116 lines
7.3 KiB
Plaintext
116 lines
7.3 KiB
Plaintext
PARANET EDITORIAL: THE SNOBS AMONG US
|
||
by Jim Speiser
|
||
|
||
|
||
As I have stated before on many occasions, the idea that abduction
|
||
experiences represent objectively real encounters with extraterrestrials
|
||
represents an hypothesis, one that must be evaluated and weighed against
|
||
other hypotheses or alternative "explanations." In terms of true scientif-
|
||
ic objectivity, no one hypothesis has any more weight than any other un-
|
||
less it can be shown to be more consistent with our knowledge and with all
|
||
the pertinent facts. A psychological explanation is no more valid than any
|
||
other simply by virtue of having been proposed by a more mainstream psych-
|
||
ologist; it must prove itself on the weight of the evidence. Occam's ra-
|
||
zor, however, dictates that more mundane, less extravagant explanations
|
||
must be evaluated and discarded before we can fully accept the more outre'
|
||
scenarios into the hallowed halls of "knowledge." You have to start some-
|
||
where.
|
||
|
||
Abduction specialists such as Budd Hopkins have long paid much lip-
|
||
service to their efforts to investigate the more subjective explanations
|
||
such as delusion or fantasy, and so I am curious as to how he and they
|
||
will react to the article in the Winter 1987/88 edition of the Skeptical
|
||
Inquirer, entitled "The Aliens Among Us: Hypnotic Regression Revisited,"
|
||
by University of Kentucky psychologist Robert A. Baker. While the article
|
||
is flawed in many respects, it compensates by offering the hypothesis
|
||
outlined in the following extract:
|
||
|
||
<<
|
||
If these abductees were given...intensive diagnostic testing it
|
||
is highly likely that many similarities would emerge--particularly
|
||
an unusual personality pattern that Wilson and Barber (1983) have
|
||
categorized as "fantasy-prone." In an important but much neglected
|
||
article, they report in some detail their discovery of a group of
|
||
excellent hypnotic subjects with unusual fantasy abilities. In their
|
||
words:
|
||
|
||
Although this study provided a broader understanding of the kind
|
||
of life experiences that may underlie the ability to be an ex-
|
||
cellent hypnotic subject, it has also led to a serendipitous
|
||
finding that has wide implications for all of psychology -- it
|
||
has shown that there exists a small group of individuals (pos-
|
||
sibly 4% of the population) who fantasize a large part of the
|
||
time, who typically "see," "hear," "smell," and "touch" and
|
||
fully experience what they fantasize; and who can be labeled
|
||
fantasy-prone personalities.
|
||
|
||
|
||
<< Wilson and Barber also stress that such individuals experience a
|
||
reduction in orientation to time, place, and person that is charac-
|
||
teristic of hypnosis or trance during their daily lives whenever
|
||
they are deeply involved in a fantasy. They also have experiences
|
||
during their daily ongoing lives that resemble the classical hypno-
|
||
tic phenomena. In other words, the behavior we would normally call
|
||
"hypnotic" is exhibited by these fantasy-prone types (FPs) all the
|
||
time. In Wilson and Barber's words: "When we give them 'hypnotic
|
||
suggestions,' such as for visual and auditory hallucinations, nega-
|
||
tive hallucinations, age regression, limb rigidity, anesthesia, and
|
||
sensory hallucinations, we are asking them to do for us the kind of
|
||
thing they can do independently of us in their daily lives."
|
||
|
||
<< The reason we do not run into these types more often is that
|
||
they have learned long ago to be highly secretive and private about
|
||
their fantasy lives. Whenever the FPs do encounter a hypnosis situa-
|
||
tion it provides them with a social situation in which they are en-
|
||
couraged to do, and are rewarded for doing, what they usually do on-
|
||
ly in secrecy and in private. Wilson and Barber also emphasize that
|
||
regression and the reliving of previous experiences is something
|
||
that virtually all the FPs do naturally in their daily lives. When
|
||
they recall the past, they relive it to a surprisingly vivid extent,
|
||
and they all have vivid memories of their experiences extending back
|
||
to their early years.
|
||
>>
|
||
|
||
While there are many aspects of the abduction syndrome left unex-
|
||
plained by this scenario, it appears to be a description of a personality
|
||
type that is consistent with some of the more famous "abductees," such as
|
||
Whitley Streiber. While researching his two books, Budd Hopkins retained
|
||
the expertise of psychologist Aphrodite Clamar, who administered psycho-
|
||
logical evaluation tests to nine abduction percipients, all of whom proved
|
||
to be normal, sane individuals. The point Baker makes, however, is that
|
||
these FPs ARE ALSO SANE, and would no doubt pass such a test. He further
|
||
claims that there are more stringent tests designed to weed out such FPs,
|
||
and I maintain that, in the interest of true scientific objectivity, it is
|
||
incumbent upon researchers such as Hopkins to arrange to have such a test
|
||
administered to another group of abduction claimants. We have been provid-
|
||
ed with an earthly alternative; we owe it to the public, to the skeptics,
|
||
to other researchers, and to the claimants themselves (who Hopkins claims
|
||
are actually quite fearful of the ETH) to investigate fully this new pos-
|
||
sibility.
|
||
|
||
There is another, admittedly more selfish and spiteful reason to
|
||
objectively evaluate the "FPH." Baker, typical of many CSICOP "hit-men,"
|
||
has succumbed to snobbery and unabashedly claims the intellectual high
|
||
ground in his article. He was doing just fine until his "Consequences and
|
||
Summary" section. Some quotes typify his attitude: "Need we be concerned
|
||
about an invasion of little gray kidnappers? Amused, yes. Concerned, no."
|
||
"Should we take Streiber, Hopkins, Kinder, et al. seriously? Not really."
|
||
"Tolerance IS the mark of a civilized mind." Well, BLESS you, Prof. Baker.
|
||
You seem to forget, however, that YOUR hypothesis has not been tested,
|
||
either, and consequently you have as yet no legitimate claim to being
|
||
"right." And as I stated before, your article is flawed. It doesn't take
|
||
into account the physical evidence, such as scarring, landing traces, and
|
||
"exoglyphic exemplars." It relies heavily on generalizations and quoting
|
||
of previous studies which only tangentially impact the abduction scenario.
|
||
And it weakly waves off the marked similarities between abduction ac-
|
||
counts.
|
||
|
||
If testing of the FPH should provide a clear indication that a psych-
|
||
ological explanation is warranted, I fully expect abduction researchers to
|
||
acknowledge that their hypothesizing of alien intervention stands on weak-
|
||
ened legs. If, however, the results of such testing show no such correla-
|
||
tion, I would appreciate it if Prof. Baker and other debunkers would
|
||
propose solutions in a more detached, even-handed, level-headed manner
|
||
more becoming of the TRULY civilized. Failing this, I would appreciate it
|
||
if they would kindly shutup.
|
||
|