@Paranormalia

I've been thinking about what to write as follow-up to Randi's Prize. My aim is to try to interest people in psychic research who might not otherwise pay it any attention. I don't want just to preach to the converted.

So who should I be I talking to? The most recent survey I know of here was carried out by Penny Sartori (who some years ago researched near-death experiences in a Welsh hospital). In her poll of 3000 British adults, published early this year, exactly two thirds said they believed in some form of afterlife. This is higher than the figures I'm used to seeing, which range from about a third to a half. Belief in reincarnation was at 22%, which is comparable to previous findings. Belief in the genuineness of psychics was at 53%.

We'd need a much higher sample - in the tens of thousands - to have any confidence about the numbers. But it's safe to say that belief in the genuineness of psychic phenomena continues to be significant in British society. Yet this is not at all reflected in the British media. It's common to see writers in the press pouring scorn and vanishingly rare to see anyone taking it seriously - in fact, I can't once recall such a thing. I've seen discussions of near-death and out-of-body experiences, but they're quite rare, and tend often to be based on claims by neuroscientists to have discovered what causes them. Ditto ghosts, telepathy, etc.

So if you'd never read anything else you'd suppose that Britain was a completely secular society, apart from a minority of superstitious misfits who should know better.

When Richard Wiseman published his debunking book Paranormality last March, the Daily Mail and the Guardian both published an extract on precognitive dreams. The Guardian subsequently let me respond to it in its Response column. To judge by the response - both in the comments to the articles and in the phone calls and emails I subsequently received - this is something that people are seriously interested in, and often experience. But it seems editors only feel confident about publishing articles about this sort of thing in inverted commas, as it were, next to comments from Professors Richard Wiseman and/or Chris French that put the madness into perspective.

I hoped that someone in the media might talk about Randi's Prize as a serious attempt to explain why the paranormal is not just goofy entertainment, but has serious implications. Realistically I suppose this was never going to happen. Why would they want to read a book about psychic stuff? Everyone knows it's nonsense, right?

So my next book will be more about trying to put the subject in a wider perspective. I've got to figure out ways to talk about it without triggering people's automatic defences, and reassure them that it's OK for 'serious' people to think about things like telepathy and near-death experiences. Trying to change perceptions is a big challenge for a writer. He has to get their trust, which means appearing to be - as I know myself to be - a sane inhabitant of the real world.

This means I'm going to have to work on my own profile as a writer. I've been tweeting occasionally under my own name @robert_mcluhan. I plan to tweet more regularly on mainstream subjects: eg, books, articles and events in neuroscience, philosophy, social ethics, etc. The point is to make connections with the people I want to try to reach in the future, who by definition are put off by talk of ghosts and mediums.

But I obviously want to keep in touch with people who come here and know what I'm about. For that, I've set up a second account, @Paranormalia_ (the name is apparently in use already, hence the pointless underscore). I'll use this to tweet alerts about new blog posts and other related stuff that I come across.

So do please follow me on one or the other - or both. (I'm also on Facebook.)

Comments

[Julie Baxter]

Just do (and write) what your intuition tells you to, Robert. People like you and Alex Tsakiris are doing a GREAT job in offering a much-needed public service. Well done!

[RabbitDawg]

Ditto on what Julie says (above). There is so much evidence, both anecdotal and analytical to support psi, reincarnation, NDE's, mediumship and crisis apparitions out there, that I see no reason for a rational person to be ashamed to take the continuation of consciousness seriously.

All it takes is an effort on the part of a few pioneering journalists and writers to present a compelling, yet pragmatic and level-headed case. Writers such as you (Robert McCluhan), Chris Carter, Alex Tsakiris, Steve Volk, Jim Tucker, Michael Prescott - oh heck, this list could take a while :-). Anyway, the word is slowly getting out there. Young Turks pioneering in fields such as psychology and physics are also starting to come up through the system. I really believe that 2012 (no Mayan connection implied here) is going to be a breakthrough year for the paranormal. For starters, the AWARE Study preliminary results, and a bunch of new books with fresh perspectives are set to come out next year.

Go Robert Go!

[RabbitDawg]

Sorry Robert, I typo-ed your name. Da*n. :-)

[Craig Weiler]

Hi Robert,
I am just finishing reading Randi's Prize and I've found it positively wonderful. You have such a restrained way of dealing with the subject matter that makes you very, very credible in my opinion. It's an excellence in your writing that I aspire to.

I'm writing a book myself that deals in part with skepticism and I find it terribly difficult to keep that evenhanded and scientific tone in my writing. Fortunately I have a woman editing for me that is calling attention to my emotional overtones.

I'm actually very psychic and take the skepticism quite personally.

As far as your next book, I think that you just need to pick subject matter that interests you and remember what you did in the last book. It's always about people and relationships, and the facts are there to shed light on that interaction.

[Robert McLuhan]

Thanks guys, lots of helpful comments there.

[Paul]

Hi Rob

I suspect that once you have 'come out' as being inclined towards acceptance of survival and/or psi generally, there will always be a section of the population that automatically don't listen or hear something other than what you are really saying :)

Some of the foremost thinkers of their day (Crookes, Lodge) lost some of their audience when they didn't like what they heard. I don't think there is much you can do for folks with this mindset as it probably needs a significant event and perhaps of a personal nature to move their position.

My humble suggestion would be to write about what interests you in a way that is natural to you and see who it attracts. Personally I like factual information, well-referenced and presented concisely. Not everyone is after that. I guess it is either about knowing what audience you want to attract and shaping your offering accordingly, or keeping your natural approach and discovering which audience you fit :) - I suspect there is not a particular general approach that will interest those not previously inclined to consider your proposition.

I would also be surprised if there is an approach that hasn't been considered at one point or another. When I read some of the older books, I am astonished at the wealth of information and evidence. Some are fantastically detailed and well researched. I read them and it is hard work at times. It requires a degree of study. Also, where are the sources of that evidence today - the mediums and others endowed with psi abilities? I suspect you will plow a lonely furrow however there will always be those who benefit from your efforts. I just wouldn't give up your day job for it :)

[Robert McLuhan]

Hi Paul, thanks, good advice of course.

'write about what interests you in a way that is natural to you and see who it attracts' - yes, it's pretty much what I do here. Hard to do any different.

I just feel that for this particular project it's worth trying to reach people who potentially might be very interested in psychic research, but feel barred by the social taboo against taking such things seriously.

There are different ways of doing this. It will be interesting to see what response Rupert Sheldrake gets with his new book, which looks like quite a frontal assault on materialist science - will post about this later.

[Nemo85]

Nice to hear that you are considering writing a follow-up to Randi´s Prize. I recommend that you create a profile at academia.edu (it's a bit like Facebook for researchers), several parapsychologists are active there and share papers.

[Robert McLuhan]

Great idea, thanks for the tip.

[RabbitDawg]

If at all possible Robert, please, please find a publisher with a U.S. distributor. There is a fairly large audience for the paranormal over here. A few folks in that audience are actually sane and level-headed.

[Robert McLuhan]

Oh I know! When I was giving away ebooks about 90% of the requests came from outside the UK, and most of those were from the US.

But good point - need to get that sorted next time.

[MJS]

Do all of the above but in a story setting.

Make it into a novel set in a reality where psi phenomena are actively investigated and used after a period of ridicule.

The opening would use actual evidence from today, the skeptical resistance and how it was overcome.

So it's basically science fact with science fiction, philosophical conflicts, and political "wars."

Speculate on a future with psi as best as you can.

Don't forget the sex and violence ;-)

[Robert McLuhan]

Ha! I can probably manage the sex and violence. Not sure about writing a novel. I did think about it, but there's too much of a learning curve, and life's short.

Great idea, though.