« Will Storr's 'The Heretics' | Main | Russell Targ's The Reality of ESP »

February 25, 2013


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I agree with you, Robert, that there are interesting parallels between our attitudes to drugs and psi. But there is one important difference. Psi can't incidentally harm other people. Drugs can. For example people high on drugs in charge of vehicles are angels of death on wheels.

Of course, like with many technological advancements such as the Internet, new laws and new security measures must be put in place to deal with psionic technologies. As for using precognition to beat the stock market, one could use this to finally undeniably demonstrate the existence of psi in a dramatic fashion for the mainstream scientific community, plow the profits back into psi research, and then lobby to get the loophole closed. Would this be a good idea? Actually, a little bird told me there is already a company with a procedure worked out and a patent pending to do just this.

But I think the good from precognition will greatly outweigh the evil. We could prevent tragedies like the Challenger disaster by first scrying the outcome and aborting the mission if failure will occur. This can be used not only in space flight, but also for medical procedures and to avoid civilian causalities in war. We could set up a continuous precognitive system to predict earthquakes and tsunamis as well, saving countless lives.

It is only a matter of time in any case. We will have to face up to these issues soon.

"....Perhaps it provides a kind of shelter, a sanctuary of reason, where we can exist without having to worry about these things..."

This is a very profound insight, one I agree with. I think it is operating behind the scenes as you suggest it is.

"But there is one important difference. Psi can't incidentally harm other people. Drugs can."

This I disagree with. If we accept psi and spirits, then we must accept that there can be a negative aspect, a negative intent, that can harm us. In fact, cultures that do accept psi without reservation (I am thinking of some Native American culture I am familiar with) ackowledge the potential for detrimental use and measures are taken to defend against it and cure when defenses have been breached. Actually, knowing this is one of the reasons that Roberts hypothesis resonates with so much truth, for me.

I feel a sense of 'Life And How to Survive It' shining through your words. The sceptics see psi as a three ring circus - that most threatening of scenarios to their sense of order. So, perhaps it's all a matter of psychological health? It's certainly always seemed that way to me. Most people are still at the fundamentalist stage of mental development.

Oddly enough, it relates well to something I posted in Atticus a few moments ago, just before reading your blog. 8}

Just a quick note to acknowledge that both psi and cannabis can and will be misused as they become more accepted by society. A lot of mediums out there are already cheats or frauds- and a lot of people rationalize cannabis as 'harmless' when it can actually be quite harmful.

Now, these caveats don't apply to 90% or more of most people- but to that other 10%, and I'm among them- be careful. The 'Green Bitch' as Graham Hancock calls her can be quite a seductive trap, and while you won't die as with many other drugs, you can be sucked into a vortex of obsession and lack of will- and the fact that it's touted as 'harmless' is a disservice to the addict like myself. Just a word to the other addicts out there- it's a slippery slope!

And BTW- if anyone out there reading this has had a reading with the medium Georgia O'Connor, please write me- it's important and I'll explain tharpa@gmail.com Blessings!!


I just send you an email re Georgia. I had 3 sessions with her.


"The 'Green Bitch' as Graham Hancock calls her can be quite a seductive trap, and while you won't die as with many other drugs, you can be sucked into a vortex of obsession and lack of will- and the fact that it's touted as 'harmless' is a disservice to the addict like myself. Just a word to the other addicts out there- it's a slippery slope!"

But surely one can say exactly the same thing about alcohol?

Ps. My comments re: 'Life And How to Survive It' were to you, our Robert.

I think legalizing pot is a good thing, but also increasing the overall knowledge about the harmful side effects.

Pot makes you stupid. Or more specifically, it interferes with short term memory. I hate working with potheads. They work too slowly, need to be reminded over and over again about simple things and can't take anything seriously.

But it's even worse for kids. In that crucial time between 15 and 25 years old which has a huge effect on the rest of their lives, the kids on pot simply don't learn a lot of extremely important life lessons. They're busy getting stoned.

It also increases the likelihood of schizophrenia in those who are vulnerable.

Yes I got that, Julie! Was it you who kindly sent me a copy? I must have imbibed its wisdom - shall have another look at it. Interesting how much emotional health has to do with preferences on social policy.

Grr, normally I like this board but I have to say that I see lots of misinformation about cannabis on here. Seems that people arent bothering to actually read the scientific literature.... Something which usually is the domain of the "skeptic" community. Pharmacognosy is a real science with real experts and real research please dont make the mistake of the "herp de derp" skeptic, know what you are talking about before you post.

Great post. I agree, the main issue is not the quality of evidence for psi, but whether society can handle the ramifications of such a worldview. Skepticism - by temporarily insulating us from these difficulties - might be useful after all...

@Robert: I'm the one who offered to send you my spare copy, by which time you'd already bought one second hand on Amazon. It's well worth reading again with regard to to issues you raise. 8)

"Psi and Cannabis"

Daggumit Robert! Here I am all fired up and ready to read an article about the psi-enhancing properties of cannabis, and all I get is THIS?

That beeing siad, the more I think about it, the more I. uh. hahpl to

Oh wel, it wuz a prety gud aartticle thooooooo

I have to say I see more violent crime from people abusing alcohol then canabis.

Not sure I agree with some of the sentiments above. I know several folk who regularly smoke weed and yet are highly functional conscientious individuals....

I agree Michael. For canabis replace the word alcohol.

It occurs to me that there are people who 'abuse' alcohol and yet still function very well. Winston Churchill, for instance, and Tommy Cooper. Perhaps it's all a matter of character, temperament and physical/mental constitution?

"It occurs to me that there are people who 'abuse' alcohol and yet still function very well."

If we legalise all kinds of drugs as well as alcohol, and people use them in cocktail, there will be a lot more RTAs. Cocktails of different drugs are much more dangerous than one alone. If you trust people not to do this, I admire your faith in human nature.

But surely people already do this anyway if they want to, Barbara? There's no shortage of drugs on the streets, and no shortage of high-ranking Police officers willing to take bribes from the dealers. So what has society got to lose by legalising recreational drugs?

"So what has society got to lose by legalising recreational drugs?"

Well, duh! If something is legal a lot more people do it than if it's illegal.

I didn't make my point clear enough, Barbara: If people want to abuse drugs to the extent that you suggest then they will do so regardless of the law. Most people, I believe, would choose to use such drugs sensibly - just as most people use the legal drug alcohol sensibly.

In Portugal legalising drugs has led to a decrease of useage and problems Is thyis counter intutative no bleeding obvious

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • ‘A brisk, bracing look at this continuing controversy, exhaustively researched .. a must-read for anyone with a serious interest in parapsychology and its critics.’
  • ‘‘Packed with accurate information while at the same time surprisingly engaging and fun to read.’
  • ‘‘This is one book that gives a completely objective review of skeptical debunking, and spells out in detail a clear pattern of chicanery which pervades a well-funded and organized campaign against all psi research.’

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

  • ‘These disturbing phenomena seem to deny all our usual scientific ideas. How we should like to discredit them! Unfortunately the statistical evidence, at least for telepathy, is overwhelming. It is very difficult to rearrange one’s ideas so as to fit these new facts in.’ Alan Turing, computer scientist.

  • ‘I have noticed that if a small group of intelligent people, not supposed to be impressed by psychic research, get together and such matters are mentioned, and all feel that they are in safe and sane company, usually from a third to a half of them begin to relate exceptions. That is to say, each opens a little residual closet and takes out some incident which happened to them or to some member of their family, or to some friend whom they trust and which they think odd and extremely puzzling.’ Walter Prince, psychic researcher.

  • When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong. Arthur C. Clarke

  • ‘Science seems to me to teach in the highest and strongest manner the great truth which is embodied in the Christian conception of entire surrender to the will of God. Sit down before fact as a little child, be prepared to give up every preconceived notion, follow humbly wherever and to whatever abysses nature leads, or you shall learn nothing.’ Thomas Henry Huxley

  • We can always immunize a theory against refutation. There are many such immunizing tactics; and if nothing better occurs to us, we can always deny the objectivity – or even the existence – of the refuting observation. Those intellectuals who are more interested in being right than in learning something interesting but unexpected are by no means rare exceptions. Karl Popper, on the defenders of materialism.

  • If we have learned one thing from the history of invention and discovery, it is that, in the long run - and often in the short one - the most daring prophecies seem laughably conservative. Arthur C. Clarke.

Become a Fan