I have just been reading Caroline Watt's new textbook "Parapsychology: A Beginner's Guide" (2016).
She has an interesting chapter in which she admits:
(page 31)
(page 37)
Watt's statements are important because she is seen as a main figure in the modern parapsychology community.
Skeptics have argued for years that there is no solid evidence for psychokinesis. Are parapsychologists starting to wake up to this fact?
She has an interesting chapter in which she admits:
Quote:
|
"Most parapsychologists do not believe that there exists a strong body of evidence supporting the existence of macro-PK. However, investigations into such claims have yielded a considerable insight into the psychology used to fool observers into thinking that they have witnessed genuine psychic ability." |
Quote:
|
"Overall, the majority of academic parapsychologists do not find the evidence compelling in favour of macro-PK. However, as a result of this work, we now have a much greater understanding of the psychological strategies employed by fake psychics to fool people, including how they manipulate attention, perception, and memory." |
Watt's statements are important because she is seen as a main figure in the modern parapsychology community.
Skeptics have argued for years that there is no solid evidence for psychokinesis. Are parapsychologists starting to wake up to this fact?
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire