December 5, 1977
              Approved For Release 2001/03/26: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200080012-1
         7' 0 Fellows of the Committee for the
         Scientific Investigation of Clairris of the i`aranorrnal
         The enclosed article will appear next month, Just before the annual
         national mecting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Wash-
         ington. Because nearly a thousand reprints have already been reqqested, arid because
         the name of the Committoe has been repeatedly invoked it) the national news rlle@clia, I
         expect to be asked --- and yoq may be, asked -- if the type of attacks described in the.
         article represent the thinkinSI 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 whethor the sweeping attacks being made indiscriminately by a few in-
         dividuals against a wide range of beliefs, life styles, arid scientific, research repre-
         sents y2ur thinking as to how these issues should be addressed.
         Prof. Kurtz and Mr. Rand! have managed to convince much of the
         media that t1hey speak for "a growing number of scientists, philosophers, and other-
         defenders of logic and the scientific method" (NY Times, Nov 20/77). 1-he credibili-
         ty of this craim rests heavily on the willingness of you and other respected Fellows of
         the Committee to have your names used in this way. I
         Some members of the Committee have told rine they are disturbed that
         their names are being used to legitimate such actions, which they consider bŪrtray
         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 HUI-TIM-liSt hZlVe OX--
         pressed shiiiIar concert-is in forceful terms. The American L-thical Union has with-
         drawn its SUPPort of The Humanist. Yet the Chairman and a few others continue to
         claim they are speaking f9r you.
         Dr. Truzzi has told you why Fie resigned on August 10 as Co-
         Chairman of the Committee and as Editor of The Zetetic , and later from the Commit! i_-2
         itself, asking that his name not be used by the Committee. I lowever, you may not
         real!7.e that his name is still being cited as Co-Chairman and as Editor, in Novembur
         correspondence sent to the nevvspa()cr,s, SV.VCrZAl hundred TV stations, both hOUSCn
              Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200080012-1

 proved For ReleasQ.2001103126 CIA-RDP96-00787ii&00200080012-1
 2
 of Congress, and various ac3encies of the Federal Government. Your name also ap-
 pears on these lett.ers, which are causing considerable concern.
 When I am asl<ed whether the noted scholars and logicians on the Com-
 mittee personally condone this approach to "scientific investigation of claims of the
 paranorrial " I want to reply faCtUallY. That is why I havc wrincri you. It is not
 enough for one to say the authors and The HUMatli-St do not officially speal< for the Corti-
 mittee. As Dr. Truzzi learned, t tic, constant use of the Committee's name in connec-
 tion with these attacks has rendcred such a response fatuous.
 I assume that at I humanists agree that claims of the paranormal
 should be scientifically investigated. But if you have any reservations at all as to flow
 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 Rockwel I
 SGFOIA3
 Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : dIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200080012-1

   Approve -d For Release 2,0,01/03/26 -11, ClIA-RD P96 -00 78 7 R000200086-054@2`--l-
                           Irrational Rationalists: A Critique of
                              The Humanist's Crusaide Against
   Panapsychology
                   TilEODORE RoCKwr-.L1_, RoBERT ROCKWFLL, AND W. TF-r-D
                                         RoCKWELIJ
   PRr-LIMUNAR), NOTE
   CPYRGHT
        The 11unianist. the voice of the American Humanist Association
   and. until recently. of the American Ethical Union. has published a
   number of articles devoted to **debunking'* parapsycholo-y in gen-
   cral and cei-tain individuals in particular. it also set up and sponsors
   a Committee for the Scientific Investi-ation of Claims of the
   ParanormaJ (CS]CP). Althou2h the macazine claims that its intent is
   to bring rationalitv to a disclission often characterized by emotion
   and misinformation, the writings have not lived up to that aini. We
   submitted a paper to The Ilumanist to point out arid document the
   extent to which its articles have departed from this objective. With-
   out discussing the merits of parap-ychology, the paper charged that
   The Manotrist has so outraged the rules of rational discourse in this
   area that it has compromised its claim to the rationalist platform.
        The Runianist was willing to publish only excerpts from the intro-
   duction to the paper. but the 1"ditor told the authors that "we have
   made a SCI-iMls rnistake--a marked departure from otir staied ainis"
   and that "we intend to proceed differently from now on.- Yet,
   shortl\,thereafter. the 1--_xectitivc Committee of CSICP, under the
   leadership of the I'ditor of The Humanist, called a press conference
   whose content was fairly indicated bN, the following headline In the
   New )'ork Tintes (August 10. 1977): "Panel Fears VO-LIC for the
   Paranormal. Scientists Say Belief in Astrology
           and Parapsychology
   May Bring a Society of 'Unreason.' -
        The Editorial Board ot'The 11nmanist contains sonic philosophers
   and SCiC11(iStS Of N1,111.11T. and the. maga7inc has liad in impact from
   time it) tinic in other fields. In view ofthis, the Journal considers it
        I Our thanks to Dr. R. A. McConnell. who read Rn earlier draft of thi.% paper and
   nutdc man5 helpful stwv
   for iv, irnptovcnieni,
   Vic Antrital of* the it orerican Smlel r hw
   P.%.%chiced flem-girch Vol. 72. January 3978
   Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200080012-1

Approved For Relea-5p#02001/03/26 CIA-RDP96-00787iW00200080012-1
211 im(ratil (it' rlie .4 tnericwi S,cie(Y jOr PAYchiced Rc N corch
CPYRGHT
imporuint 10 [)tit 011 YCC01d ;I fliCtUal &SCriplion of' tile nature of tile
ti-,ittle heim-, @%agcd 1)\ Pie lhemcmi@r ,o that
ps@cholw,l"tN. his(orialls. and sociologi',ts may tic 11111@ a@%ztreoflhk
PaltiCL11;11' fitcet Lit' p,11-,,tP"yCholoL\-'s long "ImIll-11C lor sclentit-IC
recounition. Therefore. the paper ,uhmilted to Ilie Ilmnuni.ki ha,@
been re\i,,cd for publication in tile Journed and appears below.
IN-1 RODUC-I ION
The 11ionaiii.q has been emphaSiZinlZ tile UI-gCrlt need for maintain-
ing on the mitional scene an imstrunicrit of rafionallt@. Yet. @%e
believe that in orne areas. notabiv paraps@,cfioion-. it has traded
mvav its rationalist birthi-W,111. for a mess t)f rhetorical pottage. 'I he
purpo,e or thi@, Piper 1@, to document tile basis For this char2e. and to
call for it return to rationalist principles.
We Shall confine our attention to '1111, 11111minisl's treatment of
inve,,tk,at ions into r)sl phenomena. 0or charge is that tile C@-,dua-
tI0nS It h.1S PUblkhed have abused tile principles of rational dji-;@-
course its often and as badly as tile worst of those the\- seek, i o
discredit. We cite enoiu!h examples belo\v to dernonstrate that thk is
not a case of occasional lapses: it is a consistent pattern. Moreover.
we have limited ourselves to quotations which clearly illu-,Irace [he
problem ina brief phrase or m-o: anal\ sis of entire articles would be
cven more persuasi@e. tBecause re@erences to Ul--Os. astrolozy.
witches. and other unrelated topics are sprinkled through01-11 1711,111%,
of the artic)esatiacklng parapsychology. they also appear in a few of
our excerpts.)
It is not relevant here \vhether one '"believes in" pci phenomena
nor whether they are in fact genuine. Our concern is with the
intellectual qualit@- Of tile PUbliShCd debate. Extraordinar\ claims
demand not merel\ sk-epticisni m-hich is just as cheap as CI'CdLllil\ ).
but ricorous. =igi .native. dispassionate investigation. (which is
harder to come b@ ).
Tim. NoBu..\t
For some time no@\-. especially since the foundin-2 of tile CSIC11 in
1976. Pit, Ilimumi.\t has pro\ided it forum for those \\ho \@ould
ratioiiall% C%@LILKLIC tile
the term -pnranormal.- Such a f0rum is much needed: the uni\er-
sities are i-,cner@fll\ Unilll'OrnlCd Oil tile 'SUI)Ject: the typicill\*
CL'Wntribute@, it) tile problem: the puhlic k confu\,ed: and. except I @or
111L)NO direcil\ in%oked ill tile re@warch. tile Scientific Communil\ \%ill
not f.-Lce tit) ILI tile k"tie.
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200080012-1

  Approved For Release 2001/03/26 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200080012-1
  Irrational Rationalisis
  CPYRGHT
  25
       Unfortunately. indications ofa problem have been evident since
  tile collillittee %@ zt@ f'ormcd. in @innouncln,,, W, forimalon, Statelliclits
  of hiV I i purpose %@et-0 11MICTCUt by ta I k oft tic "tic edto oma I) lize so tile
  stratepy of refu I a I I on" (5. 1). '-S)- and to explore mot I vations oCthose
  who believe stram_,c things. For example: 'The scientific debunker's
  jot) nuty be coriip@ired to th-Lit oftlic trash collector. The fact that the
  garbage truck comes by ioday does not mean there Nvon't be another
  load tomurro@k " (6. p. 8). A debunker is indeed like a trash collector,
  but a scientific investirator is not.
       71te Hunumist has run special issues on: "The New Cults" M,
  **Antiscience and PSC L1 dose ic rice- (6), and "The Psychics De-
  bunk-ed- (9). 1 hese. plus a number of articles in other issues, consti-
  I g wid) little distinction a perceivcd
  tute an editorial stance. attackin I I
  class of person@, rzinEing from satanists through astrologers to psy-
  chical researchers. These articles have relied heavily on atl
  homincin attacks and a vencral strategy ofassi t:, la-
                           gnin guilt by associ
  aims
  tion. In those few instances where tie-cl. have been distill-
  guished from the claimants and addressed on their- merits, we find
  unsubstantiated allcaations. internal COntl7adictions, logical noll
  sequiturs, and use drumor and innuendo. At the extrerne. rational
  criticism has Liven @vay to the invocation of Hi-her Authority and
  prophecy of lpqcalyP0iC Consequences if -these heresies are not
  suppressed. The "debunkers" have thus become the very thing they
  claim to despise: evangelical -true bellevers,- standing, on unexaln-
  ined faith rather than objective analysis.
  AD 110MINEM
       Arguments that appeal to prejudice rather than to intellect are
  difficult to categorize. To help the reader grasp their variety and
  prevalence in The 11itinanist's attacks. we have grouped a selection
  of exarnple@ as best we could.
  False Categorization
       When tire CSICP was formed. Co-Chairman Marcello Truzzi-I
  noted that such claim,; come from widelv different sources which
       Numbers in parcrithescs refer to A Iist of relevant issues of ne llumeipii.%t at the
  end of thisarticle. We ha\ c not cited :mihors here. Nince our concern is itot widiany
  intlividual uriter. but mitti the editorial stance created h% the totalit% ofstaterne nts
  such as those cited.
       ) On Aiipist 9. 1977, Dr.TruLzi rcsigncdw, Commillee Co-Chairman andas Editor
  of it% nweazinc, 71u, Zaetic, in clisagreernent over the Committee's niethods of
  operation,
  Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200080012-1

   T,
          96~~O~O'~~87R'0'0020'00'8-00~1'2-'I
   App ved For Release 2001/0/26 't A'RDO@
   *AW Now
   CPYRGHT
   26 Journal of, IIIv 'Imericall Nm-jt,jv,1j,r Vsychical Re.scarch
   Cannot rca,,ormlily fie lwnre(l toleether and reNrionded to w@ it' the;,
   were the same. But thk is just WhM has been done. For cxampic. a
   lead article in '111c 11jimaniv 111111lis together for common CT-ItiC111111
   such disparate entitie% aN Aik-Ido, Tran"Cendent:11 Nledil:lfion. 3C Ws
   Cl)['i%t. N1011,111MICLI. %lury Baker Eddy, encOLHIM' @'1-01-11)S. %-Oillt.
   ore.iinic rardenin-. Kirlian pholouraphy, and ESP (6. pp. 27-31).
        Another article limms to,,ether variou.", t\ lies of "non-scientific"
   entities ,vith the phi-ase: - . . . they hold beliel's in God. devils. ollija
   boards. ESP. precouniiion'. and so on'* (6. p. 3-2).
             In it similar collective vein, the cover of 77w flumani.W.% %),I\;
        June. 1977, issue proclainis: -The Psychics Debunked!- The COvel,
        picture is of a wild-eyed gypsy cry',Wl-g,17.01% and the hCadlHICd
        - L
   articles include "The Unsinkable Jearte Di.%on- ;in(] -Ro@nje
   Medium Tells All." But the bulk' of the text is aimed at two tarvets:
   the leading science writer ofNeiv.%iveek, and two sellior pli\'sicists at
   a major research institution,
        The critics of parapsychology will travel -it long \vay to find it (lead
   horse to beat into an associate supporting their argument:
   Who %%,its Lysenk-o? llmv did his actions sto p research in Rus@,ian
   genetics for a generation*? Why do I think- of him \@@hcii I read the silly
   Stuff Out Of SRI [Stanford Rescarch Institute]? 0. 1). 15).
   This scenario (interest in psi plicnomena leading. to distrust of
   SCiCnCCj iS aCtUi-illy qUi(C similar to what happened in RUSSia during
   the Lysenk-o cra (5. p. 31-a different writer front the preceding
   citation),
   Personal Dejittitarion
        Sometimes (he attack is upon. imagined or irrelevant personal
   chiracterisLics of the individual investigator:
   Targ*s fatherat one lime Owned a bookstore that sold nut books on
   CVCFy1I1iTh! fVOM P111-C110102N. 10 11@'))110W,111 and asll'010"V. SO Tar" is
   fundamentally a believer in these things 10, p. 10).
   g. is an cditor at Putnam's
   Inciden(ally. Targ's failier. William Tars
   which has pubfi,,hed plent% of pr0fill0blC psychic books (6. p..15-a
   different from (tic preceding citation),
   Dr. Putliorl' is a Scientolo,-,ist. I h@irdly nocd mention to you the
   abandorimcm of' reasoning powers that would Indicate. . . . I have
   nj0reg00dC0n11110n-,cnse thanany Nixof1hosefeIIo"-.,16.pp. 16-171.
        One experi-MC111 W.1@, dismis,;ed with I brief ci-.)ck io the experi-
   menter's "never havillu, ibsorlled from lik (PlI.D.1 studies .11 MIT
   that the 1@iws ofprobabilll@@ necd it little more elbow V00111** (9. P. 15).
   Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP.96-00787ROO0200080012-1

   6'--eilk--~RDP96--00787ROOO2OOO8DOt2,t,
   It-1-alimial Ra lie) fill li,% 1.%
   27
   Groul) Derogation
   Sometimes tile critic bases his case on the rnere statement that ,in
   investigator bclomls Io a -'roup tile critic di"11,11st". For example, it is
   revealed th"It Zi group of* reselffchers "are physicists to a man. Not, I
   hasten to ad(i, ilim one has anything against physicists. lt'SjUS1 thM
   they have an unforitinate tradition of being the bi( gest kinds of
                 CPYRGHT stickers %%then it conics it) fraudulent psychic phenomena- (9, 1). 22).
   I low can we apply mich statements to the rcscarch in question-are
   we to conclude that no plly@icist is Competent to scientillcally invcs-
   ligatc parailornial phenomena? There are other similar charactcr
   evaluations:
   The recornizcd topacadernic FS11 experts (ESPeits for short) are a
   Most peculiar breed of "scientist" (6, p. 14).
   . . . the failures [of parapsychology] are the result of scientific
   rewarch being. canied out by closet OCCU16SIS-Widi HIDS. Cult Phuds,
   to give thein a inore convenient ninic, permit metaphysics to interfere
   with physics (9. p. 12). []'his is fron) an article entitled: "When )-oil
   Give a Closet Occultist w PhD, W'hat Kind of Research Can you
   Expect?*')
   ... the entire field of paripsi,cholo-y has, frorn its very beginnings,
   been crowded with, characters as trustworthy as the Eniperor's tailors
   (6, p. 14).
   God-believers . . . have in effect rejected the use of logic and
   experience, the use of objective criteria for which thoy have substi-
   tuted subjective, irrational, and emotional methods of thinking. . . .
   Thus, nitiny religious believersare more likely to accept other strange
   views (6, p. 32).
        We will concede there are good arguments against tile conclusion
   that the universe is rdled by a purposeful Creator. But, since the
   dawn of rationality. :grent thinkers have come down oil both sides of
   this question and it does not yet seem licaded for resolution.
   Moreover, there is no evidence that scientists who have rejected
   belief in a deity haveproved more competent, rationa), or reliable
   than their Mievim, colleacues. And. c%,cn if this coul(l be shown to
   be true in general, it would not crititle us to prejudge any individual
   case. Scientific findinIgs must be judged oil their merits.
   IN Loco RATIO-NIS
        Evert when The Humanist mana-cs to see past tile personality of
   the experimenter to consider the work itself, its criticism relics
   heavily oil vague. sweeping charges in(] gencral im putat ions of base
   Motivations. @Onlc examples follow:
   Approved For Release 2001/03/26
   : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO020008 012-1

   
Approved For.ReleaS462001/03126 CIA-RDP96-00787JW00200080012-1
29 jim)-mil 0, flu. Amel-ic(In societY.1in. 1.@Ychical Rewal-ch
Unsulmmillielled Altegaliomv
CPYRGHT
11mily of the positive praps@lchology restilis beine. Published ire
filtUdUlCrit. 111C FeSUlt of' or impropei-IN, conti olieLl ex-
perillielits (5. P. ,I).
It gOCS WithOL11 SI@Iing th@,Q tile prime motive for all this- i'@ moncy
the broad [C@idenlic reulities are ot)@iou%: reponini! iici!zitive FSI'
results will not generate new foundation grants or, maintain old firian-
Ciid ';Otll'CC,. . , . Is it CL)illCidCnCC 1h:1t we are in an economic
depre%,sion thiit has hit physickts especi@illy ll@ird? . . . During (lie
current se\ere sliortL!c of fundilig, Plenty 01, ac;ldculic Chicallerv is
botirw to keep sm-1*1,icitle. despite tile t)cst cover-m) clTorts i(). P. I @).-
They prefer not to 11W tile OCCUlt term bcCMISC tile%' (r\' 10 get
monev from the go\ ernment to conduct their And I hate
to tClf \'Oil. but some dLln1nlieS ill tile government actuall\ appro%ed
the ftii@dinv A p. 20).
In fortunetellinu land. the verb-zil shoe always fits, The reports from
SRI's remote viewimz tests. tile Maimollides' dreirn lab . . SLJfTCr
from shoe-tittinC language, and all their results are worthless M p.
Contradictoi-k, arguments against psi phenomena, appearing
,within and bet%veen writers. have been a feature of tile criticism of
parapsychology since the 1930,; and should suggest to the open-
mindej skeptic that tile tl-LIC iSSUcs are not being faced. Here are
sorne of Vic flumanist's contributions to the historian's collection:
Targ and I'LlIhOfT al-C said to lack "any kind Of SLISTained CXPel-i-
ence in the tricky Field of paraj)s\'ChologY- 0, p. 22): yet six pa.-es
cai-lier another v,-ritcr says ihat * neiiher aulhor is 11 novice in psy-
chical research. Tarli's interest in psychic phenorlicna goes back
sonle twenty %,cars." Both statements are offered with dci-oLiatory
intent.
We are told that -if ESP wei-c proved to be a reality it would not
P1-OVidC a SCHOUS tlll-C@lt 10 SCiCTICe Or- 00101- lCCCptCd viewS- (9. P.
18). Yet six pages later Nve read that if even half of' whal is clairned
proved to be true. "modern theories of physics, to say nothing of
physiology and psychology. would IlCed 10 be OVCHIaLlIed PI-City
rutlilessly.-
Several writers claini that books which debunk- populai- heliet"s do
not sell well: "You niny be sure Ilim tile S111C Of these books (hasi
been onk, a tinv fraction ofthe %.des ol'books promoting tile origimil
vagm-ics;* A P'' @'%). Yet 1110thCl- CritlC Wl'iICS: "Bill 111@- book has
brought file a Pollillarily that I thid I)C\01- CXl)CC1Cd . . . 1111C PLJb-
lisherl was perceptive elioll"ll to re@llize tll@it not olik did thev have a
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200080012-1

Approved For Releasewo 1 i63/26: CIA-kDP96-00787RW200d'80012-1
CPYRGHT'
Irratimial Rationalists
29
potentially good-selling book on their hands, but also that they had
an impol-tant sulliect- (6, 1). 21).
One critic complains that lie received no respons-c to some of his
letters. Then Ile says: @'Not respondinr to a letter is. in my vie%v,
irresponsible. A scientist has the tinic to respond ill it simple manner
to a simple direct letter." The sanic critic, several pages later,
remarks with regard to his own corresponcicnce:--well, I hive a
bir, rubber stanip at home that says, *See your doctor,* and I usually
stamp that across the top of tile letter and send it back-. I haven't tile
time to fuss around with answers to this kind of thine" (6, pp. 20 and
22).
One critic refers to -almost universal scientific hostilit@, [to para-
psychologyl- (9. p. 22). Yet, tile same writer stated in the New
Scientist 0',11111ary 25, 1973. p. 209) that its poll showed that -para-
psvcholo,-,-,.- is clearlN, Minted as being exceedingly interesting and
relevant by a very lai-ge number of todiv's working scientists . . . a
massive hcl@ tile investip-ation, of ES'P to be 'a lezitiniate under-
taking' a paltry 3,;c' (considered] ESP an impossibility."
Alon Sequiturs
Many Hunianist writers in their attacks'on parapsychology use
statements that in tone and context vaguely imply disapproval. One
critic writes:
. . . those bCal-ded cniiiiences, Crookes, Lodge, Wallace, Richet,
who solemnly called tip ghosts of the dead. . . . And what, one asks,
has become of these grem nien and the arnazinlg- phenomena they once
proclaimed so loudly to the world? (9, 1). 24).
     The question is never answered, but the reader must apparently
assunie th,-'it these scientists were all proved to have been duped.
The writer then springs to tile conclusion that bcCaUSe Ul-i Geller has
attracted the attention or sonic noted scientists, tile%, too will uld-
mately find they have been duped. This sort oftion S11(pit .im- via an
unstated conclusion is coninion in these articles, but (toes not lend
itself to illustration by short quotations.
More explicit noll se(pliturs also abound. I-or example., it is
charred that those who have worked lono in tile field are suspect
because they -have an absolute cornnionient to a belief in the
paranornial- (9. p. 22). The supposition that a scientist who believes
in his work is not to be 1111SIOd Would be ridiculed in any other field
of research.
Further examples:
The purpose of ihi,, artide. then. is to it-\, to provide that "final
disproot7' of a%trolog@. The plan is simple: I shall donionstrate that
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200080012-1

A@-
Approved For- Release IWO 1 /03/26 CIA-RDP96-00787RO,0200080012-1
30 Journal of' III(' Amcrican Nociciv fiir P.%vchicuf Rcu,mvh
asirolo ,V%. :Irwx 'IN lmwic .1nd that phv%ical ar minicnis and c,\pImm-
tion% for :1,,lrolovy %kcre 0III\ attempt" to aloOckitc the ancient "art"
with each important nc\% Ncience lh@li came along (2. 1). 10). 11 his
dMrirtiOrl ill)pliel, C(IlK111% 10 the IlklUr% 01' 1IlCLIiCinC.l
Of gre@it intereNt to me I isl the number of' P"ychotherapi"Is. %% hoNC
dis,cipline laught us Mmt drean-IN ire. %kho proclaim tclepath% or
precognition Mien fiiccd %@ith I paient's drc@irn ofthis sort. Here is I
neat case of' colmitive dissomince. interpretim-, the facts to suit one'N
world -iew-in this case occult (9. P. 131.
Rumm- and Inmicialo
CPYRGHT
There are many kinds of alle-2ations which are inadmissible in
rational disCOLIFSC. either bouiuse thoir truth is too uncertain or I heir
relevance too WFILIOLIS. For evirriple. a critic speculates (without
evidence) that I friend of Url Geller*s narned Shipi might iniv e
slipped in a chinlUd specimen in an experiment. To the experl-
menterwho re.jects thi; possibility. the critic responds: **13LIt accord-
ing to Shipi's sister. Shipi is qLIl1C CZIpZibIC 01' SUCh thil'142S . . . " 19. P,
29).
Here are sonic other examples The flumanist was vvilling, to
print:
People at SRI %kould oril% whisper abi.)IL11 IlMk sloppily the Targ, and
Puthoff experiments were done -.nd criticize them verbally: but when
you tried to get them to put the;.- criticisms into print. that was a
different malter altogether (6. p. _20).
It is probable that the Preat Victorian chornist Sit- William Crookes
collaborated with the medium Florence Cooks fake seances. !@, a
diversion to conceal their romamic entunLIenmit (6. p. 14). [An un-
substantimed nimor used to support the ch.m2e that '*the entire Field
of paraps\ cholog\ - is crowded %% ith untrustworthy characters. 1
That Uri lGellerl sometimes ti,es gimmicks is b('Yolld 11011/71 f0Ljr
cmpha,,isj. Bob McAllister. a Nc\% York rimcician. spotted a palmed
magnet in Uri'N hind on one o,@ca,ion ...... \s I have said else\% here.
rats and electron-, don't cheat. Superpsychics do (9. pp. 31-321.
These writers would. of course. be quick to ridiCLI1C this sort of
gossip if it were oft'ered as evidenCC that a "paranormal- event had
occurred.
IN ENI-Rr-mis
Ajqwids lo Aiffhoi*Y
When logic fltik. the critic is templed to appeal to authori(y: fie
Sa)'S ill CVLNpel'.Iti0ll: "I hUVC fl'tilCd 10 COM illCC %'01.1. Nit \'01.1 muNt
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200080012-1

-V _77
Approved For Release 9&01/03/26: CIA-RDP96-00787RW200080012-1
Irrational Riahnialists
CPYRGHT
31
believe nic anyway, becauw, the authorities iire on my side.- ne
1111171eini.st's Piockiniations on asirology--barining it (2@--and on
evolulion--enforcing it i@@-are in this vein. As Carl Sagan noted,
SUCh ZILIthOrital-illn SNtICRIC1111, Ire not CO1lVlnCillj,1 because: they (10
not confront lite i.,oiie substantively, but rely oil discussion or ori-
gins, motivitions, and lack of niechanism. They come dangerously
close to defining di,.,sent as heresy. Sagan writes:
I find iny-self unitble to endorst@ the "Obicctions to Astrolopy"
statement [in 7he Humani%t. Sept,/Oct.. 19751--not because I feel
that astrology has any validity whmever. but bec,,iusc I felt and still
feel that the tone of the statement is authoi-itarian. The fundamental
point is not that the origins of astrology are shrouded in superstition.
This is true as well for'clicinistry. mcdlcine, and astrononly. to Illen-
tion only three. To discuss the psycholo.-ical motivations of those
who believe in astrolo.-y seems to nic 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 Wel-ener. Nevertheless,
we see that Wegener was right. and those who objected on the
grounds of unavailable mechanism were wrong. . . .
Statements contradictinp borderline, folk. or pscudoscience that
appear to have in authoritarian tone can do more damagc than good.
They never convince those who are flirting with pscudoscience bill
merely seem to confirm their impression that scientists are rigid and
closed-minded, In mv view there is no way to approach such subjects
cxcept substantively@ (Letter to Editor, 4.' P. 2).
The Critic as Trite Believer
It is ironic thnt the authoritarian approach lias led many of The
Humanist's writers into the posturc of lite self-sanic "true believ-
ers" they are criticizing. The\' al-C Sustained by faith -,Ind argue by
motion. They want to save o1hers frorn erroneous beliefs. For
example:
So let us do out- best to get rid of (his i( leological 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 in%- \vay. to bring society to it rationalist point of view
. . .and I am wl.-ing it battle here. and I have lots of troops on my
side. But %%e are waging it battle that can never be won.... But I am
going to continue to It-\-, zind see Miat results I can get. . . . That. to
me. is ver\ re%%ai ding. Hit li@ippcns for one person only. it was worth
doing the book ((), pp, 10-22).
... then I Will refund appr0Xilll:1lelV ('jj@lrj times ilic amount o(the
roYalt %. paid if) mcj(pr each hoW, milet. In makint! this offer. without
any urging by rn@ publisher. I risk personal bankruptcy-the loss of
Approved For Release 2001/03/26 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200080012-1

       -C,tA-RDP9-6--OQ787RO,2920QDaQQJ2
-'@Appromed F _Re1easeW1L0U2fi@,
CPYRGHT
    .12 Journal q Me limerican Societil for 1's%-chical Re.warch
everythinr I li;ive manwed to save it, , lifetime. ]'his does not prov'e
01M illy apprais;d is correct, but it does provide a weimingrul Iliensure
of tile extent of my confidence (6, 1). 13).
The critic as trite believor finds himself conimlItcd to reconfirming
his beliefs, regardless of the evidence. I lis investigation has blit one
Purpose: to find (lie "11011paronornial" explanation. lFhe cannot find
one, lie creates his own:
Since no nlztgicians were present. . . . it is impo.@;sihle to do more
than speculate oil possible nonparanornial explanations. One scenario
is . . . Jand many more followl (9, p. 27).
De 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, 1). 30). (On the basis of this criterion. offered by the
editor of Vie Humanist, relativity and qualitum mcchanics could
hardly have found a foothold.)
The editorial stance of The 11timanist finally conics to the point
where all nonscience is called "nomense for short" (6, 1). 32) and,
following the well-known psychological principle of ascribilig onc*s
own motivations and outlook to one's adversaries, such things as the
following are written:
We are confronted today with a forni of moral righteousness and
anti-intellectualism-ofien bordering on hysteria (6, p. 28).
        For a moment one of (lie writers holds the truth in his hand:
"Two can play the garne of faith-, for example, I can assert that I
have blind fiiith that there are no real witches, God, ESP and so on
(6. p. 32). But further'down the pa-ple, Ile retreats, @ayin_-, 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 unreisonable faith . . ." (3, p. 35). Presumably
     JV.4
his -Ind theirs, respective
The True Believer has continually to steel himself against evil
forces tempting hini with evidence which challenges his belief. Such
a posture was essential when nian's reason was his only tool. But
science has IIOW 6MI LIS WChlli(JUCS for examining evidence which
enable Lis to discover trullis transcending common sense (e.g,rcla-
    4 in this regard, we s.up@est that readers explore the writings of sociologist I larry
 Collins of the Univershx. of Bnth. En0and. and historians SeN Imour Niauskopf of
Duke Unkersity ;Iria Nlicll:iel McValloi of the Univer%ity of North Carolina. Thcy
have wiitten ome in%ighiful i1apm
on itic debates lietween riminline and frontier
scioitists. m hicit enable us to observc our.,elve% as actors in this diania.
Approved For Release 2001103126: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO020008 3012-1



Approved For Release Q01/03/26 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200080012-1
Irrational Ralionalivs
33
tivity and qu-,nitum niecli;inics). Thus, it iS pirtiCIII.,arl'. . Teve.,11iii-p-
when 71w llwnani.@i. in the @ijisc of scientitic investl@mtlon. cites a
))I MCICT16FIC j)l1dL)S()PhC1_ 'Wh it model For vhat to do %@hen faced with
a dcnlonstr@ltion of, C%idence th@lt Clmllelipes prCconceived helief.
Th i s critic (lijoics in essay on Democritus:
'I MITI \01o
w intellk.!ence was steeled ziv@iinst such assatilts by
skerticism and in,,ight. and %% 110, if he could not dclect the precoe
impo.sture. would zit in%- mte hzive 1,cen perf'ocily cerinin tha. ihotjiIi
this escal""Ll hin). the M101C thing \vas a lie and '111 impossibility (9. P.
32).
CPYRGHT
Apocal "yptic Rhetoric
When the charce of heresy no Jon-er suffices, the final stand of the
tnic believer is to prophesy the apocaj@lpsc: like Socrates. the here-
tic is said to be part ot'a larcer movement to sub-verl the minds of the
younLo and destroy civilization:
' * 'like the Hellenic civilization, it (scicntific enli-ghtenment] may
be ovem helmed by irrationalism, subjectivism and obscurantism (5.
P. 28).
     The doomsdav curse is laid without distinction on. recognized
scientists. SidCSfIOW hucksters, and all others deemed part of the
cults of unreason.*'
Indeed, there is al%vavs the dan,.@cr that science itself may be
enculfed bv tho@,e forces of unreason. . . . I ain afraid we xill be
constantly confronted by new forms of " know-nothingisni'" . . . (6, p.
31).
CONCLUDI,,@G Ri:%IARKS
The rationalist need not be infallible in fact or judgment: but he
must be open-minded and arQue rationally. We agree with Marvin
it "humanists ,
Zimmerman when lie says ih-, Ind othel's Committed to
scientific method are less excusable for locking their minds than
others are" (6. p. 33).
Ae flumanist is at its best when questioning the substance of
evidence behind claims of the paranorma). The continuing exchange
with Gauquelin-concerning his asserted correlation between prorni-
rience in sports and certain plinctary confi.-tirations is a niodel
case. TediOLIS. but the only proper way to resolve scientific cliims.
Similarly. Gardner appears to have done consideroble hornework- for
his review (9, pp. 25-32) of 11anati's The Geller Papers. if he had
APproved For Release 2001/03/26 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO02000 30012-1

J0111,11W Oj UIC American Jot' I'sYchical He.w(11,01
Ii-nli(Cd hillIWIf 10 tile SUITSUIlitive Polms. he %vollid have had a valid
and hald-Ilitting Critique. JIN-111,111's ar-ticle (1), Pp. 1(,-20) oil SIZI
Nvork ilddies"C', "olne %ub,,umlive qucstions, Eilksen's brief
iniMll-aCiCS is fuMlal and to tile
point. But unforturmtely Illese are tile excepliolls.
We Ile T-,Ot alonc ill th,@Sc collck:j Ils. 111creasink,ly, tile letters to tile
Edifor of The Humani.st are exprcssing simlll@ir distress. Nor are we
discwssing fine points-. Nve are concerned w,ith prewrving the very
integrity of tile rationalist position. The effectivericis of The
IIIIIII(IIIISI is It Voice for rationality is a direct I'Linction oCits fimillfUl-
ness to its (mri pilriciples. The defonse of Reason is like tile deferise
Of ViUIUC. Its dlSCjP]CS nILISt PrZiCtiCC what they preach, or they (to
their cause more harm than good.
CPYRGHT
                                                REFEUNCES
             Ossues of The Humanist referred to in the text)
(1) Sept./Oct., 1974; Q) Sept./Oct- 1975: (3) Nov./Dec., 1975, (4)
Jariffeb.. 1976: (5) Ma\-Junc. 1976: (6) July/Aug- 1976: (7) Nov./
Dec., 1976. (8) Jall,&6., 1977; (9) May/June, 1977.
340.3 Woolse v Drive
Chevy Chase, MM'.11ano' 20015
Approved For Release 2001/03/26: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO02001
0012-1