Transcript PSY 429. Paranormal Phenomena and Experience Andrew D. Dewald What are we going to do? 1. 2. Social Science + Natural Science Religion + Philosophy Importance of.

PSY 429. Paranormal
Phenomena and Experience
Andrew D. Dewald
What are we going to do?
1.
2.
Social Science + Natural Science
Religion + Philosophy
Importance of skepticism, scientific analysis,
and valid logic when evaluating fringe
science/paranormal claims
What do I call you?
Dr. Dewald?
 Mr. Dewald?
 Professor Dewald?

ANDY!
The Books
Penn and Teller
Penn and Teller are bad men…
They say bad words….
If you are easily offended by the “F” word, and other brilliant
profanities….don’t watch.
….its the law…they have to talk like jerks.
What do you have to do?






1. Midterm
2. Final
3.Reading Responses
4. Paper
5. SPEAK UP!
There is no attendance, but you must be present
on the day that responses are do….somebody
else may NOT hand them in.
Reading Responses
Based on Chapters in the book
 You do it…you get credit
 Write a short description of your reaction
to the reading, anything you have in your
life that relates and 1-3 questions.
 We will go over them in class and discuss.

The Paper





1. Pick a Paranormal Topic
2. Explain the history and current information
about it.
3. Using techniques learned in class, explain
why this is a paranormal belief and the tactics
used to convey it’s reality.
4. Show evidence against the proposed
phenomena based on science and empiricism.
October 3rd: Due date for proposed topic.
Examples











Big Foot
God
Creationism
Aliens
UFO’s
Psychics
Monsters.
Faith Healing
Levitation
Ghosts
Conspiracy theories
Extra Credit

Experiments:
2.5 points for participation
 No more than 3/ semester


Local Publication coverage of paranormal
events
Must be a local and current.
 Cut out/ print, bring in and present.
 3 points
 (cat example)

What we are not going to do
 This
class is NOT a witch hunt.
 We will not bash other beliefs
 One person’s “weird” thing could be
another’s cherished belief!
 We will be thinking about things in an
empirical and skeptical manner, NOT
ripping on, making fun of, or taunting
others.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g
What are we going to do?

Baruch Spinoza

Dutch Philosopher

“I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not
to bewail, not to scorn human actions, but to
UNDERSTAND them.”
However…

Some things are just absolutely insane….

We can have a chuckle at their expense, but be
sure to respect the views and feelings of your
peers in the class so as not to make enemies.

Discuss……don’t Argue!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
About me…

Pennsylvania native
About me



Undergrad:
Lebanon Valley College (PA)
London Metropolitan University (UK)
My Flat!!!!!!!!
About me

Hershey Inc…..
About me…

Guitars, Guns, Baseball ….
Lets talk….
Name:
 Year:
 Where you from?
 Why did you take this class?

What are some things you have
heard of?
Has anybody experienced anything
paranormal?
 Have you known anybody who has made
these claims?
 What is the general consensus in the
United States about this sort of stuff?

What will we cover?









Ghosts
Afterlife
Channeling
Near-death experiences
Psychics
Psychology and all it’s BS!
UFOs and alien abductions
Creationism vs. evolution
Religious miracles
How will we cover?





1.Reviewing the myriad of events that are
considered to be paranormal
2. Addressing the public’s interest in paranormal
phenomena
3. Evaluating and dispelling the myths
surrounding paranormal events
4. Encouraging scientific rigor when examining
paranormal events
5. Reviewing the consequences of erroneous
belief systems.
Psychology?
Unknown to most people
 Information concerning human behavior
and the unconscious
 Most who are considered to be in the field
of psychology (as determined by the
general population) are far from it.


SO WHAT?!
Psychology?




Requires critical thinking skills!!!
More so than any other science.
Example: Chemistry
Hydrochloric Acid and Aluminum Foil:
Predictions?
Example: Psychology
Josh’s parents get divorced when he is 7….when
he turns 25 he will be __________________
Skeptic?
What is a skeptic?
 Do you know of any?

Skeptic?

Skeptic

Greek: “thoughtful or full of though”
2500 years old!
 Plato and Socrates

 “all
I know is that I know nothing”
Skeptics?

Modern Skepticism:
Science based movement
 First “Pop” skeptic: James Randi (the amazing)

 70’s
and 80’s-debunked many psychics and
spiritualists on the Tonight Show.
Skepticism

Embodies in the scientific method



Skepticism is a METHOD leading to conclusions
A skeptic is “one who questions the validity of a
particular claim by calling for evidence to prove or
disprove it”
“That’s nice…prove it”
Skepticism

1.Universal Skepticism:
 “The
reality of the senses and the validity of
rational inference should be mistrusted.”
 Philosophy:

this has led to Extreme Solopsism:
“The reality of the external world and even one’s
existence are doubted.”
Nothing is real?!
Universal?

Problems?

Overall, it can be seen that “Universal
Skepticism is negative, self-defeating,
and contradictory
Skepticism

2. Selective Skepticism

If a finding seems scientifically valid, it is
accepted, until a better theory comes
along to replace it.
 there
 …a
are NO absolute laws !!!
bit better
I exist…for now
Science?

What the heck is science?
What science is NOT

1. Not defined by subject matter
 Bio,
Chem, Psych, Physics…..what about selling
cars?

2. Not defined by use of particular
instrumentation and tools.
 Do
I have to blow stuff up?
So what is it then?

You tell me……

A way of thinking!
Science!

Science and Skepticism

“a set of methods designed to describe and
interpret observed or inferred phenomena,
past or present, and aimed at building a
testable body of knowledge open to rejection
or confirmation.”

What are some VERY important words here?
Scientific Principles

Induction


Deduction


Making specific predictions based on hypothesis
Observation


Forming a hypothesis from existing data
Gathering data, driven by our hypothesis that tells us
what to look for
Verification

Testing the predictions against further observations to
confirm or falsify the initial hypothesis.
Scientific principles

Via the scientific method we can come to the
following conclusions:

1.Hypothesis


A testable statement accounting for a set of observations
2.Theory

A well-supported and well-tested hypothesis


evolution
3.Fact:

A conclusion confirmed to such an extent that it would be
reasonable to offer provisional agreement.

The earth is not flat
Rationalism

Basing conclusion on logic and evidence

How do we know the world is round?

Dogmatism:
 Basing
conclusion on authority
 Parents said so
 I said so
 Textbook says so
Scientific Principles
How to ALWAYS think about explaining the
universe…
Systematic Empiricism
Production of Public Knowledge
Examination of Solvable Problems
Systematic Empiricism
Empiricism?
 Relying in observation…good enough?


STRUCTURE!!!!

My car is scratched: Who did it?
Production of Public Knowledge

“No man is an island”

Must be public and repeatable.
Why is this necessary?
 Findings must be presented to the
community in such a way that they can be
replicated, criticized or extended by
anyone

Cold Fusion?

What is it?

Pons and Fleischmann
Faulty measures
 Required Special Instruments

Empirically Solvable Problems

Predict Control Explain

What are some questions?

What are NOT some questions?

Pinker: Mysteries to Problems?
 Jefferson
now!
and Sally?! Mystery back then…Problem
Pseudoscience/ Paranormal
Characteristics:
 1. non-falsifiable or irrefutable hypothesis.


What does non-falsifiable mean?

No evidence can show the hypothesis to be
wrong.
Falsifiability?

Scientific theories must be presented in a way so as that
they can be shown to be false.

What “SHOULD” happen and what will “NOT” happen

Predictions on Josh: He SHOULD develop some sort
of behavior related to the divorce of his parent, how it
manifests itself is TBD.

Josh will NOT develop the power to kill a deer from 40
yards with mind bullets, on account of his parents
divorce.
Lets try one…
I, Andrew D. Dewald: am God
 I created all of you
 I control all of you
 And you all have no free will.
 I determine everything

Characteristic 2

Unwillingness to look closely at the
phenomenon they claim exists.

Need for hard data completely ignored.

We never landed on the moon
What if science can’t explain?

If science can’t fully explain the
phenomena COMPLETELY, reasonable
explanations are ignored or dismissed and
the proponent concludes that
pseudoscience is supported.

Why is this dangerous?
Santa?






Who has seen him?
NASA Apollo 8 saw him
Santa produces
Who does the burden lie on?
The proponent or the Skeptic?
-shifting the burden to the Skeptic is NOT a
legitimate means of defending unattainable
hypothesis.
Because I’m a nerd….

2 Billion Children in the World
 (Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and Buddhist
children no need to apply)
 = 378 Million Children (Assuming they are
good)

31 Hours to work= 821.6 visits per second
 1/1000th of a second/ kid
650 miles per second, 3000 times the speed of
sound =14.3 QUINTILLION joules of energy per
SECOND

Conspiracy Theories

Not paranormal in nature but pop up in the
belief systems of proponents of claims.

Who knows some?

Biggest Problem?
 HUGE
NUMBER OF PEOPLE TO NOT COME
FORWARD!
Polywater
1960’s: Russia
 Boils way high, freezes way low
 More stable than H20
 If allowed to contaminate actual
water…BOOM!

Skeptics could not make it
 Russia: You’re not doing it right!

Conclusion:

Extraordinary claims need extraordinary
proof!

Science is open minded: Believers are
NOT!
What is the Paranormal?


A subset of pseudoscience
“any phenomenon that in one or more respects
exceeds the limits of what is deemed physically
possible according to current scientific
assumptions”

A reliance on explanations for alleged
phenomena that are WELL outside the bounds
of established science.

ParanormalPseudoscience
Pseudo vs. Paranormal

UFO’s-You tell me.

We have been visited by aliens who use
wormhole technology to warp space to reach us.

All UFO space craft is actual psychic projections
from the dead spirits of the Universe.
Who cares?

What does it matter if people believe crazy stuff?

What do you think?
Who cares?

Late 19th/ Early 20th century:
People started to care
 Spiritualists were exposed by magicians.

Today:
 CSICOP (1970)

 Committee
for the Scientific Investigation of Claims
of the Paranormal.
CSICOP
 CSICOP
established several
goals:

A. “to encourage the investigation of paranormal
and fringe-science claims in a responsible,
scientific way”

B. “to obtain and disseminate to the public
accurate, scientifically reliable information about
the paranormal.”
Who cares?
?
http://www.csicop.org/
Question:

Is teaching skepticism harmful to curiosity
and creativity?

What do you think?
Why do they care?

I. Claims might be true!

A.Hypnotism
 Franz Anton
Mesmer 1700’s
B. Stones from space?(17th c)
 C. Acupuncture?(70’s)

Aliens?
 (sure)

Why do they care?

II. Responsibility to inform the public:
America is easy:
 Nisbet (1998)

 45%-Faith
Healing
 30%-UFO’s (like actually here now)
 37%- Astrology (like in the paper!)
 25%-Reincarnation (Christians)
Why do they care?

II. Responsibility to inform the public:
The public spends a lot of time and MONEY
on this junk.
 Fraud (John Edward)
 Uncritical coverage of paranormal claims
(Faith healers, prayer, Mary on toast)
 Alternative Medicine (10 BILLION/ year)

Why do they care?

III. Dangers in belief:
So what if I believe?
 3 levels of why this is trouble:

 1.Philosophical
 2.
Practical
 3. Social
Philosophy:
False beliefs about how the world actually
works= DANGEROUS!
 Truth=good


Holding an incorrect view of how the world
works is referred to as a?
Practical
New Kona Coffee:
 200% the regular caffeine! (only has 10%)
 Problems?

The Amish (sorry boys):
 Prayer over inoculation

Social
Bringing it to the masses!

Uncritical acceptance of paranormal belief
systems can be extremely damaging

Examples:
Conclusion:

Those are extremes

However: If one accepts faulty evidence,
intellectual shoddiness and fraud and
twisted logic for little things…it be comes
EASIER to accept the same type of
evidence in support for REALLY bad stuff.