Personality And The Paranormal — Olaf Stapledon, lecture notes

Original manuscript — sheet 1

Transcription

52.5PERSONALITY + the PARANORMALF52.5
Progressive League
Brighton, Feb 1949
Introductory:
Key note: opening up a new world view
but — be true to old-new principles & values
[52,5]which come clear only today —
in clash of science & religion
we are discovering that — ⊕
religion is not a matter of belief
”   ”   ”   ”   theory
but of feeling, attitude
to ð actual; here & now
attitude to :
moral championship1. something worth while
(spirit)
agnostic piety2. ð Whole, or superhuman
1. what ð past gave us —
religious experience, but confused with theory
2. what ð modern age has given us —
ð scientific spirit, intellectual integrity,
modern logic
realization of limitations of thought & language.
∴ agnosticism, natural piety, cosmical piety
aim of this talk:
to assess θ interim findings of paranormal psychology
in relation to — other modern experience
especially religion
i.e. what difference does ð paranormal make?—
1. to our practical prospects
here & hereafter
2. to our understanding
of self & cosmos
3. to religion, at its best
ð plain man looks at psychical research
wide mouthed amazement
but tongue in cheek.

Original manuscript — sheet 2

Transcription

⊕  summary of θ experts verdict:
1. agreement! psi does happen
& is not reducible to θ physical
mind no epiphenomenon on θ physical
θ physical is not θ ultimate reality
spatial experience is “superficial”
temporal    “    “    “
2. disagreement:
about θ psi powers: only telepathy?
pretelekinesis“ clairvoyance?
& postboth?
telebouliatelekinesis?
precognition, & post?
about θ self: substantial ego?
psychon system?
about survival: value of θ evidence?
cogito - substancecogito argument?
Humepartial & complete survival?
pre-existence?
about θ common ground:
personal, impersonal, “supra personal”?
about time: fully real, wholly illusory, superficial?
multidimensional
×  about “reality”: in principle - fully revealed?
open to scientific study?
grades of significance (Tyrrell)
free will
⊙  distinguish two possible aspects of telepathy
1. telepathy proper = awareness of experience in others
thought-reading
“far-willing”2. “teleboulia”, influencing other minds
(a) thought-Transference
(b) swaying other wills
helpful prayer

Original manuscript — sheet 3

Transcription

2
Notes on ð evidence for paranormal powers
accept it, but still with caution
1. possibility of a systematic error throughout
due to some hidden factor
analogy: ether theory—“perfect fluid” etc
(relativity not yet above ð horizon)
2. depths of human gullibility
in a complex field, anything is provable
(given obsessive will to prove)
eg. Bacon-Shakespeare
British Izraelites
Flat Earth theory.
∴ reserve final judgement
but accept provisionally,
× and — beware staking one's life on it
ie founding a faith on ð paranormal
using it as a prop for—
crumbling theories, doctrines
⊕ ╱╱╱ð should be outgrown
notes on ð particular powers
telepathy: direct contagion of experience?
or indirect, through ð “other sphere”?
what appears in consciousness—
a symbolization of unconscious contagion
(cp dreams)
tangled with repressions etc
possibility of much undetected telepathy
eg in “tilting” conscious thinking
fashions of thought & feeling
(war fever etc)
in artistic creation, inspiration
in reverie
in hypnogogic visions ⊙ ×
my faces & voices ╱╱╱
telekinesis: need for greater caution
anyhow, very restricted scope
× but — ages of miracle working?
autosuggestive cures
a special case of psychokinesis?
as in normal volitional action on muscles

Original manuscript — sheet 4

Transcription

⊕ but — if I foresee my dying in a railway accident tomorrow?
then — I don't take θ train
then — θ foreseeing was illusory
i.e not real foreseeing
if it was real —
then — my precautions defeated
(in ways unforeseen)

Original manuscript — sheet 5

Transcription

3
clairvoyance : awareness of remote objects, unsensed
& not by telepathy,
& not by precognitive perception
extremely hard to isolate
precognition and postcognition
forms : telepathic
clairvoyant
direct or indirect? (through the other sphere)
participation in ð eternal “now” ?
X precognition and free will X
not antithetical.
grant ð choice is free & effective
but — grant ð other sphere, supratemporal
then — what I shall choose & do —
is now available —
in ð supratemporal ⊕ |||
but note— free will controversy is false
I may be, in one sense, determined
through & through
physically & mentally
yet in another sense free
within limits   (Trolly bus)
i e self-determined
by my own extant nature
i e not constrained externally
(finally— free will unimportant
ð cult due to veiled egoism
self-importance
violates best religious feeling
X “let me be God’s hand, eye, voice”)
“pre-kinesis”, a logical possibility? & “post-kinesis”
pre- i e past volition might directly affect present events
post- or, present  “   “   “   “   past   “
eg) 1. John’s present heroic choice might —
contribute directly to his futr strength
or  “   “   past  “
2. John’s present longing for a fine day in ð future might —
influence ð future weather
3. John’s present love for Jane might —
directly strengthen Jane in ð past
4. God, as ultimate flower of ð cosmical process, might —
in ð end create ð initial stage of ð cosmos

Original manuscript — sheet 6

Transcription

⊙ or better — “ad hoc re-vival” of full or partial personality

α and would explain — no positive information of ð after life

Original manuscript — sheet 7

Transcription

4
communication with the dead
(∴ evidence for survival)
definition of survival:
1. complete survival, true survival
continuance of intelligent activity
with memory of earthly life
without intelligent activity—
mere survival of records
cp Broad’s psychic factor
without memory—
no personal survival at all
(unless a “clean slate” ego)
2. incomplete survival
intelligent activity + some memory
no   “   “   but  “   “
value of ð evidence for survival
some say— “proven”
“    “    “no proof”
“    “    “not proven” but possible
I suspend judgement
no expert knowledge
but no strong preference
(more comments later)
X “ad hoc survival” or “ad hoc re-creation” of person//⊙
Tyrrell rejects with scorn//α
but — would explain scrappy evidence
an hypothesis:
(non-centred theory implied)
stimulus: from living persons
thought or desire
reaching ð other sphere
(ð common ground)
response: from ð common ground
re-creation of ð person ad hoc
with memory + activity
relevant to ð stimulus
complete or incomplete
caution on survival
our concepts are probably inadequate
false question: neither yes nor no
ð truth may still be inconceivable

Original manuscript — sheet 8

Transcription

⊕ Rhine: ψ functions according to —
normal laws of higher functions
& drug effects similar.

Original manuscript — sheet 9

Transcription

5-
some general questions on θ paranormal powers
1. primitive or highly developed ?
evidence for “primitive”:
Tradition of second sight, soothsayers
witches
oracles (Delphi)
miracles
bird-flocks in motion
homing instinct
modern primitive tribes
rare in civilized societies
(too much individualism ?)
mediums mostly “primitive”
importance of dreams & trances
evidence for “developed”:
Rhine’s conclusions:
best subjects are intelligent
educated
balanced
not neurotic ⊕ ////
2. are they universal or exceptional ?
evidence suggests great differences of power
but Rhine claims — all have some power
3. are they fixed or capable of improvement ?
note — deterioration with use — fatigue ?
onset of boredom ?
no evidence yet for improvement
but — possible development of technique
c.p ancient knowledge of electricity
4   a tentative hypothesis — three phases ×
(a) primitive — strong, but wild
(b) civilized — weak
(c) great future development

Original manuscript — sheet 10

Transcription

6
notes on possible development of paranormal powers
1. θ ideal limit:
full telepathy - awareness of all minds
" clairvoyance - " " " events now
" full telekinesis - control " " present events
" pre-& post-cognition-awareness of all events
" pre-& post-kinesis - control of all events
then "I" am "God" !
2. partial development:
telepathy: development + prevention
end of privacy? & of secretiveness
we should get used to it
mutual understanding (Rhine)
love
crime
politics
preparation for war
exploration for o of other worlds
clairvoyance: extension of dowsing?
astronomical exploration
psychokinesistelekinesis: a new age of "miracles"
but systematic
conflicts of magicians
precognition: forestalling accidents
study of "future history"
postcognition: revision of past history
study of prehistory
" " biological evolution
" " cosmical origins
pre-kinesis
post-kinesis
teleboulia (far-willing) control of other minds
preboulia (fore-willing)
postboulia (after-willing)

Original manuscript — sheet 11

Transcription

• two forms of ð system theory.
I  ð elements are strictly atomic
Price eg. sense data
externally extrinsically related together
II  ð “elements” are not substances & not atomic
each is what it is in virtue of its function in a “field”
1. its relation to ð external physical world
2. its   “   “  “ subsystem (ð individual)
3. its   “   “  “ supersystem
Whitehead thus an individual is a “prehension” of ð universe
from a certain locality & date
& from a certain “position” in ð “other sphere”.

Original manuscript — sheet 12

Transcription

7
How does the Paranormal work? (How does psi work?)
what is the “mechanism” of it?
why does it work sometimes and not at other times?
Xwhy I am I not God?
θ personality of common sense:
imprisoned in body, and in specious present
but with remote perception, & memory
perception limited by sense organs
memory            “            to personal biography
communication limited by sense organs
character due to: heredity (physical)
& conditioning
a single paranormal event shatters θ theory
some types of theory:
1. direct action by θ common-sense personality (a substance)
telepathy & teleboulia — mind on mind
clairvoyance — things on minds
telekinesis — minds on things
pre- and post- — transcendence of time
but how? & why not always? no answer
2. indirect action, through a “common ground”,
“the other sphere”, supratemporal & supraspatial
in which individual minds are “rooted”
status of θ individual:
again a substance
but inhering in normal world & other sphere
or in several spheres
(potentially)
but extension & retraction of “pseudopodia”
“stretching” (Tyrrell)
in Trance — stretching to θ other sphere
in death — complete withdrawal
θ questions remain: how? why not always? No answer
3. θ person is not a substance but a system. Carington, Price
a sub-system within a super-system
its elements are “experiences”.    psychons
related psychologically within θ system
and with the super-system —
in paranormal phenomena
(similar laws in both cases)
but θ questions remain: why sometimes, not always? ⊙ ×
why am I not θ super-system? //

Original manuscript — sheet 13

Transcription

⊙ abandon simple materialism
mind not limited absolutely by the physical
(but still largely limited)
mind not an epiphenomenon
but dialectical materialism may still stand?

Original manuscript — sheet 14

Transcription

8
tentative suggestion on paranormal “linkage”
cp Rhine: interpret θ paranormal in terms of —
normal psychological principles
Carington∴ related to θ unity of θ individual mind
how do experiences coalesce?
θ unity of θ individual mind
“association of ideas”
through identical elements of content
cp F.H.Bradley
‖experience A B recalls experience B C
through θ identity of a common factor, B.
B may be mainly cognitive or affective
or conative
a thought or desire or volition
B may be hidden from consciousness
θ identity may be undiscoverable
application to θ paranormal
Carington:telepathy: through an identical factor in θ 2 minds
K object(through the super system)
eg. 1. identical general tone
2.    ”    element
clairvoyance: θ individual view of θ remote situation
is identical in some special respect
θ identity imports θ object
telekinesis: ditto. a crucial identity of —
mental state + remote physical —
∴ θ mental state sways θ physical
pre- and post-: similar mechanism
identity of indiscernibles implied by this theory?
(which is denied by Bertrand Russell etc)
substitute: “identity in θ other sphere”?
difficulty in my theory
often, no discoverable identity
Problem: relation of Paranormal + Established Knowledge
how do they fit together?
what must be abandonned?
relation to: science, morality, religion, philosophy.⊙╱

Original manuscript — sheet 15

Transcription

⊙ objects "appear"
∴ θy appear "to something"
⊕ θ subject is a featureless abstraction
a mere view point & biography
but— objects stimulate θ subject to cognize
from θ particular view point & biography
Є error : mental squinting
eg bush in dark lane, mistaken for cow
I complete θ imperfect dark form —
by squinting past cowishness on it.

Original manuscript — sheet 16

Transcription

9

What is a Personality, or a Person?

what it is not: a purely physical system (electromagnetic)
„　„　biological　„　(instincts, reflexes)
what it is:
something aware of something; “subject-object”
& responding to something
consciousness essentially a relation
subjectivity involves objectivity
(and vice versa?) ⊙ ///
but — awareness is not photographic, passive
is receptive-creative
∴ largely erronious
inaccurate symbolization
what is ð “subject”?
a metaphysical ego? + immortal soul?
a living body?
a sub-system of experience?
(absorbing new elements)
a focal point within ð supersystem?
(prehending an environment)
(and responding, affecting)
anyhow:
experience isfrom a view point
&from a “biography” ⊕ /////
ranges of objectivity, qualitatively different, hierarchical
eg.sensed qualities
perceived objects
persons (self and others)
scientific objects (electrons etc) including—
societies of persons
pure abstractions, universals
awake and somnolent experiencing
infinite gradation of lucidity
we all know ð difference
ð awake is aware of: more objects, more truly
more coherently
higher ranges of objectivity
contrast ð worlds of:worm, dog, infant
average man
saint, great artist, or philosopher
error: mental squinting　E ////

Original manuscript — sheet 17

Transcription

⊙ or — concern for some isolated higher values
to ð exclusion of others
eg obsessive pacifism

Original manuscript — sheet 18

Transcription

10

values : emerge from impact of objects on subjects
we are aware of some objects as dynamic
as tending to action
body tensions
personality tensions
social tensions
cosmical tensions?
we espouse dynamic objects
but with prejudice, due to biography
i e objects stimulate ð subject to espouse or reject
from a viewpoint & a biography
like objects, values are hierarchical
but lowly values may be ingredient in higher
eg. body values in person values
growth of personality = growth in cognition, affection, conation
i e in response to objective "reality"
in wisdom and love and creative action
∴ in response to higher ranges of objectivity
and higher ranges of value
perversion, from the true line of growth
obsessive concern for ð familiar, facile, trivial—
objects & objective values ⊙
eg. for body ≡
" self-regard, ð psychological "me"
" ð beloved
" ð social
" particular abstractions
moral squinting
irrelevant values squinted on to "here-now"
eg.
"ð unconscious"
1. ð primitive unconscious
(a) innate
(b) acquired
2. ð "upper" unconscious?
3. ð universal unconscious?

Original manuscript — sheet 19

Transcription

SIMON'S FIELD
CALDY
WEST KIRBY
WIRRAL
Hoylake 1134
——————
⊙hence - I will for “personality-in-community”
each element involves ð other

Original manuscript — sheet 20

Transcription

11
Highest Reaches of Human Personality│
derived from ð most awake experiences
i.e. fullest sensitivity to objectivity
hence fullest cognition, affection conation
in real relation to total objectivity
summary of ð highest reaches:
1 personal love : genuine “espousal” of an other self
true “I-thou” relation (Buber)
cognition of my “me”, as object
and your “me” “ ”
spiritual symbiosis
experience of “we” (us)⊙
complicated by individualism≋
∴ conflict & hate
but transmuted
2 social loyalty : to ð “we” of acquaintance
love, friendship, partnership
to ð larger “we”, unacquainted
college, TU, Church, profession etc
to ð total society
nation
to ð total human “we”
loyalty to mankind
3 creative intellect : manipulation of concepts
motive — dispassionate cognition
intellectual integrity
hence —“scientific spirit”
philosophical spirit
involving:
1. loyalty to objective fact
natural piety
2. loyalty to logical thinking
horror of loose ”
” “wishful” ”
issue: comprehensive theory
scientific, philosophical
but — with inveterate doubt
“ ð tongue in ð cheek
“ intellectual humility

Original manuscript — sheet 21

Transcription

SIMON'S FIELD
CALDY
WEST KIRBY
WIRRAL∴ this world is —
Hoylake 1134"ð Vale of Soul-Making" (Keats)
∴ Bad otherworldliness
c.p. cash agriculture
α  religion and survival:
two conflicting religious feelings about survival
interest in:1. without survival, all is meaningless, worthless
1. subjectð religious experience gives evidence )
2. object2. survival is irrelevant; so is immortality
what matters is —
ð quality of individual life, here or hereafter
if we survive — well ; if not — well !
instrumentsi e we are vessels, not ends
ð desire for survival is at bottom irreligious
even in its most refined form
must be outgrown
(even if survival is true)
X  a salutory emotional tension, between:
1. sense of ð extreme worthwhileness of personality
& of personal relationships
2. sense of persons as ephemeral,
as not fully real
out of this tension — ð supreme religious experience
ε
spirit's cosmical status — unknown
unknowable?
instrumentality—for what? God? Whole?
for spirit itself
X  ultimately — subjectivity fulfils objectivity
by awareness & espousing & —
creative action
but this may be sheer myth
symbolically true

Original manuscript — sheet 22

Transcription

12
4. creative art: making concrete symbols — │
having — sensory unity-in-diversity │
+ significance, on all levels │
primitive │
"civilized" │
"religions" │
distinguish — 1. purgation, release of pentup force │
by symbolical fulfilment │
2. creative innovation │
midwifery to new experience │
— on highest levels │
α │
5. religions experience: two aspects — conflicting │
yet mutually supporting │
1. apprehension of "spirit" │
as Tao, ð Way, ideal form of behaviour │
self-fulfilment by self-abnegation │
i e fulfilling what I am really "for" — │
by identifying myself with "God" │
(an ideal universal self) │
& ∴ by abandoning "self" — │
as finite individuality │
cp. doctrine of salvation: sin + vision │
instrumentality │
espousing ð supreme objects │
spirit = ð way of love + wisdom + creativity │
awareness: world, self, others │
feeling: │
action: coherent, creative ε││
"ð Others"2. attitude to ð inconceivable reality │
" ð superhuman, superpersonal? │
" ð Whole? │
"Thy will be done." │
"Though thou slay me, yet will I love thee." │
Though thou slay mankind, —
though thou slay thy cosmos, —
Knowing not —yet will I love thee, —
whether thou art,knowing not what thou art, —
or not.but feeling thee, in me
in others
in ð cosmos

Original manuscript — sheet 23

Transcription

SIMON'S FIELD
CALDY
WEST KIRBY
WIRRAL
Hoylake 1134
⊕ science: θ field for science is extended
θ scientific temper is still needed
(empirical, analytical, sceptical
(loyalty to θ objective; natural piety
(passion for intellectual integrity)
present scientific orthodoxy is undermined
physical concepts are inadequate to —
study of mind
& ∴ to metaphysics
new methods, concepts
psychology: possible vast complication
three spheres of influence on behaviour:
1. conscious experience
2. θ individual unconscious
3. paranormal
possibility of control & development of psi
philosophy: 1. critical philosophy:
re-examination of all fundamental ideas
in θ light of θ paranormal
2. speculative: building a new world view
c.p θ influence of natural science
education: possible use of paranormal influence
development of psi powers: in all
in experts

Original manuscript — sheet 24

Transcription

13
Significance of the Paranormal
(practical significance already noted)
scientific and philosophical significance: ⊕
simple materialism untenable ///
mind no epiphenomenon
understanding of time & space
there is more to them than appears
× they are real, but not fully revealed
understanding of personality
unsuspected links between persons
„  supra-temporality
possibility of survival
religions significance:
even if survival is proved—
no new values yet emerge
& “other side” offers no new vision
spirit remains ð goal
engagement in this world for spirit
to build Jerusalem, here & now
and note a danger:
bad otherworldliness
new sphere for self-concern
disbelief in survival was salutory
∵ clarifying to morality
&    „    „  true religion
belief in survival—
makes true salvation harder

Original manuscript — sheet 25

Transcription

SIMON'S FIELD
. CALDY
WEST KIRBY
WIRRAL
Hoylake 1134

Original manuscript — sheet 26

Transcription

14
Two
Towards a new world view

Original manuscript — sheet 27

Transcription

SIMON'S FIELD
CALDY
WEST KIRBY
WIRRAL
Hoylake 1134
⊕ science is not a key to ultimate reality,
. and that —
LIVERPOOL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
STP.
F12/20