CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1

December 5, 1977
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
TO:
Fellows of the Committee for the
Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal
The enclosed article will appear next month, just before the annual
national meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Wash-
ington. Because nearly a thousand reprints have already been requested, and because
the name of the Committee has been repeatedly invoked in the national news media, I
expect to be asked -- and you may be asked -- if the type of attacks described in the
article represent the thinking of the individual Committee members. Therefore, I felt
that courtesy required that I show you the article in preprint.
The question is not whether you "believe in" psychic phenomena,
nor even whether you believe the research is being done competently or is worth doing.
The question is whether the sweeping attacks being made indiscriminately by a few in-
dividuals against a wide range of beliefs, life styles, and scientific research repre-
sents your thinking as to how these issues should be addressed.
Prof. Kurtz and Mr. Randi have managed to convince much of the
media that they speak for "a growing number of scientists, philosophers, and other
defenders of logic and the scientific method" (NY Times, Nov 20/77). The credibili -.
ty of this claim rests heavily on the willingness of you and other respected Fellows of
the Committee to have your names used in this way.
Some members of the Committee have told me they are disturbed that
their names are being used to legitimate such actions, which they consider betray
both the principles of the humanist movement and the essence of logic and the scien-
tific method. A great many thoughtful letters to the editor of The Humanist have ex --
pressed similar concerns in forceful terms. The American Ethical Union has with-
drawn its support of The Humanist. Yet the Chairman and a few others continue to
claim they are speaking for you.
Dr. Truzzi has told you why he resigned on August 10 as Co-
Chairman of the Committee and as Editor of The Zetetic, and later from the Committee
itself, asking that his name not be used by the Committee. However, you may not
realize that his name is still being cited as Co-Chairman and as Editor in November
correspondence sent to the newspapers, several hundred TV stations, both houses
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
:

Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-007879000200080012-1
- 2 -
of Congress, and various agencies of the Federal Government. Your name also ap-
pears on these letters, which are causing considerable concern.
When I am asked whether the noted scholars and logicians on the Com-
mittee personally condone this approach to "scientific investigation of claims of the
paranormal," I want to reply factually. That is why I have written you. It is not
enough for one to say the authors and The Humanist do not officially speak for the Com-
mittee. As Dr. Truzzi learned, the constant use of the Committee's name in connec-
tion with these attacks has rendered such a response fatuous.
I assume that all humanists agree that claims of the paranormal
should be scientifically investigated. But if you have any reservations at all as to how
this is now being done in your name, I would appreciate hearing from you directly. A
stamped self-addressed envelope is enclosed for your convenience.
Theodore Rockwell
.
.
SGFOIA3
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1

Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
L
7
Irrational Rationalists: A Critique of
The Humanist's Crusade Against
Parapsychology
THEODORE ROCKWELL, ROBERT ROCKWELL, AND W. TEED
ROCKWELL'
PRELIMINARY NOTE
CPYRGHT
The Humanist, the voice of the American Humanist Association
and. until recently. of the American Ethical Union. has published a
number of articles devoted to "debunking" parapsychology in gen-
eral and certain individuals in particular. It also set up and sponsors
a Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the
Paranormal (CSICP). Although the magazine claims that its intent is
to bring rationality to a discussion often characterized by emotion
and misinformation, the writings have not lived up to that aim. We
submitted a paper to The Humanist to point out and document the
extent to which its articles have departed from this objective. With-
out discussing the merits of parapsychology, the paper charged that
The Humanist has so outraged the rules of rational discourse in this
area that it has compromised its claim to the rationalist platform.
.
The Humanist was willing to publish only excerpts from the intro-
duction to the paper. but the Editor told the authors that "we have
made a serious mistake-a marked departure from our stated aims"
and that "we intend to proceed differently from now on." Yet.
shortly thereafter, the Executive Committee of CSICP, under the
leadership of the Editor of The Humanist, called a press conference
whose content was fairly indicated by the following headline in the
New York Times (August 10. 1977): "Panel Fears Vogue for the
Paranormal. Scientists Say Belief in Astrology and Parapsychology
May Bring a Society of .Unreason.'
The Editorial Board of The Humanist contains some philosophers
and scientists of stature. and the magazine has had an impact from
time to time in other fields. In view of this, the Journal considers it
! Our thanks to Dr. R. A. McConnell, who read an earlier draft of this paper and
made many helpful suggestions for its improvement.
The Journal of the American Society for
Psychical Research Vol. 72. January 1978
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1

Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
24
Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research
CPYRGHT
important to put on record a factual description of the nature of the
battle being waged by The Humanis so that parapsychologists.
psychologists, historians, and sociologists may be fully aware of this
particular facet of parapsychology's long struggle for scientific
recognition. Therefore. the paper submitted to The Humanist has
been revised for publication in the Journal and appears below.
INTRODUCTION
The Humanist has been emphasizing the urgent need for maintain-
ing on the national scene an instrument of rationality. Yet. we
believe that in some areas. notably parapsychology. it has traded
away its rationalist birthright for a mess of rhetorical pottage. The
purpose of this paper is to document the basis for this charge, and to
call for a return to rationalist principles.
We shall confine our attention to The Humanist's treatment of
investigations into psi phenomena. Our charge is that the evalua-
tions it has published have abused the principles of rational dis-
course as often and as badly as the worst of those they seek to
discredit. We cite enough examples below to demonstrate that this is
not a case of occasional lapses: it is a consistent pattern. Moreover.
we have limited ourselves to quotations which clearly illustrate the
problem in a brief phrase or two: analysis of entire articles would be
even more persuasive. (Because references to UFOs. astrology.
witches. and other unrelated topics are sprinkled throughout many
of the articles attacking parapsychology. they also appear in a few of
our excerpts.)
It is not relevant here whether one "believes in" psi phenomena
nor whether they are in fact genuine. Our concern is with the
intellectual quality of the published debate. Extraordinary claims
demand not merely skepticism (which is just as cheap as credulity).
but rigorous. imaginative. dispassionate investigation (which is
harder to come by).
THE PROBLEM
For some time now, especially since the founding of the CSICP in
1976. The Humanist has provided a forum for those who would
rationally evaluate the bewildering barrage of claims associated with
the term "paranormal." Such a forum is much needed: the univer-
sities are generally uninformed on the subject: the press typically
contributes to the problem: the public is confused: and. except for
those directly involved in the research. the scientific community will
not face up to the issue.
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1

Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
Irrational Rationalists
25
CPYRGHT
Unfortunately, indications of a problem have been evident since
the Committee was formed. In announcing its formation, statements
of high purpose were undercut by talk of the "need to organize some
strategy of refutation" (5. p. 28)- and to explore motivations of those
who believe strange things. For example: "The scientific debunker's
job may be compared to that of the trash collector. The fact that the
garbage truck comes by today does not mean there won't be another
load tomorrow " (6. p. 8). A debunker is indeed like a trash collector,
but a scientific investigator is not.
The Humanist has run special issues on: "The New Cults" (1),
"Antiscience and Pseudoscience" (6), and "The Psychics De- )
bunked“ (9). These. plus a number of articles in other issues, consti-
tute an editorial stance. attacking with little distinction a perceived
class of persons ranging from satanists through astrologers to psy-
chical researchers. These articles have relied heavily on ad
hominem attacks and a general strategy of assigning guilt by associa-
tion. In those few instances where the claims have been distin-
guished from the claimants and addressed on their merits, we find
unsubstantiated allegations. internal contradictions, logical non
sequiturs, and use of rumor and innuendo. At the extreme. rational
criticism has given way to the invocation of Higher Authority and
prophecy of apocalyptic consequences if these heresies are not
suppressed. The "debunkers" have thus become the very thing they
claim to despise: evangelical "true believers, " standing on unexam-
ined faith rather than objective analysis.
AD HOMINEM
Arguments that appeal to prejudice rather than to intellect are
difficult to categorize. To help the reader grasp their variety and
prevalence in The Humanist's attacks. we have grouped a selection
of examples as best we could.
False Categorization
When the CSICP was formed. Co-Chairman Marcello Truzzi3
noted that such claims come from widely different sources which
> Numbers in parentheses refer to a list of relevant issues of The Humanist at the
end of this article. We have not cited authors here, since our concern is not with any
individual writer, but with the editorial stance created by the totality of statements
such as those cited.
' On August 9. 1977, Dr. Truzzi resigned as Committee Co-Chairman and as Editor
of its magazine, The Zetetic, in disagreement over the Committee's methods of
operation.
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1

Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
26
Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research
cannot reasonably be lumped together and responded to as if they
were the same. But this is just what has been done. For example. a
lead article in The Humanist lumps together for common criticism
such disparate entities as Aikido. Transcendental Meditation. Jesus
Christ. Mohammed. Mary Baker Eddy, encounter groups. yoga.
organic gardening, Kirlian photography, and ESP (6. pp. 27-31).
Another article lumps together various types of "non-scientific"
entities with the phrase: ". . . they hold beliefs in God. devils. ouija
boards. ESP. precognition, and so on" (6, p. 32).
In a similar collective vein. the cover of The Humanist's May
June. 1977, issue proclaims: "The Psychics Debunked!" The cover
picture is of a wild-eyed gypsy crystal-gazer. and the headlined
articles include "The Unsinkable Jeane Dixon" and "Rogue
Medium Tells All. " But the bulk of the text is aimed at two targets:
the leading science writer of Newsweek, and two senior physicists at
a major research institution.
The critics of parapsychology will travel a long way to find a dead
horse to beat into an associate supporting their argument:
Who was Lysenko? How did his actions stop research in Russian
genetics for a generation? Why do I think of him when I read the silly
stuff out of SRI [Stanford Research Institute]? (9. p. 15).
This scenario [interest in psi phenomena leading to distrust of
science] is actually quite similar to what happened in Russia during
the Lysenko era (5. p. 31-a different writer from the preceding
citation).
Personal Defamation
Sometimes the attack is upon imagined or irrelevant personal
characteristics of the individual investigator:
Targ's father at one time owned a bookstore that sold nut books on
everything from phrenology to hypnotism and astrology. So Targ is
fundamentally a believer in these things (6. p. 16).
Incidentally, Targ's father. William Targ. is an editor at Putnam's
which has published plenty of profitable psychic books (6. p. 15-a
different writer from the preceding citation).
Dr. Puthoff is a Scientologist. I hardly need mention to you the
abandonment of reasoning powers that would indicate. . . . I have
more good common sense than any six of those fellows (6. pp. 16-17).
' One experiment was dismissed with a brief crack at the experi-
menter's "never having absorbed from his [ Ph. D. ] studies at MIT
that the laws of probability need a little more elbow room " (9. p. 15).
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
CPYRGHT

Approved For Release 2001/03/26 . CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
27
Irrational Rationalists
-
Group Derogation
Sometimes the critic bases his case on the mere statement that an
investigator belongs to a group the critic distrusts. For example, it is
revealed that a group of researchers "are physicists to a man. Not, I
hasten to add, that one has anything against physicists. It's just that
they have an unfortunate tradition of being the biggest kinds of
suckers when it comes to fraudulent psychic phenomena" (9, p. 22).
How can we apply such statements to the research in question-are
we to conclude that no physicist is competent to scientifically inves-
tigate paranormal phenomena? There are other similar character
evaluations:
The recognized top academic ESP experts (ESPerts for short) are a
most peculiar breed of "scientist" (6, p. 14).
. . . the failures [of parapsychology] are the result of scientific
research being carried out by closet occultists with PhDs. Cult Phuds,
to give them a more convenient name, permit metaphysics to interfere
with physics (9. p. 12). [This is from an article entitled: "When you
Give a Closet Occultist a PhD, What Kind of Research Can you
Expect?")
. . . the entire field of parapsychology has, from its very beginnings,
been crowded with characters as trustworthy as the Emperor's tailors
(6, p. 14).
God-believers . . . have in effect rejected the use of logic and
experience, the use of objective criteria for which they have substi-
tuted subjective, irrational, and emotional methods of thinking. . . .
Thus, many religious believers are more likely to accept other strange
views (6, p. 32).
We will concede there are good arguments against the conclusion
that the universe is ruled by a purposeful Creator. But, since the
dawn of rationality. great thinkers have come down on both sides of
this question and it does not yet seem headed for resolution.
Moreover, there is no evidence that scientists who have rejected
belief in a deity have proved more competent, rational, or reliable
than their believing colleagues. And, even if this could be shown to
be true in general, it would not entitle us to prejudge any individual
case. Scientific findings must be judged on their merits.
IN LOCO RATIONIS
Even when The Humanist manages to see past the personality of
the experimenter to consider the work itself, its criticism relics
heavily on vague. sweeping charges and general imputations of base
motivations. Some examples follow:
CPYRGHT
-
.
-
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
4

Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-007872000200080012-1
28
Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research
Unsubstantiated Allegations
. .. many of the positive parapsychology results being published are
fraudulent, the result of data-tampering or improperly controlled ex-
periments (S. p. 31).
CPYRGHT
It goes without saying that the prime motive for all this is money : . .
the broad academic realities are obvious: reporting negative ESP
results will not generate new foundation grants or maintain old finan-
cial sources. . . . Is it coincidence that we are in an economic
depression that has hit physicists especially hard? ... During the
current severe shortage of funding. plenty of academic chicanery is
bound to keep surfacing, despite the best cover-up efforts (6. p. 15).
They prefer not to use the occult term because they try to get
money from the government to conduct their experiments. And I hate
to tell you. but some dummies in the government actually approved
the funding (6. p. 20).
In fortunetelling land. the verbal shoe always fits. The reports from
SRI's remote viewing tests. the Maimonides' dream lab . . suffer
from shoe-fitting language, and all their results are worthless 19. p.
13).
Contradictions
Contradictory arguments against psi phenomena, appearing
within and between writers, have been a feature of the criticisms of
parapsychology since the 1930s and should suggest to the open-
minded skeptic that the true issues are not being faced. Here are
some of The Humanist's contributions to the historian's collection:
Targ and Puthoff are said to lack "any kind of sustained experi-
ence in the tricky field of parapsychology" (9, p. 22): yet six pages
earlier another writer says that "neither author is a novice in psy-
chical research. Targ's interest in psychic phenomena goes back
some twenty years." Both statements are offered with derogatory
intent.
We are told that "if ESP were proved to be a reality it would not
provide a serious threat to science or other accepted views" (9. p.
18). Yet six pages later we read that if even half of what is claimed
proved to be true. "modern theories of physics, to say nothing of
physiology and psychology. would need to be overhauled pretty
ruthlessly."
.
Several writers claim that books which debunk popular beliefs do
not sell well: "You may be sure that the sale of these books [ has]
been only a tiny fraction of the sales of books promoting the original
vagaries" (6. p. 8). Yet another critic writes: "But my book has
brought me a popularity that I had never expected . . . (the pub-
lisher] was perceptive enough to realize that not only did they have a
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
.

Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
29
Irrational Rationalists
potentially good-selling book on their hands, but also that they had
an important subject" (6. p. 21).
One critic complains that he received no response to some of his
letters. Then he says: "Not responding to a letter is. in my view.
irresponsible. A scientist has the time to respond in a simple manner
to a simple direct letter." The same critic, several pages later,
remarks with regard to his own correspondence:" -- well, I have a
big rubber stamp at home that says, 'See your doctor. and I usually
stamp that across the top of the letter and send it back. I haven't the
time to fuss around with answers to this kind of thing" (6, pp. 20 and
22).
CPYRGHT
One critic refers to "almost universal scientific hostility [to para-
psychology]" (9. p. 22). Yet, the same writer stated in the New
Scientist (January 25, 1973, p. 209) that its poll showed that "para-
psychology is clearly counted as being exceedingly interesting and
relevant by a very large number of today's working scientists . . . a
massive 88% held the investigation of ESP to be 'a legitimate under-
taking* ... a paltry 3% [considered] ESP an impossibility."
Non Sequiturs
Many Humanist writers in their attacks on parapsychology use
statements that in tone and context vaguely imply disapproval. One
critic writes:
. . . those bearded eminences, Crookes. Lodge, Wallace. Richet,
who solemnly called up ghosts of the dead. . . . And what, one asks,
has become of these great men and the amazing phenomena they once
proclaimed so loudly to the world? (9, p. 24).
The question is never answered, but the reader must apparently
assume that these scientists were all proved to have been duped.
The writer then springs to the conclusion that because Uri Geller has
attracted the attention of some noted scientists, they too will ulti-
mately find they have been duped. This sort of non sequitur via an
unstated conclusion is common in these articles, but does not lend
itself to illustration by short quotations.
More explicit non sequiturs also abound. For example. it is
charged that those who have worked long in the field are suspect
because they "have an absolute commitment to a belief in the
paranormal" (9. p. 22). The supposition that a scientist who believes
in his work is not to be trusted would be ridiculed in any other field
of research.
Further examples:
The purpose of this article, then. is to try to provide that "final
disproof of astrology. The plan is simple: I shall demonstrate that
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1

Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
30
Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research
astrology arose as magic and that physical arguments and explana-
tions for astrology were only attempts to associate the ancient "art"
with each important new science that came along (2. p. 10). [This
description applies equally to the history of medicine.|
Of great interest to me [is] the number of psychotherapists. whose
discipline taught us what dreams are. who proclaim telepathy or
precognition when faced with a patient's dream of this sort. Here is a
neat case of cognitive dissonance. interpreting the facts to suit one's
world view-in this case occult (9. p. 131.
Rumor and Innuendo
There are many kinds of allegations which are inadmissible in
rational discourse. either because their truth is too uncertain or their
relevance too tenuous. For example. a critic speculates (without
evidence) that a friend of Uri Geller's named Shipi might have
slipped in a changed specimen in an experiment. To the experi-
menter who rejects thi ; possibility. the critic responds: "But accord-
ing to Shipi's sister. Shipi is quite capable of such things . . . " {9. p.
29).
Here are some other examples The Humanist was willing to
print:
People at SRI would only whisper about how sloppily the Targ and
Puthoff experiments were done and criticize them verbally: but when
you tried to get them to put their criticisms into print, that was a
different matter altogether (6. p. 20).
It is probable that the great Victorian chemist Sir William Crookes
collaborated with the medium Florence Cook's fake seances. as a
diversion to conceal their romantic entanglement (6. p. 14). [An un -.
substantiated rumor used to support the charge that "the entire field
of parapsychology " is crowded with untrustworthy characters.}
That Uri [Geller] sometimes uses gimmicks is beyond doubs four
emphasis]. Bob McAllister. a New York magician. spotted a palmed
magnet in Url's hand on one occasion. ... As I have said elsewhere.
rats and electrons don't cheat. Superpsychics do (9, pp. 31-32).
These writers would, of course. be quick to ridicule this sort of
gossip if it were offered as evidence that a "paranormal" event had
occurred.
IN EXTREMIS
·
Appeals to Authority
When logic fails, the critic is tempted to appeal to authority: he
says in exasperation: "I have failed to convince you, but you must
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
CPYRGHT

Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
Irrational Rationalists
31
CPYRGHT
believe me anyway, because the authorities are on my side." The
Humanist's proclamations on astrology -- banning it (2)-and on
evolution-enforcing it (8) -- are in this vein. As Carl Sagan noted,
such authoritarian statements are not convincing because they do
not confront the issue substantively, but rely on discussion of ori-
gins, motivations, and lack of mechanism. They come dangerously
close to defining dissent as heresy. Sagan writes:
I find myself unable to endorse the "Objections to Astrology"
statement [in The Humanist. Sept./Oct .. 1975]-not because I feel
that astrology has any validity whatever, but because I felt and still
feel that the tone of the statement is authoritarian. The fundamental
point is not that the origins of astrology are shrouded in superstition.
This is true as well for chemistry. medicine, and astronomy, to men-
tion only three. To discuss the psychological motivations of those
who believe in astrology seems to me quite peripheral to the issue of
its validity. That we can think of no mechanism for astrology is
relevant but unconvincing. No mechanism was known, for example,
for continental drift when it was proposed by Wegener. Nevertheless,
we see that Wegener was right, and those who objected on the
grounds of unavailable mechanism were wrong.
Statements contradicting borderline, folk. or pseudoscience that
appear to have an authoritarian tone can do more damage than good.
They never convince those who are flirting with pseudoscience but
merely seem to confirm their impression that scientists are rigid and
closed-minded. In my view there is no way to approach such subjects
except substantively (Letter to Editor, 4, p. 2).
The Critic as True Believer
It is ironic that the authoritarian approach has led many of The
Humanist's writers into the posture of the self-same "true believ-
ers" they are criticizing. They are sustained by faith and argue by
emotion. They want to save others from erroneous beliefs. For
example:
So let us do our best to get rid of this ideological garbage, lest it
inundate the earth. . . . If we save even a few from the lure of the
higher nonsense, our efforts will have been worthwhile (6. p. 8).
I'm trying, in my way. to bring society to a rationalist point of view
. . . and I am waging a battle here, and I have lots of troops on my
side. But we are waging a battle that can never be won. . . . But I am
going to continue to try, and see what results I can get. . . . That. to
me. is very rewarding. If it happens for one person only, it was worth
doing the book (6, pp. 16-22).
.. . then I will refund approximately eight times the amount of the
royalty paid to me for each book sold. In making this offer. without
any urging by my publisher. I risk personal bankruptcy-the loss of
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
.

Approved For Release 0001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
4
32
Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research
everything I have managed to save in a lifetime. This does not prove
that my appraisal is correct, but it does provide a meaningful measure
of the extent of my confidence (6, p. 13).
The critic as true believer finds himself committed to reconfirming
his beliefs, regardless of the evidence. His investigation has but one
purpose: to find the "nonparanormal" explanation. If he cannot find
one, he creates his own:
Since no magicians were present ... it is impossible to do more
than speculate on possible nonparanormal explanations. One scenario
is . . . [and many more follow] (9, p. 27).
He has a simple faith that all valid things will fit into his (often
outdated) understanding of the current scientific worldview:
A belief is invalid if it contradicts other well-grounded beliefs within
a framework (6, p. 30). [On the basis of this criterion. offered by the
editor of The Humanist, relativity and quantum mechanics could
hardly have found a foothold.]
The editorial stance of The Humanist finally comes to the point
where all nonscience is called "nonsense for short" (6, p. 32) and.
following the well-known psychological principle of ascribing one's
own motivations and outlook to one's adversaries, such things as the
following are written:
We are confronted today with a form of moral righteousness and
anti-intellectualism-often bordering on hysteria (6, p. 28).
For a moment one of the writers holds the truth in his hand:
"Two can play the game of faith; for example, I can assert that I
have blind faith that there are no real witches, God, ESP and so on"
(6. p. 32). But further down the page, he retreats, saying that those
with faith in ideas other than his "have in effect rejected the use of
logic and experience. . . . " Another writer notes: ". . . there is
reasonable faith and unreasonable faith . . . " (3, p. 35). Presumably
his and theirs, respectively.4
The True Believer has continually to steel himself against evil
forces tempting him with evidence which challenges his belief. Such
a posture was essential when man's reason was his only tool. But
science has now given us techniques for examining evidence which
enable us to discover truths transcending common sense (e.g., rela-
4 In this regard, we suggest that readers explore the writings of sociologist Harry
Collins of the University of Bath, England, and historians Seymour Mauskopf of
Duke University and Michael Me Vaugh of the University of North Carolina. They
have written some insightful papers on the debates between mainline and frontier
scientists. which enable us to observe ourselves as actors in this drama.
-
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
.
CPYRGHT
1

.
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
1
1
Irrational Rationalists
33
tivity and quantum mechanics). Thus, it is particularly revealing
when The Humanist. in the guise of scientific investigation. cites a
pre-scientific philosopher as a model for what to do when faced with
a demonstration of evidence that challenges preconceived belief.
This critic quotes an essay on Democritus:
. . . a man whose intelligence was steeled against such assaults by
skepticism and insight, and who, if he could not detect the precise
imposture. would at any rate have been perfectly certain that. though
this escaped him. the whole thing was a lie and an impossibility (9. p.
32).
Apocalyptic Rhetoric
When the charge of heresy no longer suffices, the final stand of the
true believer is to prophesy the apocalypse: like Socrates. the here-
tic is said to be part of a larger movement to subvert the minds of the
young and destroy civilization:
. . . like the Hellenic civilization, it [scientific enlightenment] may
be overwhelmed by irrationalism, subjectivism and obscurantism (5.
p. 28).
The doomsday curse is laid without distinction on recognized
scientists, sideshow hucksters, and all others deemed part of the
"cults of unreason."
Indeed, there is always the danger that science itself may be
engulfed by those forces of unreason. . . . I am afraid we will be
constantly confronted by new forms of "know-nothingism" . . . (6, p.
31).
CONCLUDING REMARKS
The rationalist need not be infallible in fact or judgment: but he
must be open-minded and argue rationally. We agree with Marvin
Zimmerman when he says that "humanists and others committed to
scientific method are less excusable for locking their minds than
others are" (6. p. 33).
The Humanist is at its best when questioning the substance of
evidence behind claims of the paranormal. The continuing exchange
with Gauquelin concerning his asserted correlation between promi-
nence in sports and certain planetary configurations is a model
case. Tedious, but the only proper way to resolve scientific claims.
Similarly. Gardner appears to have done considerable homework for
his review (9, pp. 25-32) of Panati's The Geller Papers; if he had
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
CPYRGHT

Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
€
1
34
Journal of the American Society for Psychical Rescarch
limited himself to the substantive points. he would have had a valid
and hard-hitting critique. Hyman's article (9, pp. 16-20) on SRI
work also addresses some substantive questions. Eriksen's brief
paper (7. pp. 43-44) on astrological inaccuracies is factual and to the
point. But unfortunately these are the exceptions.
We are not alone in these concerns. Increasingly, the letters to the
Editor of The Humanist are expressing similar distress. Nor are we
discussing fine points: we are concerned with preserving the very
integrity of the rationalist position. The effectiveness of The
Humanist as a voice for rationality is a direct function of its faithful-
ness to its own principles. The defense of Reason is like the defense
of Virtue. Its disciples must practice what they preach, or they do
their cause more harm than good.
CPYRGHT
REFERENCES
(Issues of The Humanist referred to in the text)
(1) Sept./Oct., 1974: (2) Sept./Oct., 1975: (3) Nov./Dec .. 1975: (4)
Jan./Feb .. 1976: (5) May June. 1976: (6) July/Aug., 1976: (7) Nov./
Dec., 1976: (8) Jan. Feb., 1977; (9) May/June, 1977.
1
.
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
---
.
1
3403 Woolsey Drive
Chevy Chase, Maryland 20015
.

USAPASSNEEDFor ReleaseTER001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200080012-1
USE ONLY
CONFIDENTIK
SECRET
ROUTING AND RECORD SHEET
SUBJECT: (Optional)
FROM:
EXTENSION
NO.
DATE
TO: (Officer designation, room number, and
building)
SG11
RECEIVED
FORWARDED
SG11
100
OD &E
12/21
12/21
OTS
LSD
LSD
0
/9
5
11
LSD
11
T
RD COMP
8
9.
SG11
== 10.
SG11
SG11
11.
COC
ODVE
12.
13.
14.
15.
Approved For Release 2001/03/26
FORM
3-62
610
USE PREVIOUS
EDITIONS
SECRET
DATE
OFFICER'S
INITIALS
COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom
to whom. Draw a line across column after each comment.)
20 I got this in the
in an envelope marked from " Osz "
Who in OSI sent this y
why ? With my name on it
it should have been classified
( which al have done).
3 Negative info on themi.
E
4
5-7: InTHETing
PACKAGE In VIEW OF
our TELEcon yesterday
ABOUT The HUMANIST.
This is Additional
statt an same
general smsjte5.
5-011: I have BEEN
unable To Identify
who in osi sens is.
I Suspect S WAS
not from ost, sime
LSD personnel (Still in
=
OSI As far as I
Know) would have
received it LIVET. Plass
INTERNAL
CONFIDENTIAL
.. .. .
ORD
1/3
FJP
1/8