Thursday, August 18, 2011

Time Pressure

The future speaks to us in the language of the past. And no two people hear it the same.

Many years ago I participated in an ESP experiment. I use the vague term 'ESP' deliberately at this point because my experience during the experiment allowed me to examine competing ideas about what 'extrasensory' meant. I've previously written about this experiment, and briefly touched on the two competing hypothetical explanations: 1) Telepathy - I had some kind of 'access' to my partner's mind and/or the contents therein. 2) Futuresense - Identifying those images/ideas in my stream of consciousness that correlated strongly to my future subjective experience.

Here is what I wrote in my previous post... "The most vivid image that I 'received' was actually an image that my friend had drawn during the 'sending' phase of the experiment. After the judging and feedback portions of the experiment were complete, I had the opportunity to see these drawings and discuss the session with my friend. Naturally I had a strong reaction to that image when I saw the drawing of it, as it was the image I had 'received' during the experiment. Had I gotten that image telepathically from my friend? If so, why hadn't I gotten the actual target image telepathically? Or had I been drawing on my startled reaction to the image when I was casting about for information during the 'receiving' portion of my session? If so, why hadn't I pulled the target image, which I subsequently saw and knew to be the correct image? (And so on.)" In assessing my subjective experience during the testing phase and the feedback phase of the experiment, I came to prefer the futuresense explanation. (And it's actually a lot simpler than telepathy.)

I'm not going to pretend that I subsequently worked out a complete (positive) definition of psi/ESP. (And to be clear, I'm referring to what is commonly perceived to be a receptive faculty, as opposed to an influencing agent, although at some level this distinction may vanish.) In fact, I only mention this at all because I got suckered into watching Beyond Belief last night. What started me thinking was the reading that took place about 39 and a half minutes (hulu time) into the program. Bits of the reading were interspersed with feedback, including a relevant picture of David (the reporter's) mother. With my futuresense hypothesis in mind, I couldn't help but think that the psychic (Rebecca) had awesome future feedback to draw upon during the reading. Not only were relevant images and details given to the psychic immediately during the reading, but they were also broadcast on network television to a huge audience. [ASIDE: The huge audience is relevant when one wants to consider multiple observer hypotheses. And I'm of the opinion that you have to consider the effects of each observer, including the skeptical ones.] Contrast this to the type of feedback that the tarot card reader and palm reader received at around 18 minutes. For the purposes of this program, comparing the feedback that was given in Rebecca's success and in the skeptic's failure is like comparing apples to... well, rocks. But if psi/ESP is in some way a sensitivity to the 'flavor' of the future, then the proper way to test that is to give all psychics an equal amount (and quality) of feedback, regardless of whether they hit or miss.

Of course a proper skeptic would immediately point to the Sylvia Browne incident at 29:50, wherein Sylvia's reading to the couple was (painfully) incorrect. Surely the media coverage of that was comparable to Rebecca's feedback, right...? Hey, I don't have all the answers.

But I am very interested in developing a positive definition of psi/ESP, and I have to wonder... Is there an architecture in the brain that might be sensitive to influence from the (subjective) future? (For clarification, I'm not referring to an architecture in the sense of, say, the amygdala, but more along the lines of the microtubule.) From analyzing the subjective experience of psi/ESP, I would think that such an architecture would have to pervade the same regions of the brain that contain memory, as information acquired via psi/ESP appears to often (if not always) come as the activation of existing knowledge structures (memories). This may also explain why two people never have the same 'psychic' experience with respect to a given event; they are operating with a different set of knowledge structures and interconnectivity among the structures.

Is there a way to distinguish between the activation of this architecture in response to pressure from the future, as opposed to the influence of the past? I wouldn't necessarily expect to see an architecture that is dedicated to - will only respond to - influence from the future, but I would expect there to be a way to differentiate the influences of past and future within an overall pattern of signalling.

How does this hypothetical architecture change as one becomes more 'sensitive' to the influence of the future? I'm drawing primarily on my own subjective experience (again) in suggesting that, over a period of time, and with practice, some relationship between signals from the past and the future is/can be modified. This results in what is effectively a 'signal boost' for information/influence from the future. It also fits the pervasive meme that one can learn how to become psychic, and can develop ESP abilities with practice.

Overall, in watching the program last night (and again this morning for the purposes of obtaining names and time markers), I saw such a confusion of information and methodology that it doesn't surprise me that skeptics find it impenetrable and want to chuck it all out the window. But perhaps the better approach is simply to search for the commonalities of experience amidst the chaos of expression. Is sensitivity to elements one's own subjective future one such commonality?

I realize that I'm not saying anything particularly new with this post. But every once in a while you just have to stir the pot. Bonus points if you boosted a signal to get here. ;)

No comments: