Skeptical paper about PSI

[joki]

Hell to every one, who is interested in the previously cited paper. It can be downloaded here: 4shared.com - document sharing - download Moulton_Kosslyn.pdf.
Let us discuss this stuff. I think this research shows the same problems like the study with the meditating nuns ("Spiritual brain") or the NDE research with EEGs, where the authors concluded the opposite view (they supposed to found GOD). It is not possible to assess mystical experience with some modern standard techniques like using imaging methods. What do changes in blood flow mean: There is PSI? There is GOD? I doubt this.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

So you're proposing that all the various purported psi and mystical experiences occur in my brain without any signatures at all? You can propose that, of course, but since it is entirely nonfalsifiable, why would we argue about it?

~~ Paul

[joki]

Consider that many in the field are of the opinion that psi is consciousness-related --- meaning not dependent on the brain per se -- and may be a non-local process. If this is the case, this type of study would not disprove the existence of psi at all, merely support the hypothesis that if psi exists, it is a process of non-local consciousness.

[Open Mind]

Hello Joki,

Perhaps I am doing something wrong but when I go to click on the 'download' link on the page with file I get a pop up advert taking me elsewhere.

I'll try again later, cheers.

[davidsmith73]

Originally Posted by joki

Consider that many in the field are of the opinion that psi is consciousness-related --- meaning not dependent on the brain per se -- and may be a non-local process. If this is the case, this type of study would not disprove the existence of psi at all, merely support the hypothesis that if psi exists, it is a process of non-local consciousness.

I'm not sure precisely what you're saying here, but also remember that there are undeniable correlations between conscious activity and brain activity. As far as correlations go (which of course don't imply causation), I think we should expect the same kind of observations associated with anomalous experiences as well as conventional ones. I don't think this particular study is strong evidence against psi because they performed a limited analysis and it could be the case that their noisy, uncomfortable scanner inhibited a psi-conducive state.

[Venom]

Originally Posted by davidsmith73

I don't think this particular study is strong evidence against psi because they performed a limited analysis and it could be the case that their noisy, uncomfortable scanner inhibited a psi-conducive state.

Of course it's always possible to think of some rationnalisation for this. If you ad enough ad hoc hypothesis there won't be any problem: you'll make psi totaly impossible to falsify. Like for exemple the experimenters did that experiment when the Sun was in Virgo and we all knows that it's very bad for psi-experiment. Should have ask an astrologer advice. And also a dowser: maybe there is some water underneath the room interfering with the morphic field also...

[Larry Boy]

Originally Posted by Venom

Of course it's always possible to think of some rationnalisation for this. If you ad enough ad hoc hypothesis there won't be any problem: you'll make psi totaly impossible to falsify. Like for exemple the experimenters did that experiment when the Sun was in Virgo and we all knows that it's very bad for psi-experiment. Should have ask an astrologer advice. And also a dowser: maybe there is some water underneath the room interfering with the morphic field also...

Well, the difference between "the Sun was in Virgo" and a noisy environment is that a noisy environment has a direct impact on the subject performing the task, whereas the Sun probably has not. What you're doing is lumping together real, physical factors that may - or may not - have direct bearing on the experimental outcome, with imagined scenarios of your own that nobody hasn't even seriously suggested.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by joki

Consider that many in the field are of the opinion that psi is consciousness-related --- meaning not dependent on the brain per se -- and may be a non-local process. If this is the case, this type of study would not disprove the existence of psi at all, merely support the hypothesis that if psi exists, it is a process of non-local consciousness.

It's rather presumptuous to assume that consciousness does not interact with the brain at all, isn't it?

~~ Paul

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Larry Boy

Well, the difference between "the Sun was in Virgo" and a noisy environment is that a noisy environment has a direct impact on the subject performing the task, whereas the Sun probably has not. What you're doing is lumping together real, physical factors that may - or may not - have direct bearing on the experimental outcome, with imagined scenarios of your own that nobody hasn't even seriously suggested.

No one has suggested? The experimenter effect has been used as an A-1 excuse for awhile now, and it's not even well-defined. People have suggested all sorts of nutsy things. Here's a good one:

Entangled Minds: More lunacy. Not.

I agree that the MRI machine is a clear choice for an annoyance. But the cat is out of the bag: Parapsychologists are going to have to find their way clear to allow it during psi experiments.

~~ Paul

[joki]

"I'm not sure precisely what you're saying here, but also remember that there are undeniable correlations between conscious activity and brain activity. As far as correlations go (which of course don't imply causation), I think we should expect the same kind of observations associated with anomalous experiences as well as conventional ones. I don't think this particular study is strong evidence against psi because they performed a limited analysis and it could be the case that their noisy, uncomfortable scanner inhibited a psi-conducive state."
David, I never doubt this. This statement is fact. I am a physician and have seen a lot of patients with neuronal disturbances ( altered state of consciousness) without any abnormalities in the CT scan or MRI. What I am saying that our imaging methods do not mandatory detect morphological changes. On the other hand the authors could not find any differences between the groups, does this really rule out PSI effects. I think this depends more on the state of consciousness (meditating, sleeping, .....).
Further think about van Lommel s study and findings in EEG changes during cardiac arrest and its correlation to NDE. A lot of Neurologists critisize his conclusions, because there could be some kind of awareness without any EEG findings.
Further the neuroscientist Mario Beaugard has published his MRI findings with meditating nuns. He also concludes that meditating leads to different states of consciousness and results in changes of cerebral blood flow, but is not mandatory an evidence that the nuns were talking with GOD (although the nuns believe this).