We don’t. We scoff at the morons who abandon all reason and logic and take up the banner of bunkum and idiocy.
What would you call a psychologist who jumps out of an airplane with a Special Forces Team to keep them and the indigenous troops they support mentally healthy?
A waste of taxpayer money?
ETA: I just got the joke. never mind. :smack:
Well, not really - there are protected things on this site.
The Edinburgh thing was Arthur Koestler’s money. I’m quite happy that someone at least attempted some experiments. Didn’t work? That is data, too.
It isn’t linked to psychology. Parapsychology is the psychology of the paranormal. In the same way that Social Psychology, Forensic Psychology, Child Psychology et al focus on particular aspects of psychology.
Jung isn’t a European gig. That’s strictly for the Americans. Social and behavioural psych are much more common here.
Evidence of what exactly?
The aim of science is not to go out and prove something exists or happens. It is to go out and investigate something and evaluate the evidence for or against it. Nothing is proven completely.
Parapsychology sets out to investigate instances which we consider to be ‘spooky’ and have no rational explanation for. Many of these things are shown to be the result of phenomena we can explain. How is this a failure? Others are not yet explicable and are set aside for another time when we might have better tools and understanding. In what way is this a failure? There can only be failures if one has an initial belief and desire for certain results.
You appear to be assuming that parapsychology sets out to prove the existence of ghosts. In this you are quite mistaken and perhaps you need to re-examine your beliefs about what this discipline is and of course, to consider the influence of popculture in your culture as I am convinced that this has led to American misunderstandings of what the term refers to.
How can the paranormal have a “psychology?”
Dio, the distinction being made seems pretty clear to me. I’m as hard-headed a skeptic as you are but it seems to me that your objection to the mere presence of certain words is interfering with your understanding of the argument.
To define parapsychology as “the psychology of the paranormal,” as zelie indicates is the practice in the UK, apparently refers only to a legitimate branch of psychology that focuses on people’s fascination with and/or perception of what they consider to be “the uncanny.” It has nothing to do with whether such phenomena exist. It has everything to do with how and why people get the willies in certain circumstances, and then ascribe said willies to supernatural forces. Parapsychology, in this formulation, is ultimately about the people – it is not about the phenomena in and of themselves.
Shermer’s book Why People Believe Weird Things, for example, might therefore be seen as something of a parapsychological primer: what is it about our wiring that makes many people see things a certain way, and leap to rationally unfounded beliefs about those perceptions? That, right there, is another way of stating “the psychology of the paranormal.” If you prefer to add a couple of clarifying words, then try out “the psychology of people’s relationship to the so-called paranormal.” Better?
Anyway, this application of the term “parapsychology” is distinctly at odds with the American usage, and that may be causing the confusion. Hope this helps.
How can a social have a psychology? How can a forensic have a psychology? How can an educational have a psychology?
:rolleyes:
OK, I think it’s long been established what parapsychology is about and what the word refers to. I’m not going to bother feeding you anymore. Enjoy. 
Nobody says that it’s possible to study the “psychology of a forensic/educational or social.” Those words refer to specific aspects of the psychology of humans. You said that parapsychology studies “the psychology of the paranormal.” That was a nonsense sentence. Maybe you meant to say it studies the psychology as it pertains to human beliefs about those things, but the sentence, as you phrased it, made no semantic sense.
Well duh. Fairly obvious one would have thought. Especially considering this has been covered several times already. Keep riding your pony, cowboy.
– tap tap –
Is this thing on? Hello?
I read your post, Cervaise, and it was helpful, thank you. I was just trying to explain why I asked the initial question about the phrase “psychology of the paranormal” and why I still find that phrase to be kind of clumsy. I think "psychology of paranormal beliefs would be better.
So what is your definition?
To me, parapsychology is the study of the paranormal. Here’s my definition of paranormal. If you search SDMB you will find several recent threads discussing the definition.
Here’s google’s list of definitions. Notice they are quite a mixed bag, but the first one seems to hit the nail on the head:
So ghosts, while not the only topic on the menu, would be one of many.
Investigation of past events is part of parapsychology “research” (which I put in quotes because this department of science does not use the same tools as other departments), but it is not the only subject. Certainly accurate reconstruction and analysis of past events can be difficult and error-prone.
But PP is also interested in experiments such as ESP, remote viewing and precognition, any of which, if reproducable, would be significant evidence toward the existance of the paranormal. And that is the evidence that I was talking about when I said that it was not strengthening over time. We have absolutely no reproducable experiments of this type even after hundreds of years of “research”. In stark contrast, high schools do physical, chemical and biological experiments every day that are 100% reproducable. Their results leave *no doubt * as to the phenomena they illustrate.
Seems like a strange thing to say on a board that fights ignorance!
Actually there is quite a lot of reproducable experimentation. To take on the example I set earlier about ghosts being seen and heard in the tunnels. This was shown to be associated with parts of the tunnel system where subsonic noise was very loud/strong. Further testing shows that we are generally uneasy in that sort of environment. The researchers concluded that the environment was causing people to experience ‘supernatural’ phenomenon. This is all easily replicated though not by children as special permission is needed to access the tunnels and conduct research.
Other replicable experiments can include testing whether subjects can accurately predict a card when it is turned and then comparing this to what we’d expect statistically. Or I suppose you could investigate the way the optic nerve works when a subject is dying to see if the famed ‘tunnel of light’ is a natural phenomenon.
Oh I’m sorry, did you want me to say that proof was found that ghosts exist? Sorry to burst your bubble but ghosthunting is not the aim of parapsychology. Starting out believing in or chasing odd phenomenon in a drive to somehow prove that they exist is not what it’s about. For some reason you are unable to see that and I wonder if this comes from YOUR deep-rooted beliefs that there are no things we cannot understand.
That is not really relevant to the science though. Investigating things we don’t have explanations for is a traditional scientific endeavour. And finding explanations likewise. If that doesn’t accord to your belief that parapsychology is about ghost-hunting then sorry but tough titties. Healthy skepticism is good. I’m very skeptical about reports of paranormal happenings as I can generally see how more normal explanations can cover an event. But completely rejecting the possibility that we might not yet be aware of everything in the universe is just as unhealthy as blindly believing every tale told.
I’m not sure what you meant about reconstructing the past as that sounds more like an area of historical study than scientific. Interesting to see how people would have lived I suppose but not really relevant to the subject at hand. Perhaps you can clarify what you meant if you were trying to allude to something else.
You mean you’ve managed to miss all the British-produced shows featuring so-called psychics, spiritualists, etc? You are fortunate indeed.
I live in the UK and it’s my experience that the word parapsychologist here has equally negative connotations to its use in the US.
And this is proof of what, pray tell? That ghosts exist? That people feel uncomfortable in claustrophobic situations? If you have a cite for this “research”, perhaps you should bring it forward.
You are talking about two different phenomena here. First is either PSI or ESP. Do you have a cite for that “replicable experiment”? Why isn’t it being done daily with positive results in all universities? If you have truly found such a replicable experiment, then you have indeed answered the OP, for anyone that devised such an experiment could no doubt get a PhD in Parapsychology, and will win a million dollars, to boot. Please tell us about this experiment so I can apply for the prize – I need the money!
Unh, I think you just did.
It may not be the only one, but if “Parapsychology is the search for evidence of paranormal phenomena”, I’d say that yes, ghosts are pretty paranormal.
It seems to be exactly what it’s about. What is NOT paranormal about ghosts?
There are things I cannot understand, but that doesn’t make them paranormal or unexplainable.
Righto. So we must use our knowledge, such as it is, to separate what might be possible from what is unlikely to be. So far, we don’t seem to be getting closer, not one bit, to a reproduceable experiment proving that any paranormal phenomena exists.
By “reconstructing the past” I mean trying to make sense of something which we have evidence of only as a past event, like a UFO report or an angel sighting. Past events do not lend themselves to a cornerstone of science, replication, but given sufficient evidence, we may be able to make a good guess as to what happened. Using the UFO report as an example, how good were the observations? Is there other evidence that contradicts or supports the observations? Are there alternative, more likely explanations that don’t require postulation of unknown forces?
Is this really that hard to grasp? Academic parapsychology is the branch of psychology that studies why people believe in ghosts, and why “ghost” sightings occur (for example). It doesn’t aim to try to prove ghosts exist. It is attempting to prove that they don’t.