![]()
Chapter 1
Introduction
Dark cognition
There are many mysteries in the cosmos that are both difficult to comprehend and challenging to explain. For instance, both dark matter and dark energy are believed to be pervasive throughout the cosmos, though have yet to be directly observed. Instead, their presence is implied from a range of scientific observations relating to gravitational effects and the amount of visible matter in the universe (e.g., Wang, Abdalla, Atrio-Barandela, & PavĂłn, 2016). In a similar way the term dark cognition can be used to convey two important points regarding some mysterious aspects of human behaviour and cognition. First, is that scientists have reported a wide range of unusual behavioural and cognitive experiences that challenge current understanding and are, at present, difficult to explain. Over time these experiences have been classified as including, though not limited to, telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, psychokinesis, energy healing, out of body experiences and various post-death phenomena. Such experiences were originally given the label psychic phenomena though this has also changed to include paranormal phenomena, as well as parapsychological, extra-sensory and anomalous phenomena. More recently such experiences have been encapsulated under the more generic and potentially neutral term of psi (pronounced âsighâ), where psi refers to the notion that there is some form of interaction between the individual and the environment, or between one or more individuals, in which it seems that some form of information and/or influence has occurred which cannot be explained in terms of current understanding of the relationship between cause and effect (see, Zahran, 2017). It is important to stress that such behaviours and cognition are not para-normal or extra-sensory in the sense that they are abnormal or unusual in any way. If real, and as will be shown in the following chapters there is substantial evidence to suggest they are, then such effects are the result of entirely normal human behaviour and cognition. Nevertheless it has been suggested that these various experiences and effects may represent distinct aspects of psi (Rao & Palmer, 1987), much in the same way that human memory is not a single construct but represents a range of distinct processes and systems (e.g., Roediger, Buckner, & McDermott, 1999). However, given the current level of understanding it is too early to reach any firm conclusions regarding this. The second point is that scientists are currently in the dark in terms of precisely what psi-type effects or behaviours represent, why and how they occur. The hope is of course that future research will be able to shed light on our understanding of psi behaviours and cognition, illuminating more precisely what is occurring, why and how. This in turn will likely have significant implications for models and theories of consciousness. Hence, the aim of this book is to highlight some of the evidence for psi, providing a useful resource of current findings in various areas, both to indicate what mysteries remain and to stimulate future researchers. It will also consider what the implications are of such findings for the dominant view of consciousness. However, before outlining which effects and behaviours will be examined in the following chapters it is worth reflecting briefly on how psi research began and how widespread is the belief in such phenomena. This is followed by a brief outline of how mainstream science views psi along with the dominant view of consciousness as a product of brain activity alone.
A brief history
Scientific interest and research in the possible effects of psi was to some extent initiated during the latter part of the nineteenth century when spiritual mediums alleged that they were able to communicate with deceased persons. This led to a growing level of interest by members of the academic community, such as Henry Sidgwick, Frederic Myers and Edmund Gurney, who advocated the need for rigorous empirical scrutiny of such alleged phenomena. This, in turn, led to the establishment in the United Kingdom of the Society for Psychical Research (SPR) in 1882 which had the explicit aim of investigating the various reported phenomena, real or alleged, without prejudice or prepossession whilst adopting the best practices of science and the scientific spirit of enquiry. According to Cardeña (2014) the aim was to move such phenomena from the darkness of the séance room to the hopefully more enlightened surroundings of the modern psychology laboratory. The SPR was not only interested in testing the claims of psi phenomena, it also explored other topics including unconscious cognition, hypnosis and altered states (Cardeña, Lynn, & Krippner, 2017). Similarly, in America the need to establish a scientific organisation led to the founding of the Parapsychological Association (PA) in 1957 which over time became affiliated with the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 1969 (Cardeña, 2014; Irwin, 2007). Both the SPR, which is now over 130 years old, and the PA, which recently celebrated its 60th year, are still going strong. They are both involved in holding regular meetings and organising study days, guest lectures and an annual scientific conference to showcase the most recent research. Alongside these there are several other institutions that pursue both research (e.g., Australian Society for Parapsychology; Institute of Noetic Sciences in USA; Institut Métapsychique International in Paris) and training (e.g., Arthur Findlay College; College of Psychic Studies, both in the UK) of psi-type behaviours. All of which reflects an on-going and extensive interest in the field of psi-type behaviours and effects.
Belief in psi
There may be any number of reasons why psi-based experiences and behaviours should be taken seriously. Perhaps the most obvious is the sheer prevalence of such reported experiences and the level of belief those in the population report. According to Zahran (2017) people have experienced unusual phenomena and believed in them since the âbeginning of recorded historyâ (p. 34). The validity of such claims is echoed in the surveys carried out across the UK and USA which have repeatedly shown that a large proportion of the population have experienced and believe in such effects. For instance, a Gallup poll reported by Newport and Strausberg (2001) not only showed that the majority of Americans believe in such things but also that there had been a slight increase in the level of such belief since 1990, suggesting that belief in such events/phenomena may be growing. Furthermore, there was a similar increase in the number of reported experiences and the poll also showed that Americans with the highest level of education were more likely than others to believe in effects such as the power of the mind to heal the body and telepathy. This high level of belief in psi effects and behaviours is found across societies both geographically and historically, although the content of the beliefs and experiences may vary across cultures. Indeed, a survey in Germany on attitudes towards such phenomena showed that, of those that responded, more than half gave accounts of personal experiences of such unusual events (Knittel & Schetsche, 2005). Furthermore, these experiences can often have dramatic and influential effects on the lives of those that experience them. This may be because they seemingly extend their range of conscious awareness, or offer an alternative view on the nature of consciousness (Cardeña et al., 2017).
Mainstream view of psi
It is difficult to deny the claim that the nature and content of psi-based effects are viewed by many in the mainstream to be at odds with current understanding of science and the world view (Lamont, 2012). Indeed, some view effects such as extra-sensory perception as representing a problematic area of pseudoscience which need to be dealt with by mainstream psychology adopting a more critical model of understanding (Lilienfeld, Lohr, & Morier, 2001). Others have gone so far as to suggest that proponents of psi may be incompetent observers, lack sufficient scepticism or lack the necessary scientific training (Lamont, 2012). A slightly more measured response comes from Hyman (2010) who argued that the limited progress made by the field, in terms of its understanding of the various phenomena under observation, has in turn limited its recognition as a legitimate area of scientific interest.
However, Irwin (2007) has argued that this is a âmisperceptionâ of the field as either unscientific or pseudo-scientific. Indeed, Tart (2009) has argued that the evidence for psi is often irrationally ignored by mainstream scientists and irrationally attacked by ill-informed sceptics. For instance, the research findings from the field tend to be published in selected and/or topic specific journals which have only a limited distribution, readership and impact, and are largely ignored by the mainstream. This, Irwin (2007) points out, means that mainstream awareness regarding the level and quality of evidence from psi research is very limited which in turn weakens the case for the field. Hence, despite the attempts by those conducting psi research to communicate their findings in the form of published peer reviewed scientific journal articles, many have argued that mainstream science simply ignores the field and its findings (e.g., Cardeña, 2018; Luke, 2012; Roe, 2015). There are two lines of enquiry that would seem to support this view. The first examines how many university departments conduct such research and the second asks how much coverage psi receives in mainstream psychology textbooks.
The potential importance of housing the topic within university departments is essential to enable the coverage of the subject to be disseminated to a potentially new generation of students who in time may themselves go on to become the researchers of tomorrow. This is not only an essential component to maintaining the growth of the field but also provides explicit recognition of the area as a legitimate topic of enquiry and research. From an initial survey conducted by Luke (2012), only around four universities in the USA offered some form of teaching in parapsychologically based topics. Luke (2012) has argued that the low offering of such topics suggests a resistance to covering the subject at university level. Indeed Watt (2012) has suggested that the centre of gravity, particularly in terms of the focus on research, has shifted from the USA to Europe. However, Luke (2012) found that of those universities that responded, only six within the UK, out of a total of around 130, taught some combination of parapsychology and/or anomalistic psychology, usually as final year undergraduate options. Such a number certainly seems at the low end given that there are currently over 500 accredited courses on psychology within the UK (British Psychological Society, 2019). This lack of coverage in both the USA and the UK represents a severe limitation to the potential growth of the field in general. It also hinders progress and inhibits recruitment of people to the discipline. Roe (2015) has suggested that this may to an extent be because scientific education is less concerned with encouraging independent critical thinking than in ensuring the incoming students learn and adopt a set of agreed upon practices and approaches to ensure that research work is carried out in the accepted manner. Such a process of socialisation naturally informs the individual in terms of what are and what are not deemed acceptable questions that can be asked and what are acceptable techniques for attempting to find answers. The lack of coverage also gives an implicit indication that the field of psi is somehow outside of the normal mainstream discipline of psychology.
Despite the interest that undergraduate and postgraduate students show in such topics there is also a surprising lack of coverage in key mainstream psychology texts. For example, Roe (2015) surveyed a range of introductory psychology textbooks with the aim of finding out what impression of psi research was presented to undergraduate students within the UK. Roe (2015) found that 50% of the books surveyed made no mention of the field at all and of those that did include some findings related to psi the frame of reference was invariably as a function of distinguishing between myth and reality, with evidence for psi coming under the heading of the former. Furthermore, such texts often presented those studying psi as being distinct from âscientistsâ and hence implicitly suggesting that the field is unscientific. Moreover, when there was coverage of psi effects it tended to be overly simplistic and did not provide an accurate picture of the ...
