Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
November 4, 2016
Document Release Date: 
August 25, 2003
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP96-00792R000700620001-2.pdf925.2 KB
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