ANGLO-SAXON VS. LATIN PARAPSYCHOLOGY: UNDERLYING THE COMMUNICATION BARRIER (MARIO P. VARVOGLIS)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: STARGATE
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 13
• Document Creation Date: November 4, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 25, 2003
• Sequence Number: 1
• Content Type: RP

Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
"Anglo-Saxon" vs. "Latin" Parapsychology:
Underlying the Communication Barrier
Laboratoire de Recherche sur les Interactions Psi
Based on interviews of French-speaking researchers, an
attempt is made to determine some of the issues which may
contribute to communication and collaboration problems in
parapsychology. It is argued that these problems reflect
broader issues than just language barriers. American
parapsychologists are the most "successful" of parapsycho-
logists, in terms of organization, recognition, funding, and
social standing. Insofar as they are in a leadership
position, they are largely responsible for defining the
field's subject matter and methods, as well as qualitative
standards for experimentation, journal reports, and PA
wembership. The situation has contributed to the creation of
hierarchical, rather than peer-like, relationships within
the field, in which "Anglo-Saxon" parapsychology dominates.
This tends to alienate foreign researchers who disagree with
some of the priorities or approaches of their American
colleagues, and who do not wish to feel inferior to them. It
is suggested that, if we truly wish to improve international
cOtnmur,ication and collaboration, we must come to recognize
t.h-he sozio-economic, cultural and philosophical relativity of
oi,? o vin approach, and thus be more open to divergences in
style s.:-,d phi loscphy within the field.
Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
"Anglo-Saxon" vs. "Latin" Parapsychology:
Underlying the Communication Barrier
Mario P. Var?voglis
Laboratoire de Recherche sur les Interactions Psi
Problem? What problem?
In his JP paper- "The 1an.uase
Alvarado deplores the low levbar
elr ier in parapsychology", collaboration in of communication and
Americans' limited awareness o'far?esearch or psycho
l
Publc lic citing
foreign countries or ations in
the PA and in' Angloa$axon re1gners' lack of participation in
measures to counteract psi journals. He proposes several
measel these trends, including the use of
conventions, SandoincreasedeeffortseYtoalocate aion lat
foreign publications. and translate
But while focusing largely upon these Alvarado also cautions that formal measures,
Philosophical issues may obstructrnquiickbandceasyltolut
ions.
In this context, the opening quotes of his article ar?eui
instructive, as they exemplify the divergence in qute
vs. European perspectives on the status of American
collaboration in the field. J international
"a spirit and vitality in ,E"Rh7Yte states that tf~~there is
Y the research that is general and
international and in no sense localized" while Tenaef+
darkly observes that "some (English and Americans) seem t'ver?y
chauvinistic and seem to believe that
done in their country are i only the researches
Rhir~e cheery assessment mportant". Thus, in contrast to
view of the continent, refers explicitly ylto "n9 the paint of
e
the part of Angie-Saxon chauvinism
parapsychologists. on
implying that unfamiliarity with foreign wor
he es to
cultural biases and is
ks isebased be
than mere ignorance. is, hence' suggestive of darker dynamics
My own interactions with a number of
contemporary parapsycholo
g Euaopeahe amoive in
continental Europe has not changed much hat the mood
Tenhaeff' statement. g muin the decades since
barrier" 5 Thus, I think that the "language
just a facet of the communication, problem
parapsychology; indeed in
My fees i that , it may be the least significant one.
hrif we seek to address the
trough formal measures alone, without dealing with pdeeler~
issues, we might end up reinforcing, rather than resolving,
P
alienation or mutual intolerance.
}
317
Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
So in this presentation I would like to analyze some of the
conflicts which may underlie the communication barrier.
Toward this end, I compare the situations and mentalities of
two groups - American vs. French-speaking - in hope that
this will also clarify issues dividing broader groups in our
field ("Anglo-Saxon" vs. "Latin", or "Northern" vs.
"Southern"). I must apologize, in advance, for the
stereotyping and "flattening" of individual differences
associated with this kind of work. In order to render my
communication manageable and relatively clear, I present
global trends which inevitably caricaturize reality; I hope
to be excused for the multiplicity of exceptions to the
trends described.
In order to gain some perspective on the French views, I
exchanged with a number of researchers who are specifically
-familiar with American parapsychology. These exchanges were
informal, two-way discussions, in which I first presented
the theme of this symposium, and then asked individuals to
present their opinions on two questions: what specific
issues, if any, might exist between American (or
Anglo-Saxon) and French (or Latin) parapsychologists, and
what factors or dynamics may underlie these issues.
In all, I was able to exchange with 9 researchers: Pierre
Janin, Rem., Chauvin, Jean Dierkens, Michel Ange Amorim,
Christine Hardy, Jean-Remi Deleage, Francois Favre, Yvonne
Duplessis, and Yves Lignon. Given space limitations, I must
offer my own synthesis of what they have said, focusing upon
a few global areas which, I believe, contribute most to the
communication barrier.
Socio-economic constraints upon research
After a year or two in France, one cannot help but feel that
French parapsychology is decades behind its counterpart in
the U.S.; indeed, it is not clear if it makes sense to refer
to a "field" of parapsychology in this country. Recognition
of scientific parapsychology is very limited, and external
support practically non-existent. Research efforts,
involving a. few isolated investigators dispersed over the
country, are largely self-funded, personal affairs. Little
distinction is made between a parapsychologist and psychics,
clairvoyants or. healers: the term "parapsychologue" can be
used liberally by any "practician" who wants to attract
clients, and the media further confuse issues by presenting
a parapsychologist on the same level with an astrologer,
medium, or dowser. Predictably, scientists in various fields
tend to dismiss as unimaginable the possibility of serious
parapsychological research. The situation is so bad, that
the French scientific journal of parapsychology is called
"Journal de Recherche en Psychotronique" - "psychtronics"
being seen as less provocative a term than "parapsychology".
Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
In short, French parapsychology is confronted with a
familiar vicious circle. The field is tainted with negative
connotations, due to its lack of internal organization or
cohesiveness and its limited means. These negative
connotations, in turn, discourage scientists from an open
identification with parapsychology, isolate those already
active in the field, weaken efforts to organize the field as
a distinct discipline, and further remove any chance for
funding or respectability.
Why is the situation so "backwards" in France, one of the
most developed and progressive countries in Europe? A
partial answer, I believe, can be found by considering the
socio-economic structure of the French scientific scene. The
socialists have been in power for less than a decade, but
centralisation has a very long tradition in France, and
extends beyond social services, utilities, banks, public
transport, etc., reaching into the core of the country's
intellectual and scientific activity. The national research
organisation, the Centre National de Recherche Scientifique
(CNRS), has a hold on all branches of science, both within
,the university and in other centers, and essentially
constitutes a means for controlling the nature and funding
of the scientific enterprise.
Centralised political and socio-economic structures have
proven to be a handicap for innovative research; they are
tradition oriented, discouraging bold advances, initiative
and change. For example, the universities and (to a lesser
degree) the CNRS operate by a kind of "quota" system, and
applying for a position is generally possible only following
the retirement of someone from the corresponding post. Even
then, approvals must be collected by a seemingly endless
review committee, which of course translates into a
preference for known quantities, not for newcomers, and
certainly not for "strange" topics like parapsychology. it
must be recalled that the "rationalist" movement has a very
long tradition in France, and is strongly opposed to
anything resembling religious, esoteric or occult claims.
This is perhaps why efforts to explicitly establish, some
research within officially approved centers e.g., the
university - have generally met -
resistance. Remy Chauvin was unable toth inanrrnoficil
parapsychology chair established, despite the t support offfcal
nt.
of the most powerful men in French industry and ven of oe
My own attempt to enter the university and the CNRS through
the experimental psychology department was unsuccessful.
Christine Hardy has some prospects for discreetly
establishing some research, in cooperation with some
university faculty members; but even if successful, this
research would have no immediate access to funds, and would
have to remain hidden behind some innocuous-looking
departmental "front". Yves Lignon, a math instructor, has
succeeded in openly maintaining a small psi laborator for a
Approved For Release 2003/09/10 :9IA-RDP96-00792R00070062000' -2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
number of years, at the University of Toulouse; however, the
laboratory's existence has never been officially approved
from the top, and the university's president openly denies
its legitimacy. The survival of this lab would appear to be
a paranormal feat, but can perhaps be explained by Lignon's
extensive relations in the media and a tacit threat of a
scandal, should anything happen to him.
What about less "formal", privately funded efforts? Although
tax-break measures have been instituted to encourage
contributions to non-profit organisations, they are still
not truly exploited; the French are not as advanced as the
Americans in the fine tradition of donations and
humanitarian foundations. Thus, research has been largely
self-funded, and, invariably, short-term. Christian Moreau,
who had been keenly interested in dream telepathy and psi in
psychoanalysis, has long since abandoned parapsychology in
favor of psychiatry. Pierre Janin, the inventor of the
tychoscope, also left the field to pursue his clinical
interests full time. Rene Peoch, who conducted a series of
successful anpsi studies with Janin's moving-RNG (the
tychoscope), has been progressively forced to abandon the
field, and return to his medical practice. Christine Hardy
and I, having established a modest laboratory dedicated to
computer-RNG research, are feeling the financial pinch, and
are wondering how long we can finance our research. Remy
Chauvin has managed to get research done, over the years,
but he remains quite isolated, and is now forced to act as
his own subject in his experiments, due to his remoteness
from major centers.
Besides lacking opportunities for conducting research,
either within the system or independently of it, French
parapsychology also lacks cohesiveness; there is no single
organization which well represents the field. The "Institute
Metapsychique International" (IMI), once the well-funded and
internationally recognized center of psychical research, is
broke, and plays practically no role in the field today.
GERP, an interdisciplinary reflection group which sustained
lively interest in parapsychology throughout the seventies,
had to fold. Its livelihood was too closely tied to a couple
of individuals and thus could not be sustained once they
decided to move on.
Recently, a new effort toward organizing the field has been
undertaken by Marc Michel, a co-worker of Yves Lignon. His
"Organisation, pour la Recherche en Psychotronique" (ORP) is
publishing a scientific parapsychological journal, and has
organised a research congress and a number of work sessions.
But while these activities are enhancing inter-researcher
cooperation and exchange, they largely depend, once again,
upon the good will and work of a single individual; they are
not. sure to survive shifts in his life-situation.
320
Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
The upper class and all the Rest
In general, then, the socio-economic conditions in France
render parapsychology a marginal, poorly organized activity,
with researchers facing great difficulties
research, or even establishing the le macyucting
desirability of such research. This, in turn, m turn, means asy and
budgets, limited opportunity for cooperation and exchange
with others in the field, and, given the language little exposure to contemporary Anglo-Saxon 9 barrier,
Parapsychology.
By comparison to this situation, the conditions for American ' socio-economic
favorable; the field is parapsychologists are quite
ravogition even by well organized, enjoys a growing
skeptics), local conventions, involves researrchsacregular natial
tiivites both?n in
universities and in independent centers n
if sometimes s, and has concrete,
though to a Iesserextentd~r~g ?pp?r?tunities. Similarly -
though t countries parapsychologists in northern
"status" than those in Latin generally
countrieSbetter socio-economic
Of course, French researchers welcome the relative success
of American encouragement for them, and parapsychology; constitutessauconven i ent ope and
ment for the legitimacy of their own research. argue
time, the higher "social status" of American At the same
arapsycholo-
gists indirectly introduces communication and collaboration
problems, insofar as it encourages hierarchical, rather- than
peer-like relationships. The dynamic seems reminiscent
that between our field, as a whole of
science" - only that in the , and "establishment
parapsychology which is acting as the guardian of scientific
Americans
nature, methods and objectives; inasmuch dasltheytcontri l the
PA and the most important journals in the field, the are
also in the position of enforcing their. ' Y are
result, the French seem forced to chooselbetweenieadopting
the American style of parapsychology, being ignored, or
being labeled "marginal".
I've discovered that some French prefer to follow their
instincts rather than to feel like subordinates to American
Parapsychology. As mentioned, the ORP of the Toulouse
has been attempting to promote cooperation and group between researchers through a series of " exchange
of the first topics discussed in these4Jsessionsiowas. One
the
organization of a European congress (Euro-Psi), which would
serve as a launching point' for subsequent cooperative
a earcprojects. The association was to eventually
a trans-Eu ?' establish
le9itimatize parapsychology psi researchers, which could
9Y after 1992.
321
Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
 in response to this, i suggested that the basis for European
cooperation, in parapsychology may already exist in the form
of the EuroPA. i proposed that the French ccooordinattee their th,
e;forts with the members of the EuroPA, and insofar as participation in the EuroPA was restricted to PA
members, this would be a good occasion for several French
researchers to join the PA. As members of the PA, they coul
more effectively elicit the cooperation of other European
parapsychologists, while at the same time establishing a
more prominent French presence in the internationally
recognized organization of scientific parapsychology.
I proposed this during two different work sessions, and both
times the reactions ranged from cool to hostile. The
arguments against my suggestion were at no point clearly
phrased or explicated. Rather, Ifroomthaa renumberat of these
comments and snide remarks,
researchers simply had no desire to join the PA, to adhere
to what they perceived as an American (rather than
international) organization. Surprisingly, the most negative
responses came not from the clinicians or anthropologists,
but from those whose work falls most clearly
Rhinean tradition of experimental parapsychology.
Mi initial interpretation of all this was that I had
stumbled upon a clear cut case of territoriality. I, a
foreigner (worse, an American) had invaded the territory of
French parapsychologists, and, by suggesting that they join
the PA and EuroPA, was challenging their claim to fame as
leaders in European parapsychology. I still think this
interpretation is partly valid. However, I have since had a
s
rather personal taste of what it's like to be inithCe shoes
of a foreigner seeking to join the PA. This expe
me realize that some tacit criteria underlie the explicit PA
admission policies, allowing for discrimination against
candidates who come from another culture, and have published
works outside the officially sanctioned Anglo-Saxon
journals. Insofar as admission to the PA is controlled by a
committee largely representative of American parapsychology,
it is easy to see how foreigners can come to the view that
the PA is in fact an American, rather than international,
organization. It is also quite understandable that they
would react. aggressively when asked to seek PA membership.
Why should individuals who consider themselves prominent in
their own country risk a humiliating rejection?
Of course, it is possible to defend the need for strict
criteria for PA membership, as well as the more general need
for strong leadership (hence, "hierarchical" relationships)
within the field. Given differences in recognition, in
numbers, and in funding, it could be argued that American
parapsychology is, de facto, the leader in the field. bMMoneey
translates into improved research conditions,
equ_R.ipment, more talent, more extensive exchanges with other
Approved For Release 2003/09/10: CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
scientists, and so forth.
like it or Consequentl:?, one could say that
Cesearc not, the Americans have outstr?i '
hers er l i t i not competence arid author. itys PP have of he
researc h
promoting the field as ' ar,s have the
the interest of the field's they. see fit; in
u h"r don't measure up defined e stand tangmust a>cc 1 ude those
to the ards.
Needless to say, these kind
pr;-rrn communication and of arguments are hardly apt to
ote thfe: underestimate the cult,~roalaboelativ:ty invoimportantly,
perceptions of "competence" y hlvet in oas.
to what constitutes valid and r,sigrificant t criteria
hence as
as to who is and who isn't a " ?psipsychol, and,
are not universally agreed upon. go oparasogisch
French, researchers view ties the in ex a tent to which
from the Americans, they are bound to resent the message
American model" is the only one acceptable.
the issues here But
considerations clearly transcend socio-economic
cycholoicl and and touch upon; much thornier cultural,
philosophical divergences.
Cultural and psychological issues
I mentioned earlier that heavy, centralized bureaucracies in
France may impede the evolution of
resear?ch. However scientific inquiry and
seiarc % complementary to this bureaucracy, French
is characterized by a tremendous
People are ir?, an-,informal but individualism.
eeablisrmenn, and will permanent struggle against the
system" go to great lengths to "beat the
even when they don't. have to.
This anti-conformism is
TC also apparent in the intellectual
passion and expressiveness pervades
culture, and not
=u i ouce, much just the arts. Of course, when i tecomes i to
is necessarily built upon the modest to
persistent work of technicians and s and
'-
vE~r?:ywhere else in the Pecialists. And, as
conservative in nature and suspiciiousnloftu starts.i'et
French r? i de are
p themselves above p , the
technicians or s al] as creators, not as
fr more pecialists; the image of the free thinker is
a of an inspiration than that of
scientist. This is particularly true now, astthe "Newernati"
Vogue has pul led a number. of scIarftists f rom their 4, Age"
tional tasks and thrust them into Kuhniar, shift
currents, cor,ven-
s and
Apart from the centrality of individualism and creativity in
French culture, also of relevance is the trait of
[er,tr'lcism, y
nationalistic Like in other rnediter?ranean countries,
at to the Pride k,at pronounced; cnot tk
the French do not take
kindly someone else. idea that they may be playing second fiddle to
suerir l e cO urs , their self-irna? e
by the enormous ecos r,or,;iicp Power and
Po
and
323
Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
political influence of the U.S. in post-war Europe. But
along with other European civilizations, the French have
increasingi', sought to distance themselves from complete
loyalty to the U.S., and reaffirm their distinct identity.
This tendency has been reinforced by the anti-conformist and
anti-authoritarian sentiments described above, since the
U.S. has often been perceived as an over-dominating economic
and Ti 1 itary force.
What does all this have to do with communication and
cooperation problems in parapsychology? I think that a
number of our problems within the field may have little to
do with parapsychology per se, and be strictly related to
such cultuural issues. The traits of our culture rub off on
all of us, and, inevitably, affect the kinds of r?elation-
shi^s we sustain with those from other cultures.
Fo" example, the individualist and anti-conformist traits of
the French imply a desire to remain free, distinct, and
unclassifiable - and, hence, a resistance toward invitations
to join groups and organizations. Such cultural traits may
have been one of the main reasons why the French have had
difficulty organizing parapsychology in their own country,
Coupled with the slightly paranoid sentiments vis-a-vis
American chauvinism (or imperialism), these traits probably
induce considerable psychological blocks vis-a-vis organiza-
tions such as the PA. But additionally, individualist and
anti-conformist feelings could also lead to resistance
toward methods, rules and standards "imported" from American
parapsychology - especially when these seem out of sync with
Latin values and traits.
American parapsychologists spend much energy organizing the
field, defining its subject matter and standardizing
research methods and reporting styles. A good chunk of their
time may also be spent on formal budget proposals, annual
reports, or public-relations activities (including,
respordinq to irresponsible critics). All these activities
move the field toward planned and systematic, rather than
spontaneous or improvisational research programmes. It is a
trend which is entirely justified, inasmuch as the goal is
to render parapsychology more "professional", and thus more
apt to he welcomed by the scientific establishment. But it
is a trend which has its price, as well; in other cultures,
researchers may see little reason to orient themselves in
the same direction. The contingencies and constraints are
riot the same for those who work in isolation, without budget
proposals, annual reports, or Csicops axing the doors down.
There ma.?' therefore be little concern with standardization,
replica.bility, or other marks of professionalism. The
feeling might be that, when it comes to psi'research, the
top priority is to creatively explore new directions - even
at the risk of committing errors or wandering down some
blind paths.
Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
Of course, to the extent to which American
"calling the shots", the French (or Latin) parapsychology
is bound to be 9y is
o
penalized for not followin Inevitablythis
leads to a widening of the communicatiorg,~ inevitably,
this
ehere is
gp.
provided by Remy Chauvin, who several An example
submitted an article
Year's back
effects upon water congelationJpGivFnporting apparent PK
water to living organisms the centrality of
potentially important a Chauvin considered this
further investigation. finding, worthy of replication a
rate the p , it seems that the JP and
d
wop
n deced eh manual measurement techniques usedld not
y computer-controlled data collection and dat
} ata
processing had not been adopted instead. data
spent many months devising his a To Chauvin, who had
results, this demand ppar?atus and collecting
re its, t for computer;-control seemed
not everybody is equally able toexutilize
computers, .and the latter are by omput };, no means necessary on 1 iod
He ended up publishing the article in the JSPRgo
In my interviews with Chauvin and
researchers, I had the impression that Sthere4isa
rebelliousness vis-a-vis the American criteria for French
research growing
or acceptable reporting styles; aood psi
to find approaches involvin_ ' there is a desire
priorities. These feelings complementary values
they s. were of interest to me, use
eyreminded me of similar feelings which uderlieasa
movement called " atin management". As described to me by a
well- well-known
nsultant, it is an attempt to ren Fr American models Styles from the dominant p gear
and to cultivate styles whichnare `axon
consistent with Mediterranean values and traditions. I wonder whether more
some of the communication issues thus
Parapsychology are part of i r,
emergence of a "Latin alarger development
eeressiveofss science", emphasizing - the
: personal implication individuality
rather than standardization ' and human interaction,
formal means for regulating exchangesent, objectivity, and
A paradigm conflict?
Si nce the writings of
encitized to Kuhn, we have become increasingly
the central role of tacit Motives
conceptual frameworks in, scientific research. Such t
factors define ' beliefs and
significant the questions we consider tacir
meni
them , the tools and procedures we utilizeator,gEul Or
s and the responses we addrees
frameworks with are likely
different to find. When
premises collide ontological or epistemological
of communication then the minimum we can expect is a
involved. collaboration between the lack
groups
One of the most obvious
parapsychology is obstacles
"s 1jtoratior,
the 322 metaphysical l sp Ii" in
Approved For Release 2003/D9P10 : CIA-RDP96-00792 R0007006iddbltfr+
 iriteractionist-dualism and monism. Many, if not most
American parapsychologists are tacitly or explicitly
committed to dualism. Even recent theories, inspired by
quantum physics, retain a distinction between the observing
consciousness and matter. By contrast, the French, who have
been struggling to rid themselves of their cartesian
heritage, are generally hostile toward dualistic concepts,
and much more prone toward monistic worldviews - whether
materialistic or idealistic in nature. Thus, in seeking to
eyplain psi phenomena, they are more likely than Americans
to use concepts often found in the East or in Russian
parapsychology (like "bio-fields" or "bioplasma") and to
explore the possibility of detecting "psi-energies".
Inevitably, of course, the differing worldviews lead to
clashes. To many Europeans and Russians, dualism seems
reactionary, like a left-over from the days of spiritualism.
Or, the other hand, to most American parapsychologists,
concepts like "psi energies", and the work associated with
these concepts, seem rather "marginal". But the two views do
not have equal opportunities of expression; while research
consistent with the dualistic viewpoint receives much
coverage, some feel that the Americans are prone to ignore
work which is more consistent with a monistic view. Yvonne
Duplessis, for example, complains that her work on dermo-
`optic perception did not receive the attention it deserved,
even though it is conspicuously relevant to a substantial
amount of psi research (i.e., clairvoyance tasks with sealed
envelopes). When Carroll Nash sought to explore protocols
analogous to her. own, he concluded that his results pointed
to something other than psi phenomena; the results were "too
good" to be based upon psi. Perhaps this is true. But to
those who assume that psi is a subtle physical energy,
rather. than a "pure" mental phenomenon, this attitude seems
incomprehensible. It translates to abandoning a promising
research lead, in favor of pre-established assumptions about
the nature of psi; and it also implies the perpetuation of
parapsychology's isolation from "normal" science.
Another issue which may. act as a divisive force in the field
is the very ancient and persistent confrontation between two
episternologial frameworks: empiricism and rationalism. The
empiricist approximates truth by accumulating more and more
data, relying upon these to diminish the "interference" of
erroneous ideas and conceptions; his preoccupation with
methodological purity and replication reflects this search
for "hard facts". By contrast, the rationalist seeks to
approximate truth by constructing increasingly compelling
theoretical structures. His focus is upon formal systems or
semantics, and he is preaccuppied far more with the
coherence of thought than its correspondence with data.
In the U.S., parapsychology is clearly rooted in the
ern ir?ici t radit' n ~,o -h}~~ b n Aired
Approved I or Release ~~fi3/O9/1 d : ~96-a&,792Wv0007gt8oh0 2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
largely by behaviorism
both extreme elf and thus, indirecti
aftePr?essuons of the p Y, by
Parapsychology in the S. em iriciSt radi iiolargejm
experimental continues And
collection PsYcholog to be modeled
in model izaandMethodological emphasizing systematic argey
atheoret and purity and showin data
iCal termino2oeOrizin 9 restraint
rather g? ~imilarIy, the trend than psi) reflects (e.g.r references to toard
ParaPsYchology? the data-orientation anomalies?
By contrast Of American
empiricists , French Para
.9 are nevertheless psychologistswhile
with a long rationalist certainly
warmly received tradition. within a culture
approach in France Positivism that a
atheoretical Not Phenomena could purely
"anomaly Surprisingly, the ever really
preferable to start N
i nearly intolerableCePt Of
an
the o~out with some
The uts t and view the theoretical it seems
facts as framework from
inellectual
theories climate is part of a meaningful
grid.
and innovative such as to encoure is
important that these conceptual e ag
fforts; a ambitious
be internally coherbe t based on many facts
b is less
premises. and consistent witt }pan t he i
that they
r own
This' diver
Americans gence
and French in
could help clarify thou r,
Priorities. American gardinq methods by no means
polished experimental parapsychologists, and r eseath
are consistent protocols sts preoccupation
with the and near-perfect with
pure
" data - facts aihicf, empiricist goal controls
they cannot are of seek ing out
e the ror, be said to be so elementary and certain that
It is assumed distorted Y Subjective skeptics of that
the r only such hard opinion or
eality of data car,
On the Psi ? Persuade
other hand, in
be no such thin the rationalist
and fr?amework
mean g as e1ementar tradition
Data Y data, in de ' there can
s intended are not ends Pendent of
model. to ascertain in themselves Premises
"anomaly", or clarify an but
An only
..'*uni esting if even if
lends not embedded f well - demonstheory or
it meaning. From in a conceptual context which
terms of I assurin of view, methodoIo
public relations data Purity, though laud 9ici
-ational Priority. At a Skeptics) able in
n
ex Perspectives this point ' is not the most ist perimental "hard +,.f eel ' those influenced
data that there 15 no need by
of all avai ]able ' what b
is needed for
more
6'ture of cues in search is the
Psi. of an understanding elf the
ti atio
The climate in th e U.
on, we I tr ,e U. S. is such
I-ConOlled
of "solid"
laborator as to er,hoL,r,age specializa-
data - even if y research
the , and
effects observed a good yield
327 are near the
Approved For Release 2003/09/10: CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2
vanishing The climate in France, on the other hand,
ihkpoint.
is likely to reinforce theoretical, phenomenological or
"macro" effects
field work, and a courting after risky
through studies with gifted subjects, clinical case studies,
anthropological and ethological investigations, and so on.
There is little doubt that the experimental approach is
more likely to gain us favors
eswith tablishmentascience~ntheic
audiences, and an entry parapsychologists
earlier mentioned successtne of American approaches
attest to this. However, be these which, in some wild
have their own appeal. it may
chase over the landscape, will unveil the true forms behind
the walls of data, and satisfy our thirst for meaning.
Conclusion
We are all drawn to the ideas of communication and
ansion
collaboration. Communication implies enrichment, exp sis
of knowledge, broadening of vision; collaboratloneluggf
the warmth of shared creativity, and achinVement beyond the reach of isolated individuals. In our
field, especially, plagued as it is by chronic funding
problems and endless battles for recognition, communication
and collaboration are necessities, not just luxuries. But
''just happen"s
neither communication nor collaboration us a reinforced.
automatically; they must be ac~ographpcal, linguistic,
This is especially true when g
political, cultural, or philosophical factors obscure and
obstruct sharing and interchange.
I think it is clear, at this point, that differences in
arapsychology are inevitable and that, at this stage in the
d we cannot specify priorities,
deevveel lopment of the field, referable over
objectives and methods which are
oodnsci~ncelyrefiect specific
other ones. Our criteria for "9 lturally
aSGurnptions and values, which in turnhmay b be e calutradition.
bound, or the result a p
Consequently, in reflecting upon how better tof communicate,
o it is important. we appreciate the relativity f,
and develope a tolerance for, and respect o o
perspective, . Once we accept that all aPProacwehe may p'
begin to
have some strengths, and some weaknesses,
exchange more freely and make room for collaboration. After
all, to wort together, we don't really need to speak the
same language; we just need to understand what the other is
so-ing.
328
Approved For Release 2003/09/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2