advertisement
On TV.com: ANGELINA JOLIE looks stunning as usual
Find Articles in:
all
Business
Reference
Technology
News
Sports
Health
Autos
Arts
Home & Garden
advertisement

Content provided in partnership with
Thomson / Gale

Reflections on being a parapsychologist

Journal of Parapsychology, The,  Fall, 2003  by Carlos S. Alvarado

<< Page 1  Continued from page 4.  Previous | Next

Most of the parapsychologists who are PA members and who present papers at PA conventions are not full-time workers in the field. In a paper Tart presented in 1967 in which he surveyed PA members he found they spent only 10% of their time in parapsychology (Parapsychology in 1967, 1969, p. 7). More recently, Blackmore (1989) reported an average percent working time in parapsychology of 49%, out of a small sample of 18 parapsychologists. It seems that most of us only devote a fraction of our working time to parapsychology. This is not surprising considering the following well known facts. First, we have almost no institutions that can afford to employ someone full-time. Second, there are very few opportunities for financial support in parapsychological research. Third, those employed in academia are usually expected to do more than parapsychology, such as teaching other subject matters. Fourth, in many circles association with parapsychology is a social and an intellectual stigma. As we all know, the consequences of such a small work force are serious, and only a handful of research projects are conducted every year, something that hinders our progress. I believe that, under such conditions, we deserve to feel especially proud of what we have accomplished.

advertisement

THE VARIETY OF MEMBERS OF THE PARAPSYCHOLOGICAL COMMUNITY

There are other interesting aspects of the profession besides its low numbers of members. In what follows I focus on PA parapsychologists, but we should keep in mind that there are many individuals that are involved in parapsychological research that do not belong to our Association.

We may refer to some individuals in our community as public workers; that is, they dare to publicly defend the field or identify themselves with research. In comparison, there are those individuals who, while helpful privately on occasion, are not willing to take a stand in public due to such consequences as losing prestige, jobs, and funding. One wonders what would be the effect of having those silent allies speak up and more actively defend the field. Support from formerly silent groups has traditionally been valuable in fights for social causes and it should not be an exception here. If at least they were willing to argue for the importance of further research I believe they would make a difference and would provide a significant help to those of us who have dared (sometimes paying the price) to identify ourselves with parapsychology. While we can understand the reasons for a lack of public involvement, there is certainly little to admire in such individuals, considering the courage and sacrifices continuously shown by many more public parapsychologists. (2)

We may also talk about those few whose main intellectual identity is in parapsychology and those whose identity lies in other fields. (3) The former includes such figures as past PA presidents John Palmer and Richard Broughton and the latter such individuals as Daryl Bem and Etzel Cardena. As I see it, both types of workers are important to keep the field going. Research is not necessarily better because it comes from one group or the other, Important contributions may come from either group. Still, we need to recognize the strength of each group. To maintain a professional field we need the first group. These are the individuals who present research yearly at PA conventions, a smaller number of whom make the administration of the PA possible and who edit the journals of the field. The second group I refer to is usually in a good position to help us reach the wider scientific world because of their political connections and prestige. This was evident in the publication of the initial Bem and Honorton (1994) ganzfeld paper in the Psychological Bulletin and in the recent book Varieties of Anomalous Experience published by the American Psychological Association and edited by Cardena and others (Cardena, Lynn & Krippner, 2000).