Peculiarities of Psychical Research

Abstract

THE following are a few of my grounds for questioning the scientific acumen of the psychical researchers:—(1) M. Richet's experiments are cited as if they were significant of telepathic action. On the contrary, they give odds of so little weight that they are significant of nothing but want of acumen. I have in card drawing, tossing and lottery experiments, all conducted with every precaution to secure a random distribution, obtained results against which the odds were more considerable. (2) Mr. Dixon is unable to see the importance of ascertaining whether there was an abnormal distribution in the cards cut or the cards guessed. His inability is a strong confirmation of my standpoint. (3) I have heard lectures, and read papers written by psychical researchers. Both alike seem to me akin to those products of circle squarers and paradoxers, with which, as a reviewer, I am painfully familiar. As a concrete example, I take my friend Dr. Oliver Lodge's psychical papers. They are typical, to my mind, of the manner in which the scientific acumen of even a professed and most highly competent man of science vanishes when he enters this field of “research.”