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

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: STARGATE
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP96-00792R000400100005-8
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 13
• Document Creation Date: November 4, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 27, 1998
• Sequence Number: 5
• Content Type: RS

"Anglo-Saxon" vs. "Latin" Parapsychology:
Underlying the Communication Barrier
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
membership. The situation has contributed to the creation of
hierarchical, rather than peer-like, relationships within
the field, in which "Anglo-Saxon" parapsychology dominates.
74.: _ +-.ndc to vii-Hate foreign researchers who disagree with
=_omn of the priorities or approaches of their American
col leagues, and who do not wish to feel inferior- to them. It
is suggested that, if we truly wish to improve international
comma,r.ication and collaboration, we must come to recognize
tt-.e, _.c-:r,-economic, cultural and philosophical relativity of
o n,.,., apps ouch, and thus be more open to divergences in
-typo -nod philosophy within the field.
331? 1_24reAWJYe,~i,O1Q11eX.1 /4SSot. Cox..,
~~ !Q k 0
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-R[bF6-00792R000400100005-8
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000400100005-8
"Anglo-Saxon" vs. "Latin" Parapsychology:
Underlying the Communication, Barrier
Mario P. Varvoglis
Laboratoire de Recherche sun- le?5 Interactions Psi
Problem? What problem?
In his JP paper "The Ian uage
Alvarado deplores the loar leb~lr 1er in par-apsycholo
collaboration in of communication hand
international limited awareness ofresearchpo~cpublic, citing
foreign countries, and foreigners' lack of public,
in
the PA and in Anglo-Saxon psi
journal. He participation in
measures to counteract these trends,sinclud Pirngoposte the s use several
of
travel grants to encourage conventions, and increased offortsertol ticipation ir, U.S.
foreign publications. locate and translate
But while focusing largely upon, these "formal"
Alvarado also cautions that measures,
Philosophical issues may obstr-?uctr'lquiickbandceas?ylsolutions.
In this context, the opening quotes of his article are t
instructive, as they exemplif; the divergence in
Ameriquicate
vs. European perspectives on the status of n
collaboration in the field, international
J?B?Rhine states that there is
"a spirit and vitality in the research that is
international and in no sense localized general and
darkly observes that "some (English and Ame
" while ricans) seem very
chauvinistic and seem to believe that esres
done in their country are important" only the r?trastcF~to
Rhine's cheery assessment Thus' in cor7 t to
view of the continent, referseexplicitloiton9 the point of
the part of Anglo-Saxon parapsychologists; "ehauvinism on
ems to
implying that unfamiliarity with foreign 9n works isebased be
cultural biases and is, hence, suggestive than mere ignorance. ' ggestive of darker dynamics
MY awn interactions with a
on own n number of Europeans active
in
Y parapsychology suggest
that the mood in
continental Europe has not changed Much in the decades since
Tenhaeff's statement.
barrier" Thus, I think that the "language
is just a facet of the communication
parapsychology; indeed, it may fica t i.
MY feeling be the least signifcant one.
is that if we seek to address the
through formal measures alone, without dealing with pdoelem
issues, we might end up reinforcir, g deeper
alienation or mutual intolerance, 9' rather than resolving,
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000400100005-8
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000400100005-8
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, Remy 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
rcuntry, 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 seer, as less provocative a term than "parapsychology".
318
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000400100005-8
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11: CIA-RDP96-00792R0004001
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.
connotations, in turn These negative
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 "b
ackwards" in
most developed and France, one of the
I progressive countries in Europe? A
partial answer, I believe, can be found by considering the
y socio-economic structure of the French scientific scene.
e socialists have been in The
d centralisation has a very for less than a decade, but
? ~ extends beyond social y long tradition in France, and
c xas srb ! services, utilities, banks, P , etc. 1 into the core of the Public
r intellectual and scientific activit coustry s
d organisation, the Centre National de.ReThe cher cheorlSeienti farce
(CNRS), has a hold on all branches of science, both within'
the university and in other centers, and sntially
e constitutes a means for controlling the nature and se
of the scientific enterprise.
funding
?b Centralised
!n political and socio-economic structures have
proven to be a handicap for innovative research; they , are
e tradition oriented, discouraging bold advances, ~
and change. For example, the universities and (tolaltlesser?
degree) the CNRS operate by a kind of
applying for a position is "quota" system. and
the retirement of someone from the lcoprrespond i ng 1post 1 I ow i n
then, approvals must be collected by Eess
it review committee y a seemingly endless
'n preference for e, which of course translates into a
;r known quantities, not for newcomers, and
certainly not for "strange" topics like paraphol it
3n must be recalled that the "rationalist" movementchas?ay.very
11 long tradition in France, and is
is anything resembling religious, esotericsorooccultoclaims. to
1e This is perhaps why e research within ofefforts ts approved explicitly establisr, some
university h have pproved centers -
'e resistance. Remy generally met e.g., the
Chauvin was unable tote insurmountable
't parapsychology get an official
,9 of gy chair established, despite the support of one
the most powerful men in French industry and
My own attempt to enter the universit governmoug.
Is the experimental y and the CNRS through
Is Christine psychology department was unsuccessful.
is Hardy has some prospects
establishing some research for discreetly
rr,iversit , in cooperation with some
r d y faculty members; but even if successful, this
s research would have no immediate accee
have to remain ss to funds, and would
hidden behind some
succet edtarl, "front" innstructorookias
. Yves Lignon, a math instructor has
openly maintai in
Approved For Release 2000/08/1-1~6}i79~2@?0?460 0008
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000400100005-8
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 Ligr-on'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
tvchoscope), 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 in4his 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.
Recent]:', a new effort toward organizing the field has been
undertaken by Marc Michel, a co-worker of Yves Lignon. His
"Grganisatior, 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.
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000400100005-8
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000400100005-8
The upper class and all the Rest
In general, then, the socio-economic conditions in France
render parapsychology a marginal
with researchers facia , poorly organized activity,
research, or even g great difficulties conducting
establishing the legitimacy and
desirability of such research. This, in turn, means small
budgets, limited opportunity for cooperation and exchange
with others in the field, and, given the language barrier,
little exposure to contemporary Anglo-oaxor, parapsychology.
By comparison to this situation the o-nomic
' soci-
conditions for American '
e quite ecoquie
te
favorable: the field is well organized, enjoys aagrwin
recognition (even by the skeptics), holds regular- national
and local conventions, involves research activates both in
universities and in independent centers, and has concrete,
if sometimes shaky, funding opportunities.
though to a lesser extent - Similarly -
Eur?opean countries parapsychologists in northern
"status" than those generally lcountrieSbettEr socio-economic
Of course, French researchers welcome the relative success
of American parapsycholo
encouragement for them, ands coit is a nstiitutessaucorvenientPeargaud
ment for the legitimacy of their own research. At the same
time, the higher- "social status" of American parapsycholo-
gists indirectly introduces communication and collaboration
problems, insofar as it encourages hierarchical, rather, than
peer-like relationships. The dynamic seems reminiscent of
that between our field, as a whole, and "establishment
science" - only that in the
ycholo present case it is American
purity. ThusgytwhheicAmh
otheclfield's
nature, methods and objectives; inasmuch as they control Ithe
PA and the most important journals in the field, they are
also in the position of enforcing their point of view. As a
result, the French seem forced to choose between adapting
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 grup
has been attempting to promote cooperation and exchange
between researchers through a series of "work-sessions". One
of the first topics discussed in these sessions was the
organization of a European congress (Euro-Psi), whic{-, would
serve as a launching point for subsequent cooperative
research projects. The objective was to eventually establish
a trans-European association of psi researchers, which could
legitimatize parapsychology after 1992.
321
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000400100005-8
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000400100005-8
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 coordinate their?
e4for?ts with the members of the EuroPA, and added that,
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 could
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, from a number of side
comments and snide remarks, I gathered that these
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 within the
Rhinean tradition of experimental parapsychology.
My 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 pa-apsychologists, and, by; suggesting that they join
the PA and EtAroPA, 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
rather personal taste of what it's like to be in the shoes
of a foreigner seeking to join the PA. This experience made
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.
Whys should individuals who consider themselves prominent in
their own country risk a humiliating rejection?
Gf 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
para.psychalo3y is, de facto, the leader in the field. Money
translates into improved research conditions, better
eq!..iipment, more talent, more extensive exchanges with other
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000400100005-8
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11: CIA-RDP96-00792R0004001
scientists, and so forth. Consequent l.;, one could sLky ti,at Ii t