Read about January's Maverick Milestones, see the announcement of our new quarterly webinar series, including information about the Remote Viewing Unlocked! A “Try It Yourself!” Workshop coming March 19, and the Member Spotlight interview with Daching Piao.

Read the Full Newsletter

In today’s hyper-polarized political and intellectual landscapes, the idea of ‘winning’ dominates debates, discussions, and even research. This pursuit of victory often overshadows the true purpose of inquiry—the search for legitimate knowledge. When positions are framed solely as pro or con, individuals risk oversimplifying complex issues and undermining the collaborative process necessary for genuine understanding. This sort of dichotomous thinking is flawed, whereas a genuine a shift toward truth-seeking can transform discourse.

The Fallacy of Binary Thinking in Research

Binary thinking, where debates are framed as a contest between opposing sides, reduces nuanced issues to oversimplified arguments. For instance, in discussions and published papers on sensitive topics like anthropomorphic climate change and receptivity to ‘misinformation or conspiratorial thinking,’ the focus often shifts to proving the ‘deniers’ wrong rather than collaboratively addressing important uncertainties or exploring innovative solutions (Oreskes, 2018). This adversarial approach fosters confirmation bias, where individuals prioritize evidence supporting their position while ignoring contradictory data (Nickerson, 1998).

When researchers or debaters aim to ‘win,’ they may prioritize persuasive rhetoric over intellectual rigor. This mindset can lead to cherry-picking evidence or manipulating interpretations to fit a narrative, a phenomenon seen in controversial fields like nutrition science or political economics (Ioannidis, 2005). By contrast, framing debates as opportunities to refine collective understanding allows for more productive and ethical inquiry.

The Philosophy of Truth-Seeking

Truth-seeking, as opposed to ‘winning,’ requires humility and open-mindedness. Karl Popper’s philosophy of falsifiability underscores the importance of actively seeking to disprove one’s hypotheses rather than defending them at all costs (Popper, 2002). This approach aligns with the scientific process, which traditionally values iterative refinement over definitive conclusions.

Moreover, truth-seeking emphasizes the process over the outcome. In fields like medicine, for example, randomized controlled trials are designed not to confirm a predetermined hypothesis but to rigorously test it, regardless of whether the results align with researchers' expectations (Straus et al., 2018). By prioritizing truth over victory, researchers contribute to cumulative knowledge that benefits society, as well as the scientific enterprise.

The Psychological Pitfalls of Playing to Win

Psychologically, the drive to ‘win’ fosters adversarial mindsets, eroding trust and cooperation. Studies in conflict resolution suggest that framing disagreements as zero-sum games exacerbates polarization and reduces the likelihood of consensus (Fisher et al., 1991). In contrast, adopting a collaborative mindset encourages empathy and the exploration of shared goals, fostering environments where truth is more likely to emerge. Whether or not disparate communities inside and outside of frontier science fields will ever forge powerful alliances in the shared pursuit for knowledge remains to be seen (see e.g., Houran, 2022; Houran & Schofield, 2023).

Toward a Culture of Collaborative Inquiry

Creating a social and intellectual culture that values truth over victory requires systemic changes. For instance, educational systems must prioritize critical thinking and intellectual humility over rote memorization and competition (Paul & Elder, 2021); media platforms should reward balanced, evidence-based reporting rather than sensationalist headlines that push government propaganda or cater to ideological echo chambers, and academia needs to balance incentives for publishing ground-breaking results with rewards for replicability and methodological rigor.

The Bottom Line

You can only lose if you’re playing to win—this adage reminds us that the pursuit of victory, rather than truth, is a misguided and even counterproductive endeavor in intellectual and societal discourse. By moving beyond combative or tribal mindsets and instead embracing the complexity of truth-seeking, individuals and institutions can foster deeper understanding, greater collaboration, and more meaningful progress. The pursuit of truth is not a competition, but a shared responsibility and journey—one that we must embark on together in good faith and a sense of adventure.

References

Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1991). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. Houghton Mifflin.

Houran, J. (2022). Editorial: An introduction and mission of building bridges to reach the unknown . Journal of Scientific Exploration, 36, 3–7. https://doi.org/10.31275/20222439

Houran, J., & Schofield, M. (2023). Championing “exchange and cooperation” efforts in frontier science: Epilogue to the Special Issue. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 37, 776–786. https://doi.org/10.31275/20233207

Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Medicine, 2(8), Article e124. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175

Oreskes, N. (2018). Why trust science? Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvfjczxx

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2021). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life (4^th ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.

Popper, K. (2002). The logic of scientific discovery (2^nd ed.) Routledge.

Straus, S. E., Glasziou, P., Richardson, W. S., & Haynes, R. B. (2018). Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM (5^th ed.). Elsevier.

Holiday parties can’t stop frontier science! Enjoy the latest issue with its varied array of topics:

• Jeff Mishlove’s Guest Editorial about a new parapsychology education program.
• New findings on scopaesthesia (the sense of being stared at), reincarnation-type phenomena, and random event generator (REG) effects at Egyptian sacred sites
• Thought leadership on biological and spacetime correlates of higher states of consciousness, plasma ball phenomena
• Book reviews about UAPs and government programs, remote viewing, and freedom of speech
• And Bill Bengston’s special obituary for SSE Founder Peter A. Sturrock

Read the issue:

https://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse/issue/current

We eagerly invite scholars and researchers to support SSE’s Journal of Scientific Exploration (JSE) as peer reviewers. Contribute your expertise to support rigorous research, advance knowledge in frontier science, help to shape impactful scholarship.

What We’re Looking For:

• A passion for high-quality research and academic integrity.
• Expertise in your field, with experience in research and publication.
• Commitment to providing constructive, balanced feedback.

Your Benefits:

• Expand your academic network.
• Enhance your reviewing skills and stay updated on the latest research.
• Receive recognition for your contributions.

To join our esteemed team of reviewers, please send the JSE’s Editor-in-Chief your areas of interest and expertise today at: editor@scientificexploration.org

by William Bengston

Peter Sturrock, founding President of the SSE, passed away peacefully in his home, surrounded by his friends and family, on August 12, 2024, at the age of 100. Peter was a leader among those rare scientists who made major contributions in both conventional and non-conventional science.  On the conventional side, Sturrock was known worldwide for his profound contributions to the fields of astrophysics, plasma physics, and solar research.  He continued that work until the very end of his life as a distinguished physicist and emeritus professor at Stanford University.

On the less conventional side, Peter, along with peers such as the late Bob Jahn, was among the visionary founders of the SSE. In 1981 they called for a new, generalist society that could function as a magnet for scientists and researchers doing rigorous scholarly work in areas we now label as anomalous.  These early founders pushed back against the balkanization of knowledge acquisition which prohibited scholars from veering too far from orthodoxy.  Peter and the founders recognized that without a means to network and share ideas, little progress could be made in areas shunned by traditional fields. And so the Society for Scientific Exploration was born to sponsor regular conferences, and the Journal of Scientific Exploration was soon after founded as a peer-reviewed scholarly journal.

We wouldn’t be here without Peter.

A simple recitation of his many accomplishments, however impressive, doesn’t grasp the profound influence he had on generations of scholars, both conventional and not so conventional.  Some personal anecdotes: I first met Peter in 1999 while attending my first SSE conference. After giving a presentation to the group of luminaries assembled, and having no history with them, I was somewhat uncertain what to expect.  Soon after I finished, both Peter (and Bob Jahn) approached me with nothing but encouragement and inquired what they could do to help. 

That offer never wavered over the quarter century I knew Peter. When I’d be in California we’d try to meet at a restaurant, or at his home in Palo Alto.  Sometimes he’d already assembled a group of people who were interested in providing various types of support for me.  I would find myself, with his encouragement, giving a spontaneous presentation of some recent work.  He obviously took pleasure in being a magnet for scholarly discussions.

When we were at an SSE conference in the US or Europe, we’d try to spend some time in private conversation, catching up with whatever we were working on.  I’d be interested in his recent thoughts on UAPs, or the Shakespeare authorship question, or his conventional research on dark matter or neutrinos or whatever.  While excited about his ongoing research, he was equally interested in whatever I was working on.

We are pleased to share the abstracts of all the presentations from our recent conference (online event) with SSE's membership.  Please see the "Members Only" section of the website. 

Thanks to John Kruth (Editor-in-Chief), the Journal of Parapsychology (JP) will publish these abstracts in JP's forthcoming "conference issue." 

Two of our featured presentations at the upcoming 2024 conference.

See the full conference schedule.  Don't miss out,register today!

After-Death Communication with Cell Phones: Investigating Their Nature and Relationship with Psychological Measures

Elena Padilla, a student of Dr. Imants Baruss, and 2024 graduate from King’s University College.  

Ms. Padilla investigated After-Death Communications (ADC) with cell phones and examined their relationship with psychological well-being factors. Survey advertisements were shared with groups including the Forever Family Foundation and Instrumental Trans-communication Collective. Results revealed that 56 out of 118 participants reported experiencing an ADC with a cell phone. Participants scored higher than norms on personal growth and openness/intellect measures. Participants regarded their ADC experiences as real and meaningful connections with the deceased.

According to Elena, she has, “developed an interest in end-of-life care and a passion for helping others through their grief journey”.  Kudos Elena for an interesting study and best wishes in your future career!

Psychic Hacking: Using Remote Viewing to Steal Computer Data

Scotch Wichmann, cybersecurity expert at Meta, with an M.S. in Cybersecurity from the University of Maryland.  He is also a paranormal researcher with a Ph.D. in Metaphysical Parapsychology from the University of Sedona.

Declassified documents from the U.S. Government’s Stargate project show that Remote Viewers can accurately describe foreign military installations, missile silos, lost aircraft, planetary features not yet discovered by NASA, and locations of people from thousands of miles away. One question went unanswered, however: could Remote Viewing also be used to steal data from supposedly secure computers? In this talk, I'll present exploratory experiment results demonstrating that "psychic hacking" is possible. Following established Stargate research protocols described by Puthoff, Targ, and others, I led a double-blind experiment hosted on the Internet over a 2-week period that allowed participants to try using their psychic powers to describe picture, video, ATM PIN, and passphrase targets stored on laptop computers located in Los Angeles.  146 remote participants from 10 countries generated 584 experiment rounds. Successful participants bypassed security defenses to describe many unique details about the targets from miles away. Statistically significant results (alpha=0.05) were observed for picture rounds (p=0.000597, ES=1.075) and video rounds (p=0.000911, ES=1.131). ATM PIN results were significant for 3 digits in any order (p=4.118×10^-6, ES=0.788) and 2 digits in any order (p=7.84×10^-6, ES=0.763). The experiment's security implications are far-reaching, since physical distance, attenuating structures, visual shielding, network air gaps, data obfuscation, strict file permissions, and password protection failed to prevent data theft.  

When Scotch is not working to protect the data of 4 billion users in cloud and AI environments at Meta, he is doing cutting edge research, exploring the intersection between clairvoyance and data privacy, and the potential for cybercriminals with psychic abilities.  Welcome Scotch – we are thrilled to have you with us! 

Two of our featured presentations at the upcoming 2024 conference.

See the full conference schedule.  Don't miss out, register today!

Reports of Non-Physical Beings Assisting in Reiki Sessions

Helane Wahbeh, PhD, Director of Research at the Institute of Noetic Sciences and an adjunct assistant professor in the Department of Neurology at Oregon Health & Science University.

Across diverse cultures, the belief in non-physical beings plays crucial roles in both illness and healing. In a previous study, participants reported the presence of non-physical beings during energy medicine sessions.  To evaluate the perceived presence and characteristics of non-physical beings, six seers observed 40 Reiki sessions, and quantitative and qualitative data were collected from the seers, participants, and Reiki practitioners. All sessions had reports of apparent non-physical beings, including angels, spirit guides, and possession/spirit attachments. The reported entities mainly aided the healing process, but some were also linked to pathology. The findings highlight the potential importance of ostensible non-physical entities in Reiki, warranting further investigation.

Dr. Wahbeh is best known for her book and research on the Science of Channeling.  As part of that research, she has, “come out of the channeling closet” about her own and her family’s channeling experiences, breaking barriers to the discussion of trance channeling and the science to study these exceptional abilities.  Bravo Helane!

Paranormal Folklore in Western Georgia: A Critical Narrative Analysis of Apparitions

Jacob W. Glazier, PhD, Assistant Professor of Psychology at the University of West Georgia, and Lead Editor of the tri-yearly publication Mindfield: The Bulletin of the Parapsychological Association.

This study employs Critical Narrative Analysis (CNA) to examine local ghost stories through the lens of folklore studies, situating these narratives within a broader cultural and academic context. The methodological approach involves analyzing the interplay between individual narratives and dominant societal discourses. We collected, using an anonymous Qualtrics survey, ten accounts from individuals in the Western Georgia area. The analysis revealed four primary discourses: (1) psychological misperception, (2) scientism, (3) privileged access to subjectivity, and (4) prototypical paranormal explanations. These were countered by the participants in five significant ways: (1) the extension of consciousness across space and time, (2) lucid perceptual experience, (3) the presence of anomalous phenomena, (4) adjudication to story and hearsay, and (5) consensual or repeated verification. These counter-discourses challenge mainstream understandings of reality and push back against normative accounts while highlighting the critical potential of folklore. Our research suggests that many people have exceptional experiences (ExEs), which then become assimilated into their prevailing cultural understanding of the world.

Dr. Glazier is Editor of the recent book, Paranormal Ruptures, which takes a critical approach to exceptional experiences, realizing that if some of these exceptional experiences are true, both experiencers and Society will need to adjust core understanding of our Reality.  

The Augustine-Braude Bigelow Survival Debate: A Postmortem and Prospects for Future Directions (in press)

We are excited to announce that Dr. Michael Sudduth―noted philosopher and expert on theories of evidence and the justification of belief (including general and legal epistemology)―spent more than a year preparing an extensive analysis that will soon appear in JSE’s 2024 fall issue. He meticulously studied the published exchange between skeptic Keith Augustine and sympathetic researchers Stephen Braude, Imants Barušs, Arnaud Delorme, Dean Radin, and Helané Wahbeh on the merits and meanings of the evidence presented by winning entries in the 2021 BICS essay contest on the survival hypothesis (see: JSE’s 2022 fall issue).

Sudduth's aim was not to declare a winner to that spirited debate but instead to assess candidly the strengths and weaknesses of the respective arguments in order to extract key learnings and propose recommendations to advance future research in this domain. This was no small feat, so readers can expect a massive (but still a usefully integrative) summary of many foundational issues of evidence and inference with which new students and seasoned researchers alike are encouraged to familiarize themselves. In fact, we think his report will make ideal reading for serious-minded book clubs or discussion groups in parapsychology and consciousness studies.

Scopaesthesia and the Nature of Visual Perception Rupert Sheldrake, PhD

The sense of being stared at, or scopaesthesia, is well known; surveys show that up to 95% of people have experienced it.  It is also common in animals. Numerous randomized tests have shown that people can detect when they are being stared at from behind. Not surprisingly, some people are better at this than others, and children under the age of 9 seem more sensitive than adults.  This sensitivity can be trained, as in martial arts programs, and a new app enables anyone interested to try and improve their own abilities.  Recent studies have shown that scopaesthesia is usually directional; the person or animal stared at turns around and looks directly at the starer.  It also seems to work much better when coupled to direct vision than when people’s images are looked at on screens and in mirrors.  Scopaesthesia implies that influences move outward from the eyes of the looker and are somehow detected by the person or animal looked at, but no one yet knows how this happens.  This familiar phenomenon has profound implications for our understanding of the nature of vision and of extended minds.

Rupert Sheldrake, PhD is a biologist and author of nine books and more than 100 papers in peer reviewed journals.  After studying natural sciences at Cambridge and history and philosophy of science at Harvard.  He worked on plant development for his PhD at Cambridge University. He was subsequently a Fellow of Clare College, Cambridge and a Research Fellow of the Royal Society.  He was then Principal Plant Physiologist at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) in Hyderabad, India.  From 2005 to 2010 he was the Perrott-Warrick senior researcher, funded from Trinity College, Cambridge for research on unexplained human and animal abilities.  He is a Fellow of the Institute of Noetic Sciences, in California, of Schumacher College, in Devon, England and of the Temenos Academy, in London.  His website is sheldrake.org.