CIA-RDP96-00787R000500240025-6

ENC 8
Approved For Release 2003/09/16 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000500240025-6
MIND -REACH
Scientists Look at Psychic Ability
-DV
RUSSELL TARG
and
HAROLD E. PUTHOFF
Introduction by MARGARET MEAD
Foreword by RICHARD BACHI
DELACORTE PRESS / ELEANOR FRIEDE
....
.
.
.. .
Approved For Release 2003/09/16 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000500240025-6

INTRODUCTION
BY
MARGARET MEAD
This book is a clear, straightforward account of a set of successful
experiments that demonstrate the existence of "remote viewing," a
hitherto unvalidated human capacity. The conventional and time-
honored canons of the laboratory have been observed, aided by our
current repertoire of instrumentation, Faraday shielding, specifically
generated sets of random numbers, and cathode rays. People-both
inexperienced learners as well as those who have previously demon-
strated psychic proficiency-have been used as subjects successfully.
It is a perfectly regular and normal piece of scientific work, as is the
study of communication among bees, the luminescence of fireflies,
the way in which frogs discriminate between the sexes, or the sci-
entific study of any new biological phenomena.
Contemporary quantum physics, specific qualities of electromag-
netic fields, and advances in brain research not only have deter-
mined the experimental methods, but have contributed to the
tentative explanations advanced in this book as to how this newly
observed ability might operate. As all work following the canons of
science must be, the experiments are presented in a form that can
be inspected and replicated under the same conditions, and further
tested by altering various experimental parameters.
The claimed results are narrow but clear. The particular set of
XV

$8.95
5688
Ap
Introduction
human beings studied have been able to produce formal drawings
on paper approximating some distant spatial target mediated only
by the independent designation of the target and the concentration
and attention of the subject.
In terms of the ordinary type of painstaking procedures of the
scientific method, we should now be well launched into a new era
of exploring aspects of the human mind, with which scientists previ-
ously have had difficulty in dealing. There have been other thor-
oughly creditable, conventionally structured experiments before.
But these have not received the kind of acceptance normally given
within what scientists feel is a wholly rational, totally trustworthy
scientific community. In fact, I think it may be fair to say that as
the experimental methods to investigate so-called psychic powers
have improved, so have the violence of controversy, the proclama-
tions of disbelief, and the accusations of either conscious or un-
conscious fraud.
These particular experiments do start with several advantages:
they come out of physics, popularly believed to be the hardest of
the hard sciences; they come out of a respected laboratory; and they
do not appear to be the work of true believers who set out to use
science to validate passionately held beliefs. Tremendous efforts
have been used which far outstrip the normal procedures to guaran-
tee scientific credibility. Perhaps this in itself may make them less
easily accepted. For scientists on the whole take each other's word
for most of their experiments, and only present their data in com-
pletely accessible form when others have failed to replicate their
experiments, seldom distrusting the carefulness and honesty of
their colleagues.
We may well ask why it is necessary, in studies of this kind, to
have at least twice as many safeguards and artificial substitutes for
integrity as those usually demanded. Why does the psychic research
worker, following ordinary rules, have to anticipate more hurdles
than research workers in other controversial fields-such as the
study of the inheritance of acquired characters, the existence of ei-
detic imagery, mind/body relationships postulated for somatotypic
studies, or the findings of psychoanalysis. In all of these fields, those
who claimed new results have been subjected to enormous academic
Introduction
punishment. They have been tempted to distort or suppress their
data. Many have become unscientifically dogmatic and stubborn ad-
vocates of their positions. And, occasionally, some have been driven
into exile, or even into desperate situations involving suicide, misery,
and death.
The scientific world and the literate public have been fully ex-
posed to the intricacies of disputes involving scientific theories so
dogmatic as to resemble religious beliefs. Among other topics, they
have been treated to diatribes on the impossibility of transmitting
acquired characters and to the inextricable associations made be-
tween some scientific claim and the sociological platforms of com-
munism, capitalism, fascism, or racism. We have read Double Helix,
the accounts of Lysenko, Tempter by Norbert Wiener, and most
recently the story of Bill Summerlin in June Goodfield's The Siege
of Cancer. We have even read of the early use of the microscope to
find miniature horses in horse sperm.
Psychic researchers do, I think, sometimes forget that they are
not the only research workers, who are subjected to harassment,
misquotation, and unfair attack when they challenge old theories
and propose new ones. Yet when we examine the history of the last
hundred years, in which careful experimentation has been
continuously misrepresented and denied, we find many recog-
nized scientists insisting that psychic research should be endlessly
repeated because it is not a "recognized area of scientific research."
As one person quoted in this manuscript said, "This is the kind of
thing that I would not believe in even if it existed." We can easily
conclude that this is indeed an area of scientific research more
fraught with irrational opposition than most, although hardly more
subject to attack than, for example, psychoanalysis.
There are, I think, a series of historical reasons for this. It would
be valuable for the open-minded reader to explore some of the
historical and cross-cultural backgrounds of psi capacity. It seems to
be a very unevenly distributed ability, overtly manifested by only a
few individuals. In most societies, no connection is made between
these very special unique "sensitives" and the rest of the popula-
tion. Sometimes, in other societies, the capabilities exhibited by the
few individuals are generalized, but if there are a large number of
Approved For Release 2003/09/16 : CIA: RDP96-00787R000500240025-6
xvii
xvi

Approved For Release 2003/09/16 : CIA-IOF 90-00787R00UJU0240UZJ-0
Introduction
individuals believed to be capable of some exercise of psi-like
predicting the future, diagnosing illness, or healing the sick-then
the individuals who would normally stand out are simply absorbed
into a group of practitioners and their special abilities go unre-
marked. Other societies outlaw all such behavior as coming from
the devil or involving fraud, and here again, both the uniquely gifted
and the somewhat gifted will be discouraged.
Furthermore, there is good reason to believe that the practitioner
of an uninstitutionalized art-such as a prophet or healer or diag-
nostician-may have limited understanding or control of his or her
special capacities. There is therefore a tremendous temptation to
include various kinds of tricks in the practitioner's repertoire, in
case the little understood and unreliable power fails. This may be
why the tricks of the healer who palms a "pain" by extracting a small
crystal from the body of a patient go hand in hand with the demon-
stration of special healing abilities. The charismatic leader may also
substitute oratorial tricks for the spontaneity which won him his
original place. The medium who once could easily attain an altered
state of consciousness may take along a glove filled with wet sand, in
case the spirits fail to arrive. There seems to be a fluctuating, un-
predictable quality about these special powers, which may be due to
nothing more than the lack of a stable cultural understanding.
In any event, such abilities should probably be classified with all
other statistically unusual abilities, such as the amazing aptitudes of
some individuals to arouse awe or wonder.
As scientific exploration tells us more about how these capabilities
can be disciplined and developed-as mathematical and musical
ability have been fostered in the past-many conditions of uncer-
tainty surrounding psi capacity can be removed. For example, the
sophistication possessed by one of the subjects mentioned in this
book in his describing the necessary conditions for "remote view-
ing" is particularly striking.
Psychic powers have historically been closely associated with
powers of healing, an area where faith and hope and response to
placebos means that many diagnoses and many cures remain prob-
lematical. Faith in the healer is essential to the ability of the healer
to heal, so that both healer and patient are held in a tight circular
Introduction
system which is beneficial to both, and dangerous to break. The
vested claims of other kinds of healers inevitably come in conflict
with the claims for and by the psychic healer, further obscuring ra-
tional discussion. The reception accorded psychoanalysis and all
attempts to trace symptoms or their relief to communicative activi-
ties is analogous to the reception given to reports of psychic healing
-sometimes with amusing overtones such as when the psycho-
analyst who holds to a carefully structured theory of what is hap-
pening is obliquely credited with "just having generalized thera-
peutic powers" as a way of explaining the theory away!
Through the ages, deliberate magical procedures have also taken
on independent life, and guilds of conjurers and magicians naturally
hold vested interests in their bags of tricks. It has become customary
to include expert magicians among the groups testing the powers
of sensitives, and to give critical comment on the conditions under
which experimental proof for some psychic ability is sought. From
this has arisen the curious type of criticism which will undoubtedly
plague psychic research for a long time to come, that if a particular
act could have been performed by a magician, then it could not have
been genuinely psychic. But is this any more meaningful than the
kinds of doubt which plague the study of the psychosomatic dis-
orders of a single patient who displays a mixed set of symptoms
which could be "caused" by several different sets of antecedent cir-
cumstances?
I think one of the worst complications arises when both sensitives
themselves and their followers advocate psychic energies as being
"extrasensory," as proof of life after death, or of the existence of
supernatural or transcendent powers of some sort. When they at-
tach such a belief system to something as little-known and un-
dependable as psychic energy, fanaticism is often substituted for
open-mindedness. The very tenuousness of the connection, the in-
sistence upon a physical manifestation of a power claimed to be
outside the physical universe, means that they must cling to their
beliefs more strongly in the face of all evidence to the contrary.
When scientific methods were applied to the study of psychic
powers, the confrontations became increasingly dogmatic, the argu-
ments became more farfetched, and paranoia on both sides arose.
x Approved For Release 2003/09/16 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000500240025-6
xix
:

Introduction
It is often hard to tell the fanaticism of the true believer from the
paranoia of the serious experimenter, as each side feeds upon the
other's obstinate insistence. No researcher on psychic abilities can
expect to be free of this situation, and certainly the authors of the
present book were not immune to misrepresentations by both the
credulous and the stubbornly unconvinced.
The SRI research not only displays the elegance characteristic of
physical experimentation and theory, but the experimenters have
also used an imaginative approach to the human aspects of their
problem. Where too many experimenters have put their "subjects"
through long, dull, repetitive performances- during which whatever
psychic capacities they had first displayed eventually deteriorated-
Targ and Puthoff have realized that boring experiments are un-
productive for learners, and resented by sensitives with developed
psychic powers. Furthermore, where much of existing research has
treated the human participants as either "subjects" (usually thought
of as human substitutes for rats persuaded to run a maze) or im-
postors or self-deluded oddities, Targ and Puthoff have treated both
their apprentice learners and experienced sensitives as collaborators
and persons whose view's were to be respected. It is unique here that
the subjects were considered as partners in research. And Puthoff
and Targ have been richly rewarded and have gained new insights
into the complicated and delicate processes involved in "remote
viewing."
In addition to the "remote viewing," in which the participants
were most successful in picturing by drawing rather than by verbally
describing and interpreting the nature of the "target" areas, the
authors present a few cases of precognition-correct viewing of the
target area before it is known to the observer who is later to be
directed there by randomly chosen instructions. These are the cases
which raise the most interesting questions both for the contempo-
rary state of theory in physics, and for the way in which precognition
may be expected to function in everyday life. If there is precognition
of a future event, such as a train wreck, can death in the wreck be
avoided by not taking the train, even though the wreck stilloccurs?
Stated succinctly, does precognition add up to greater freedom of
the will, or to a new prescription for despair? There seems little
Introduction
reason to believe that human beings could live with the certain
knowledge of disasters which they would have no power to prevent.
This issue is not yet faced by the experimenters, but will, I under-
stand, be on their future agenda.
A second issue, which will undoubtedly be picked up by the sensa-
tionalist press, and which flows from the accounts of Soviet interest
in mind influencing from a distance, is the prevalence of fantasies
surrounding spying and being spied upon. "Could the enemy read
the President's mind?" as one newspaper account put it. But such
fantasies of omnipotence or total vulnerability to inimical forces
have been continuously fed and exaggerated for over a quarter
century by the science fiction in which many dilemmas are solved
not by science, but by ESP. These fictions represent easy solutions,
most likely unreal and certainly regressive and unchallenging in
nature.
Thirdly, these experiments are concerned with the ability of par-
ticipants to penetrate shielding when both participants are willing
to do so. But it may prove quite possible that this channel could be
as successfully blocked as it can be successfully opened. Experiments
which demonstrate that there is a counterpart to the cooperation
between the observer at the target and the observer in the shielded
laboratory, in which a trained observer at the target blocks the
channel, would go a long way to avert all the suggestions that one's
mind can be "read," creating the strange paranoia that, in this
postwar world of nuclear threat, is inevitably exacerbated in the
minds of the public, in the press, and even by fellow scientists.
Finally, I think it is important to realize that if a certain psi phe-
nomenon can be studied by scientific methods and one or more of
its mechanisms involved can be related to existing scientific theory,
this does not necessarily lead to a reductionist demolition of the
essence of the phenomenon. Explaining the behavior of great artists
in terms of childhood trauma, order of birth, or congenital excess
of a hormone may advance our knowledge of biological functions
far more than it explains a great work of art. Those who wish to
relate the human condition to some transcendent power in the
universe should be better, not worse, off by an increased knowledge
of electromagnetic mechanisms. Science is not simply a device for
Approved For Release 2003/09/16 : CIA RDP96-00787R000500240025-6
xx
xxi

:
Introduction
explaining away cvents and capacities hitherto thought to be God-
given. Because science expands one type of knowledge, it need not
denigrate another. All great scientists have understood this. But
those who hold a slavish belief in "scientific facts" and who do not
understand the glorious uncertainties of modern science are likely
to come to small conclusions that are as trivializing as reducing
"remote viewing" to repetitious "readings" of a pack of cards.
As I understand contemporary trends in physical science, there
is increasing recognition of vast unknown arcas which science may
explore and assist in ordering, but to which it may never provide
anything like complete answers. Such explorations, however, should
greatly expand our present paradigms.
-M.M.
xxii

ENC. . 9
Approved For Release 2003/09/16 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000500240025-6
STAR
2-8-77
THE STAR FEBRUARY 1, 1977 PAGE 4
STAR reporter Charles Brown
and myself this week tested
an amazing new teach-your-
self-ESP technique - and
found that it can work.
The method, called remote
viewing, was cvolved by two re-
spected scientists, Dr. Russel
Targ and Dr. Harold Puthoff of
the Sanford Research Institute in
Menlo Park, Calif.
They say that remote viewing
enables a person to describe re-
mote "target" locations - un-
known to them - simply by sit -.
ting in a quiet room with eyes
closed, watching images forming
in their mind.
HOW I TAUGHT MYSELF ESP
By Star reporter Meredith Chaplin LE
The two scientists say the tech-
nique has been successfully tested
by psychic Uri Geller and New
York artist Ingo Swann. Their
work has also been praised by
famed anthropologist Dr. Margar-
et Mead.
This week the STAR decided to
put it to the test. While I sat in a
dimly-lit room, reporter Brown
left our office in midtown Manhat-
tan, telling no one where he was
going.
At a pre-arranged time I re-
laxed and closed my eyes, as in-
structed in the remote viewing
technique. I could see treetops
marking the edge of an expanse,
with buildings beyond them.
It was only later that I discov-
ered that Charles was looking at
a similar scene. He had taken a
cab to Columbia University, and
got out at 116th. Street. He walked
east on 116th to Morningside
Drive and found himself at the top
of a wooded slope, looking over
bare treetops. There were apart-
ment buildings beyond.
He then walked back along
116th Street, looking at the apart-
ment buildings on the south side
of the street. They were Victorian
brick and concrete structures,
seven stories high.
Back in THE STAR office, I
could see gingerbread-like old
buildings, not too tall.
Charles crossed Amsterdam Av-
. enue, and proceeded toward Col-
umbia University's old library, a
squarish building topped by a
shallow dorne. Leading down
from it were steps.
To the right was a round foun-
tain, to the left an old Gothic style
church.
In the most remarkable asso-
ciations of the whole experiment,
I visualized a round roof, like the
top of a carousel, a round shape,
like a pond, and steps or a narrow
ramp.
I found that the major problem
with the experiment was that I
tried to associate the images with.
an area 1 knew.
I had never been to the area of
Manhattan where Charles was, .
and I thought he was seeing Cen-
tral Park.
The things I did see seemed
free-floating, without any scale or
surroundings.
Scientists Targ and Puthoff say
that remote viewing has also been
successfully tested by Richard
Bach, author of Jonathon Livings-
ton Seagull.
Bach tells in the book how he
watched a "surreal television pic-
ture" in his mind of another per-
son at a secret location several
blocks away. Ilis description was
close to the reality.
.
.
"I COULD SEE
A ROUND ROOF
AND A POND'
Above is the sketch
reporter
Meredith
Chaplin made of her
Image. At left is the old
library at New York's
Columbia University.
--
'I SAW TREETOPS, OLD BUILDINGS'
At left is her sketch of trees and
buildings. Below is spot where
staffer Charles Brown stood.
NOW TRY THIS
NEWAPSYCHIC
EXPERIMENT
ON YOURSELF
HERE is how to teach yourself
the remote viewing technique.
put forward by Dr. Harold Puth-
off and Dr. Russel Targ:
"Determine if you feel any re-
sistance to the idea of psychic
functioning, or the belief that
you can describe a scene beyond
your normal senses. Has some-
one in authority said it was im-
possible. or nonsense?
Repeat these questions until
you feel comfortably convinced.
even though you may suspect
that the suspension of disbelief
is only temporary.
Ask a friend to pick a location
- preferably unknown to you -
and tell the friend to be there at
a particular time, and to re-
main there for 15 minutes. The
person at the target site must
pay attention to where he is.
and observe.
At the same time, you, the
subject, should be in a quiet.
perhaps dimly-lit place where
you are comfortable.
Sit up and remain alert. About
one minute before the time the
experiment is to begin, relax
and calm your thoughts.
It is not necessary to do more
than this: no special routine or
meditation is needed.
Now try to describe the target
location - to yourself or to an-
other friend. Describe the menta!
images that seem to be associat-
ed with the target arca. Just re.
late the basic colors, shapes and
feelings. It is essential to avoid
"trying to name the place.'
Try sketching the images that
come to mind. Bc willing to
draw what pops into your mind.
even though you don't know
what it is that the drawings rep-
resent.
You should visit the remote
target as soon as possible after
the end of the 15 minute interval
allotted for remote viewing. In
this way, feedback takes place
while the images are still fresh
in your mind, and you can make
an internal comparison that will
be useful in future experiments
AFTER trying this experiment.
do you think you can do "remote
viewing?" Tell THE STAR of
your experience. $5 for every
letter published Write: Remote
Viewing, The Star, 730 Third Av-
enue, New York, N.Y. 10017.
.
Approved For Release 2003/09/16 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000500240025-6
.