Why did leading Koestler Parapsychology Unit stop lab research?

[Open Mind]

It can't be due to lack of results ....

' ....
Even stage magicians were consulted to help guard against trickery. Between 1993 and 2003, six out of nine major experimental studies produced statistically significant results. When asked directly if he personally believed in telepathy, [Professor Robert] Morris replied that he just did the research – but added that there was accumulating evidence indicating that it does occur. “We are perhaps studying nature, but in its fuller form,” he suggested.

And then, in the late summer of 2004, Bob Morris went and died. Suddenly. Unexpectedly...' http://www.forteantimes.com/features..._koestler.html

So what happened next? .... according to Jacob's interview with parapsychologist JJ Lumsden ....

when I attended (2000-2003), there was a buoyant set of research programmes in place. These were conducted by full-time staff, postgraduates working on their PhD studies, and undergraduates doing final year projects. We had a full Ganzfeld suite in the unit, so (as you can imagine) there was a fair amount of research into Extra Sensory Perception. In addition, there was Psychokinesis work, investigations into 'haunted' settings, and DMILS (Direct Mental Interaction with Living Systems) studies...... but in recent years, following the untimely death of Professor Robert Morris in 2004, the unit has been substantially downsized. Nowadays, there are only two permanent members of staff, the laboratory space has been given up , and very few students are taken on. Today, Edinburgh University seems to prefer to focus resources on other areas of psychology. Interview with parapsychologist JJ Lumsden author of The Hidden Whisper (Blog)

Author Arthur Keostler died in 1983 - a drug induced double suicide along with his healthy wife Cynthia .....brought another shock ... he had left most of his estate to 'Parapsychology and Parapsychology Alone'

Koestler’s wording, on the other hand, left no room for argument – his money was ‘for parapsychology and parapsychology alone’, and for nearly twenty years, with Professor Robert Morris in charge at Edinburgh University, his wish was obeyed to the letter (see FT201). Yet with Morris’s sudden and premature death in 2004, strange things began to happen. Applications were invited for what appeared to be the post of his successor, though the Koestler Chair had somehow been quietly renamed the Robert Morris Chair (without, it later emerged, the consent of trustee John Beloff, thanks to whom the Chair had come to Edinburgh in the first place). http://www.soultravel.se/2009/0409-P...ychology.shtml

Today, the Koestler is focusing on a 'Readership and a Lectureship' .... which one might interpret as anything but parapsychology lab research. Why?

[Open Mind]

Parapsychology Unit damaged by association with 'Koestler'

In 1998, 15 years after his death, Arthur Koestler was accused of being a rapist in a book by by historian David Cesarani.

Although one reviewer of the book claims .... '.. nearly all his ex-wives and lovers remained close friends. Two of Cesarani’s charges, though, are plausible and disturbing: the rape of [Cesarani's] friend's wife, and the apparent absence of any attempt to dissuade his own wife, younger and healthier than he, from joining him in their double suicide.
http://www.georgescialabba.net/mtgs/...omeless-m.html

Cesarani and Koestler, both jewish authors/historians held opposing viewpoints, so it would have been easier to check these claims, if these claims had emerged before Koestler's death.

Professor Robert Morris, Koestler's literary executor and the Koestler Professor at Edinburgh, called Cesarani's behavior "seriously misleading on more than one occasion"
http://mural.uv.es/jahesa/response.htm

Worse associations for the 'Koestler' Parapsychology Unit was to come .... after the publication of the book, former actress Jill Cragie sbefore her death the following year reportedly also accused the late Arthur Koestler of rape, 47 years earlier during which time she had remained silent. Jill Cragie was the wife of UK politician Michael Foot once in line to be UK Prime Minister (leader of the opposition).

Arthur Koestler had been an vocal opponent of soviet politics. In 1995 Oleg Gordievsky the KGB/British double agent on defecting to Britain claimed Michael Foot was a spy, the claim was publicized by the Sundays Times in the 1990s who in turn were reportedly successfully sued £100,000 in 1999 for the unproven allegation. Although Jill Cragie's mother was Russian there is no evidence to suggest either Foot or Cragie had anything to do with the KGB.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/fo...y-1573959.html

However there is little doubt the allegations of rape, true or false, aimed at Arthur Koestler had some effect upon the highly esteemed Keostler Parapsychology Unit .... the bronze bust of Koestler was removed after complaints by students in 1999.

The Koestler Chair has remained empty since the death of Professor Robert Morris in 2003

Unforunately perhaps the funds for 'parapsychology and parapsychology alone' becomes less likely to be strictly followed if it is the wishes of someone alledged to be a rapist.

'.... it was revealed in January 2007 that the £5,000 bequeathed by Koestler trustee John Beloff to the (Keostler) department he had done so much to help establish never reached it. His executors were apparently not satisfied that the money could be spent as he wished – on the Koestler Chair – if there wasn’t one.

Parapsychology - The Forbidden Research

[Ersby]

Looked at their site. Seems fine.

[Open Mind]

Originally Posted by Ersby

Looked at their site. Seems fine.

According to Jacob's interview with Lumsden '... the laboratory space has been given up ...

The KPU still exists for sure, it is just I don't see any lab based research being reported .... obviously projects that had started in 2003 while Robert Morris was still around would be completed and reported probably around 2004

The website lists only 2 members of staff .....

Dr Peter Lamont a magician whose main interest is 'Historical and conceptual issues in psychology, esp. history of unorthodox psychology. History and psychology of magic and the paranormal. Discursive psychology of beliefs about the paranormal.

None of the above could change any skeptics opinion to believe in psi ....this sounds like commentary, history, why people believe ...... anything but psi lab research? Although Lamont is a great writer on the history of magic/psychic claims, I cannot recall seeing his name on any paper that involved lab research looking for psi. I get the impression (perhaps wrongly) he doesn't believe psi exists and therefore his interest is in how and why people believe.


Caroline Watts whose 'main interest' is listed as ' Investigating the psychology of paranormal belief and experience (e.g., the measurement and functions of paranormal belief; childhood factors associated with the development of paranormal belief); the effects of participant and experimenter beliefs on the outcome of parapsychological experiments; and the consequences upon health and well-being of visiting alleged psychic practitioners. '

Again, none of the above will change any skeptics opinion on psi How can studying 'belief' prove or disprove psi? How can the 'consequences upon health' be differentiated from a placebo effect? ..... only lab based experimentation or strictly controlled experimental research outside a lab = parapsychology, surely?

I am not complaining about their leading roles at the KPU .....but all that really counts is looking for psi experimentally ....anything else is psychology, lecture, history .... pretending to be parapsychology.

[hoggworks]

Originally Posted by Open Mind

How can studying 'belief' prove or disprove psi?

Well, if you're studying why people come to believe things, and if you discover, say, a tendency to believe in supernatural events not because they're true, but because of, say, an innate need to determine connections in order to survive, and if you further are able to show that it's the hyper-activity of this neurological function that leads us to believe in the super-natural -- if the belief in supernatural or psi is at its core just us incorrectly determining causation between two unrelated events -- then studying belief would indeed be able to, if not completely disprove psi, but STRONGLY damage it.

There's a new book out called "Supersense," which is about this (and there are so many more), about the way that we make mistakes in cognition and come up with "psi" as an answer. It's fascinating stuff; turns out our brain is more complex and more fallible than we used to believe.

[Open Mind]

Originally Posted by hoggworks

if you further are able to show that it's the hyper-activity of this neurological function that leads us to believe in the super-natural

(1) This cannot explain psi anomalies under strict experimental controls
(2) Research looking into normal psychological explanations has already been done.
(3) The science to correlate neurological functions with specific belief systems just isn't in place

-- if the belief in supernatural or psi is at its core just us incorrectly determining causation between two unrelated events -- then studying belief would indeed be able to, if not completely disprove psi, but STRONGLY damage it.

Why would you want to 'STRONGLY damage it' by looking for for anything psi under strict controlled conditions? It is politics.... because if you look for human gullibility, you will find it.

I could create a research programme to demontrate 'skeptics' were gullible due to expecting normal explanations (Occams Razor) while more complex things were occuring ... ....but again it would be politics.... nothing new.

EVERYONE already knows people can be fooled and misreport psi claims ... this research was already done in the 1890s e.g. die-hard skeptic/debunker Richard Hodgson attacked psychic claimants ... however a decade later changed his viewpoint to claim psi did exist and the psychological misinterpretations were not enough to explain anomalous cognition.

There's a new book out called "Supersense," which is about this (and there are so many more), about the way that we make mistakes in cognition and come up with "psi" as an answer. It's fascinating stuff; turns out our brain is more complex and more fallible than we used to believe.

And none of this can explain anomalous cognition under controlled lab conditions that prevents such self deceptions .....one can only find experimental evidence of psi by testing for psi. If you test for anything but psi, you find anything but psi.

[hoggworks]

Originally Posted by Open Mind

And none of this can explain anomalous cognition under controlled lab conditions that prevents such self deceptions .....one can only find experimental evidence of psi by testing for psi. If you test for anything but psi, you find anything but psi.

You're missing my point. My POINT, if you had cared to pay attention to it (which you seem to get a special joy out of not doing) was that our interpretation of data to fit with a supernatural line of thinking is the issue. That we see and interpret things supernaturally when there's no reason to.

The idea here is that there is no anomalous cognition going on, but we have a tendency to interpret it as such.

I should point out that all of the anomalous cognition reports I've ever seen, all of that research amounts to at BEST the most minor anomaly one could imagine, but more likely a misunderstanding of statistics by the researcher.

To paraphrase an old view of the structure of the universe: "It's garbage. It's garbage all the way down."

[Open Mind]

Originally Posted by hoggworks

You're missing my point. My POINT, if you had cared to pay attention to it

It is not your point ... this has been considered in psychical reseaerch for over 100 years....

The idea here is that there is no anomalous cognition going on, but we have a tendency to interpret it as such.

Yes researchers have been perfectly aware of this possiblity for a century. ..... before Richard Wiseman did experments in 1990s to demonstrate how easily people can misinterpret things as psi ....... one hundred years earlier Dr Richard Hodgson did the same sort of experiments, similarly jumped the gun like Wiseman ... however 10 years later Hodgson encountered evidence that convinced him psi did occur and could not be due to misinterpretation.

I should point out that all of the anomalous cognition reports I've ever seen, all of that research amounts to at BEST the most minor anomaly one could imagine, but more likely a misunderstanding of statistics by the researcher.

The Society for Psychical Research used leading scientists, nobel prize winners, royal society/british academy fellows, holders of the order of merit in science, leading professional magicians, psychologists, lawyers, policemen, doctors, politicians to investigate claims .... many in each category claiming normal psychological explanations cannot explain some cases of psi research ... the research moved to labs many parapsychologists reporting anomalies that cannot be easily explained by normal psychological self deceptions either....

I am not asking you to believe their conclusions .. what I am asking is that experimental research looking for psi anomalies under conditions that rule out self deception continues until it is solved. To shift to studiying psychology of belief, when it has already been taken into account is probably to please university politics.

[hoggworks]

Originally Posted by Open Mind

I am not asking you to believe their conclusions .. what I am asking is that experimental research looking for psi anomalies under conditions that rule out self deception continues until it is solved. To shift to studiying psychology of belief, when it has already been taken into account is probably to please university politics.

Did I or anyone suggest that such research shouldn't be done?

[Open Mind]

Originally Posted by hoggworks

Did I or anyone suggest that such research shouldn't be done?

Good, pleased to hear you support further lab research testing for anomalous cognition.