Izvenčutno zaznavanje

Iz Wikipedije, proste enciklopedije

Izvenčutno zaznavanje, tudi ekstrasenzorično zaznavanje ali s kratico ESP, imenovano tudi šesti čut, je domnevna nadnaravna sposobnost sprejemanja informacij, ki niso pridobljene s poznanimi čutili, ampak so zaznane z umom. Izraz je verjetno skoval psiholog J. B. Rhine z univerze Duke (ZDA), da bi z njim označil prerokovalske sposobnosti, kot so intuicija, telepatija, psihometrija, jasnovidnost in mnoge druge.[1] Drugi vid je oblika zunajčutnega zaznavanja, pri kateri oseba zazna informacije v obliki vizije o prihodnjih dogodkih, preden se ti zgodijo (prekognicija), ali o stvareh ali dogodkih na oddaljenih lokacijah (gledanje na daljavo).[2][3]

Ker za obstoj ESP in drugi vid ni znanstvenih dokazov, ju uvrščamo med psevdoznanosti.[4]

Zgodovina[uredi | uredi kodo]

Zenerjeve kare so prvič uporabili v tridesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja za eksperimentalne raziskave ESP.
Hubert Pearce in J. B. Rhine.

V tridesetih letih 20. stoletja sta na Univerzi Duke v Severni Karolini (ZDA) J. B. Rhine in njegova žena Louisa E. Rhine izvedla raziskavo izvenčutnega zaznavanja. Medtem ko se je Louisa Rhine osredotočila na zbiranje anekdot o spontanih primerih, je J. B. Rhine večinoma delal v laboratoriju, kjer je natančno definiral izraze, kot sta ESP in psi, ter načrtoval poskuse za njuno testiranje. Razvil je preprost nabor kart, ki so se prvotno imenovale Zenerjeve karte[5] – danes imenovane tudi ESP karte. Na njih so simboli krog, kvadrat, valovite črte, križ in zvezda. V paketu po 25 kart je pet vsake vrste.

V eksperimentu delovanja telepatije »pošiljatelj« gleda niz Zenerjevih kart, medtem ko »prejemnik« ugiba simbole. Za poskus delovanja jasnovidnosti je paket kart skrit pred vsemi, medtem ko prejemnik ugiba. Kasneje je Rhine s kockami testiral tudi psihokinezo.[6] [7]

Parapsihološki poskusi na unierzi Duke so vzbudili kritike akademikov in drugih, ki so izpodbijali koncepte in dokaze o ESP. Številni psihološki oddelki drugih univerz so neuspešno poskušali ponoviti Rhineove poskuse.[8]

Leta 1938 je psiholog Joseph Jastrow zapisal, da je večina dokazov o izvenčutnem zaznavanju, ki so jih zbrali Rhine in drugi parapsihologi, anekdotičnih, pristranskih, dvomljivih in rezultat »napačnega opazovanja in znanih človeških slabosti«.[9] Rhineove poskuse so diskreditirali zaradi odkritja, da bi slaba kontrola eksperimentov ali goljufanje lahko pojasnila vse njegove rezultate: npr. preskušanci bi lahko prebirali simbole s hrbtne strani kart ali bi lahko videli in slišali izpraševalčeve subtilne namige.[10][11][12]

V šestdesetih letih 20. stoletja so se parapsihologi vedno bolj zanimali za kognitivne komponente ESP, to so subjektivne izkušnje, ki so vključene v odzive ljudi na ESP. To je zahtevalo eksperimentalne postopke, ki niso bili omejeni na Rhineovo priljubljeno metodologijo s kartami. Takšni postopki so vključevali poskuse s telepatijo v sanjah in eksperimente ganzfeld.[13][14][15]

Drugi vid je morda dobil takšno prvotno ime zato, ker je veljalo, da je običajen vid prvi, medtem ko je nadnaravni vid sekundarni, omejen na samo nekatere posameznike.

Znanstveni skepticizem[uredi | uredi kodo]

Parapsihologija je preučevanje nadnaravnih pojavov, vključno z ESP. Parapsihologijo znanstveniki kritizirajo zaradi vedno novega raziskovanja, čeprav po več kot stoletju raziskav ne more zagotoviti prepričljivih dokazov o obstoju kakršnih koli nadnaravnih pojavov.[16] Znanstvena skupnost zavrača ESP zaradi pomanjkanja dokazov o obstoju, pomanjkanja teoretske osnove, ki bi pojasnila ESP, in pomanjkanja pozitivnih eksperimentalnih rezultatov. Številne kritike eksperimentov zunajčutnega zaznavanja se nanašajo zlasti na metodološke pomanjkljivosti. Zato ESP prištevamo med psevdoznanost.[17][18][19][20][21]

Znanstvena skupnost ekstrasenzornega zaznavanja ne obravnava kot znanstveni pojav.[22][23][24][25][26]

Viri[uredi | uredi kodo]

  1. Noel Sheehy; Antony J. Chapman; Wendy A. Conroy (2002). Biographical Dictionary of Psychology. Taylor & Francis. str. 409–. ISBN 978-0-415-28561-2.
  2. "WordNet Search - 3.1". wordnetweb.princeton.edu.
  3. "second sight". Merriam-Webster.
  4. Regal, Brian (2009). Pseudoscience: A Critical Encyclopedia. Greenwood. str. 169. ISBN 978-0-313-35507-3.
  5. Donald Laycock, ur. (1989). Skeptical – a Handbook of Pseudoscience and the Paranormal. Canberra, Australia: Canberra Skeptics. str. 28. ISBN 978-0-7316-5794-0.
  6. Sladek, John. (1974). The New Apocrypha: A Guide to Strange Sciences and Occult Beliefs. Panther. pp. 172–174. ISBN 0-87281-712-1
  7. Hansel, C. E. M. (1980). ESP and Parapsychology: A Critical Re-evaluation. Prometheus Books. pp. 86–122. ISBN 978-0879751203
  8. Cox, W. S. (1936). An experiment in ESP. Journal of Experimental Psychology 12: 437.
  9. Joseph Jastrow. (1938). ESP, House of Cards. The American Scholar 8: 13–22.
  10. Harold Gulliksen. (1938). Extra-Sensory Perception: What Is It?. American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 43, No. 4. pp. 623–634. "Investigating Rhine's methods, we find that his mathematical methods are wrong and that the effect of this error would in some cases be negligible and in others very marked. We find that many of his experiments were set up in a manner which would tend to increase, instead of to diminish, the possibility of systematic clerical errors; and lastly, that the ESP cards can be read from the back."
  11. Wynn, Charles M; Wiggins, Arthur W. (2001). Quantum Leaps in the Wrong Direction: Where Real Science Ends...and Pseudoscience Begins. Joseph Henry Press. p. 156. ISBN 978-0-309-07309-7 "In 1940, Rhine coauthored a book, Extrasensory Perception After Sixty Years in which he suggested that something more than mere guess work was involved in his experiments. He was right! It is now known that the experiments conducted in his laboratory contained serious methodological flaws. Tests often took place with minimal or no screening between the subject and the person administering the test. Subjects could see the backs of cards that were later discovered to be so cheaply printed that a faint outline of the symbol could be seen. Furthermore, in face-to-face tests, subjects could see card faces reflected in the tester’s eyeglasses or cornea. They were even able to (consciously or unconsciously) pick up clues from the tester’s facial expression and voice inflection. In addition, an observant subject could identify the cards by certain irregularities like warped edges, spots on the backs, or design imperfections."
  12. Smith, Jonathan C. (2009). Pseudoscience and Extraordinary Claims of the Paranormal: A Critical Thinker's Toolkit. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-1405181228. "Today, researchers discount the first decade of Rhine's work with Zener cards. Stimulus leakage or cheating could account for all his findings. Slight indentations on the backs of cards revealed the symbols embossed on card faces. Subjects could see and hear the experimenter, and note subtle but revealing facial expressions or changes in breathing."
  13. Marks, David; Kammann, Richard. (2000). The Psychology of the Psychic. Prometheus Books. pp. 97–106. ISBN 1-57392-798-8
  14. Hyman, Ray. Evaluating Parapsychological Claims. In Robert J. Sternberg, Henry L. Roediger, Diane F. Halpern. (2007). Critical Thinking in Psychology. Cambridge University Press. pp. 216–231. ISBN 978-0521608343
  15. Alcock, James. (2003). Give the Null Hypothesis a Chance: Reasons to Remain Doubtful about the Existence of Psi. Journal of Consciousness Studies 10: 29–50.
  16. Cordón, Luis A. (2005). Popular psychology: an encyclopedia. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press. str. 182. ISBN 978-0-313-32457-4. The essential problem is that a large portion of the scientific community, including most research psychologists, regards parapsychology as a pseudoscience, due largely to its failure to move beyond null results in the way science usually does. Ordinarily, when experimental evidence fails repeatedly to support a hypothesis, that hypothesis is abandoned. Within parapsychology, however, more than a century of experimentation has failed even to conclusively demonstrate the mere existence of paranormal phenomenon, yet parapsychologists continue to pursue that elusive goal.
  17. Diaconis, Persi. (1978). Statistical Problems in ESP Research. Science New Series, Vol. 201, No. 4351. pp. 131–136.
  18. Bunge, Mario. (1987). "Why Parapsychology Cannot Become a Science". Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10: 576–577.
  19. Hines, Terence. (2003). Pseudoscience and the Paranormal. Prometheus Books. pp. 117–145. ISBN 1-57392-979-4
  20. Robert Todd Carroll. "ESP (extrasensory perception)". Skeptic's Dictionary!. Pridobljeno dne 2007-06-23.
  21. Goldstein, Bruce E. (2010). Encyclopedia of Perception. Sage. pp. 411–413. ISBN 978-1-4129-4081-8
  22. Cogan, Robert. (1998). Critical Thinking: Step by Step. University Press of America. p. 227. ISBN 978-0761810674 "When an experiment can't be repeated and get the same result, this tends to show that the result was due to some error in experimental procedure, rather than some real causal process. ESP experiments simply have not turned up any repeatable paranormal phenomena."
  23. Wynn, Charles M; Wiggins, Arthur W. (2001). Quantum Leaps in the Wrong Direction: Where Real Science Ends... and Pseudoscience Begins. Joseph Henry Press. p. 165. ISBN 978-0309073097 "Extrasensory perception and psychokinesis fail to fulfill the requirements of the scientific method. They therefore must remain pseudoscientific concepts until methodological flaws in their study are eliminated, and repeatable data supporting their existence are obtained."
  24. Zechmeister, Eugene B; Johnson, James E. (1992). Critical Thinking: A Functional Approach. Brooks/Cole Pub. Co. p. 115. ISBN 0534165966 "There exists no good scientific evidence for the existence of paranormal phenomena such as ESP. To be acceptable to the scientific community, evidence must be both valid and reliable."
  25. Myers, David. (2004). Intuition: Its Powers and Perils. Yale University Press. p. 233. ISBN 0-300-09531-7 "After thousands of experiments, no reproducible ESP phenomenon has ever been discovered, nor has any researcher produced any individual who can convincingly demonstrate psychic ability."
  26. Stein, Gordon. (1996). The Encyclopedia of the Paranormal. Prometheus Books. p. 249. ISBN 1-57392-021-5 "Mainstream science is on the whole very dubious about ESP, and the only way that most scientists will be persuaded is by a demonstration that can be generally reproduced by neutral or even skeptical scientists. This is something that parapsychology has never succeeded in producing."