles
and Ramsden have. ~ Is fru-. seem.
ingly succeeded in definitely estab-
fishing telepathic connection With
each other
But mos eXperimenters have been
obliged 70 report either outright fail.
rre> or .noonclusive condolences
seQuently scientists. with few
exceptions. feel justified in afrrming
hat True telepathic action is non.
existent
. one thing they have overlooked
As | pointed out three years ago, in
my book "Adyensurings in the Psy
cnical" they have overlooked the
possibility that tho will may no, be
The dominant IA TOR IN eTcCtinE telc
pathic communication
Scruiini1ed closely. the great mass
az evidence which hrst forced men
81 science 70 become interested in
he feiepathy proolsms-the eyi
dence from dreams. waking halluci.
nations. and other spontaneous phe
romena strongly suggests that ac-
tually 'elepathy is produced by sub
Conscious desiring. not by conscious
willing
II Ia incredible. FOR example, 20
suppose that 4. falling 20 his death
over preciplce. in the moment Of
hts fsll consciously willed his wife
p 70 dream % the distant tragedy
II is entirely credible. on the oppo
site. 20 suppose that as he fell his
I thoughts III ght center on her with
great emotional Intensity From
/ that Intensity her coincideniai dream
OF his death would then result
In my belief that Is 70 say. the
secret 81 telepafhy IL 70 be found
no' IN the volitional sphere. but IN
The emotional And II this be the
case. Il becomes manifest, 20 quote
my own words as found in tho book
mentioned
rhat scientist r. doomed 20 per.
uetual unbclief who boasts that ne
viii never place rrederce in tele2-
sthy until he can play with IL as
&c PLAYS with The chemicals In his
lest tubes
"One cannot handle feelings as
J one can handle chemical com.
: pound, nor can ono manipulate al
F viii the subconSc ious as tho Il were
/ n physical substance
Tho Boirac definition 81 telepathy.
I The popular defnition. nceds revis-
+ inr 7 would revise y 10 read
4 'Ry telepathy IL meant tho action
+ 81 ,ransserence OF thought from one
l person 20 another by none OF tho
recognized channels ~ communlea-
lion. but by some process set In mo
/ ton thru he dynamic power OF an
: intense emotional state