Apparitions and thought-transference: an examination of the evidence for telepathy. Frank Podmore

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ probable number, on the assumption that the results were due to chance, being 4413. The probability for some cause other than chance deduced from this result is .999,999,98, which represents perhaps a higher degree of probability than the inhabitants of this hemisphere are justified in attaching to the belief that the ensuing night will be followed by another day.[18] In a similar series of experiments carried out under the direction of the American S.P.R. the proportion of successes was little higher than the theoretically probable number.[19] But in the absence of details as to the conditions under which the experiments were made, no unfavourable inference can fairly be drawn from these results. At any rate some very remarkable results were obtained later, in a series of trials made on the lines laid down by the committee of the American Society. The agent in this case was Mrs. J. F. Brown, the percipient Nellie Gallagher, "a domestic lately come from the county of Northumberland, in New Brunswick." The experiments appear to have been carried out with great care, and the results are recorded and analysed at length (Proc. Am. S.P.R., pp. 322–349). 3000 trials were made in guessing the numbers from 0 to 9 or from 1 to 10 inclusive. The order of the digits in each set of 100 trials was determined by drawing lots. The agent sat at one side of a table, the percipient at the other side. At first the percipient sat facing the agent, but after about 1000 trials had been made her back was turned to the table—and this position was continued to the end. The paper containing the numbers to be guessed was placed in the agent's lap, out of sight of the percipient. There was no mirror in the room. In the result the digits were correctly named 584 times, or nearly twice the probable number, 300. The proportion of the successes steadily increased, from 175 in the first batch of 1000 trials, to 190 in the second, and 219 in the third batch.

      No. 3.—By DR. OCHOROWICZ.

      In the following set of experiments, made by Dr. Ochorowicz, ex-Professor of Psychology and Natural Philosophy at the University of Lemberg, described in his book La Suggestion mentale (pp. 69, 75, 76), there are not sufficient indications in most cases to enable a judgment to be formed as to the special form of sense-impression made on the percipient's mind. The percipient was a Madame D., 70 years of age. She had been shown to be amenable to hypnotism, but during these experiments she was in a normal condition. She is described as being of strong constitution and in good health; intelligent above the average, well read, and accustomed to literary work. The first experiments with Madame D. are not quoted here, not having been conducted, as Dr. Ochorowicz explains, under strict conditions. The objects thought of had been selected by the agent, instead of being taken haphazard, and the choice had frequently been directly suggested by his surroundings. It seemed possible, therefore, to explain the results as due to an unconscious association of ideas common to agent and percipient. Dr. Ochorowicz, however, has shown by his careful analysis of the experiments recorded in the earlier chapters of his book that he is fully aware of the risk of error from this and other causes, and in the series of the 2nd May and the following days he tells us that adequate precautions were taken.

An Object.
36. A bust of M. N.	Portrait … of a man … a bust.
37. A fan.	Something round.
38. A key.	Something made of lead … of bronze … it is iron.
39. A hand holding a ring.	Something shining, a diamond … a ring.
A Taste.
40. Acid.	Sweet.
A Diagram.
41. A square.	Something irregular.
42. A circle.	A triangle … a circle.
A Letter.
43. M.	M.
44. D.	D.
45. J.	J.
46. B.	A, X, R, B.
47. O.	W, A; no, it is an O.
48. Jan.	J … (go on!) Jan.

      Third Series, May 6th, 1885.—Twenty-five experiments were made, of which, unfortunately, I have kept no record, except of the three following, which impressed me most. (The subject had her back to us, held the pencil and wrote whatever came into her head. We touched her back lightly, keeping our eyes fixed on the letters we had written.)

49. Brabant.	Bra … (I made a mental effort to help the subject, without speaking.) Brabant.
50. Paris.	P … aris.
51. Telephone.	T … elephone.

      Fourth Series, May 8th.—Same conditions.

52. Z.	L, P, K, J.
53. B.	B.
54. T.	S, T, F.
55. N.	M, N.
56. P.	R, Z, A.
57. Y.	V, Y.
58. E.	E.
59. Gustave.	F, J, Gabriel.
60. Duch.	E, O.
61. Ba.	B, A.
62. No.	F, K, O.
A Number.
63. 44.	6, 8, 12.
64. 2.	7, 5, 9.

      

      (I told my assistant to imagine the look of the number when written, and not its sound.)

65. 3.	8, 3.
66. 7.	7.
67. 8.	8; no, 0, 6, 9.

      Then followed thirteen trials with fantastic figures, details of which Dr. Ochorowicz does not record. He tells us, however, that only five of the representations presented even a general resemblance to the originals.

      It is to be observed that in this series of experiments contact was not completely excluded in all the trials. But if Dr. Ochorowicz's memory may be relied upon for the statement that the agent looked at the original letters and diagrams, and not at the percipient's attempts at reproducing them, the hypothesis of involuntary muscular guidance must be severely strained to account for the results. At any rate, in the three remaining trials in this series it seems clear that muscle-reading is inadequate as an explanation.

СКАЧАТЬ

---

A person thought of.
Subject.