ESP (extrasensory perception)ESP or extrasensory perception is perception occurring independently of sight, hearing, or other sensory processes.People who have extrasensory perception are said to be psychic. Some think that everyone has ESP; others think it is a talent that only special folks have. Some think that animals (see below orplants have ESP.!he term ESP was populari"ed by #. $. %hine, who began investigating paranormal phenomena at &uke 'niversity in ()*+.ESP refers to telepathy, clairvoyance (remote viewing,precognition, and, in recent years, clairaudience.!he existence of ESP and other paranormal powers such aspsychokinesis (P,, are disputed, though systematic experimental research on these sub-ects, known collectively as psi,has been ongoing for over a century in a field known as parapsychology..ost of the evidence for ESP, however, is anecdotal. !he anecdotes consist of two parts/ the experience itself and the interpretation of it. 0 story may be true, but the attempt to make sense or give psychic meaning to the story often seems to the skeptic to exceed the bounds of reasonableness. !he following example is a classic.Tart's coffee-making coup d'tat1harles !art was making coffee when he started saying coup d'tat aloud to himself. 2etells us that it is rare for him to say a word aloud or over and over. 2e says he had no idea why he was doing this/ he doesn3t follow international news and he 4could think of nothing in my immediate past that had anything to do with coups d35tat (*66)/ p. ++; firstpublished in 40 1ase of Predictive Psi, with 1omments on 0nalytical, 0ssociative and !heoretical 7verlay4. 2e3s also a trained psychologist and knows that all of us engage in irrational behavior from time to time, and have no idea why we feel the way we do about certain things because we3ve forgotten the experience that makes certain words resonate with us. 8 know a couple who get sexually energi"ed every time they pass a road sign that reads 49reen :alley %oad.4 !hey had no idea why this happens until theyrevisited a place they hadn3t been to for over thirty years and found they were on 9reen :alley %oad, which led to the campground where they3d had had their first sexual adventure together many years earlier. (8 wondered myself why 8 described to two people !art3s explanation of his experience as involving 4overlays,4 since 8 rarely use that word to describe anything. 8t became clear to me that 8 used that particular word because !art uses it in section heads ;4analytical and associative overlay4 and 4theoretical overlay4< and it3s in the title of the paper !art wrote, mentioned in a footnote in his book The End of Materialism, the inspiration for these few paragraphs on wild andcra"y interpretations of the mundane.8 certainly have no idea why the expression coup d'tat popped into !art3s head while hewas making coffee that day, but 8 could come up with do"ens of possibilities. =one of them, however, could come close to the imaginative adventure !art went on in his attempt to make sense out it. (.aybe he unconsciously overheard the expression on a radio news report while driving in his car. .aybe he heard a pigeon coo and it reminded his subconscious of the word he heard on the radio or in the conversation of a passerby..aybe he inadvertently saw the name on the envelopebefore the expression popped into his head. .aybe he was subconsciously expressing a wish to overthrow the dean of his college. .aybe.!he day after his coup d'tat experience !art found a letter in his office mailbox from a .rs. 1oudetat. 'ncanny> !art thinks so. 2e calls it 4a clear example of what we might call predictive psi phenomena.4 ?hat follows is an excursion of the imagination that tookme back to my college days when 8 first read the exotic interpretations of dreams and experiences by psychoanalysts. !wo things stand out about those interpretations/ they were extremely farfetched and fanciful, and they were unfalsifiable. 83m not going to try to prove !art3s interpretation is wrong because that would be impossible. 83ll present his interpretation. !he reader can -udge how plausible it is.!art gave immediate significance to the proximity of his coup d'tat experience and the name of his correspondent, who is the mother of one of !art3s former students. #ung might have seen the events as an example of synchronicity. ?e rule out coincidencethemoment we invest an experience with deep meaning and significance. ?hy some of us find an experience trivial or mundane, while others find the same kind of experience deeply meaningful and significant, is something that 83ll leave to others to try to explain.!art says he is 4sure4 that .rs. 1oudetat was thinking of him and her letter to him 4at thetime the phrase 3coup d'tat3 popped into my mind.4 2e says that 4it was a kind of coup d'tat on her part to sei"e control like that from the usual processes governing my mind4(*66)/ p. @). 2e also writes/ 48 might also speculate that my psychic perception of the imminent and somewhat critical letter from .rs. 1oudetat constituted my own psychological coup d'tat in defending myself against possible guilt.4 8n her letter, .rs. 1 implies that !art3s class on altered states of consciousness had something to do with triggering anxiety attacks in her son and that !art should make sure that troubled students know how to get help.!art speculates that .rs. 13s need to communicate with him provided the power or forcethat 4resulted in my unusual behavior.4 2e also says/ 4!his line of reasoning seems adeAuate on a common sense psychological level, and is probably mostly true.4 !his view seems to imply that every actual attempt to communicate in ordinary ways (by letter, speech, etc. is accompanied by psychic vibrations sent out with the same purpose.!art writes/ 48 believe the associations of military dictatorships, cheering crowds, and thoughts about efficient and disciplined organi"ations taking over when government failsrepresentanalytical and associative overlay following my initial psi impression of the word 3coup d3etat3.4 !art brings in the concept of overlays to explain why the initial associations he made (and most people might make with the idea of a coup d3etat occur along with the telepathic impressions.!art must have known he was going down an interpretation lane traveled mostly by parapsychologists and psychoanalysts because he gave an account of his overlays andimpressions to #ules Eisenbud. Eisenbud is the psychoanalyst and parapsychologist who wrote a book about a 1hicago bellhop named !ed Serios, who claimed he could make images appear on Polaroid film -ust by thinking of an image. Eisenbud encouraged !art to consider another kind of overlay, theoretical overlay. !his leads !art to consider the possibility that maybe he had some unresolved anger and guilt feelings about the student with anxiety problems. !his 3lingering unconscious residue4 of anger and guilt 4might have sensiti"ed me to psychically perceiving information....4 .aybe, thinks !art, he was putting a positive bias on his interpretation of the experience by 4manifesting an altruistic theoretical overlay in analy"ing the case.4Binally, !art relates his coup d3etat experience to his attempt to do some psychic healing, 4using shamanistic methods,4 on a friend who was about to have surgery. 48 wonder if some part of me might have helped cause the coup d3etat incident so that my own faith in psychic abilities might be strengthened, and thus retrospectively potentiate my attempts at healing my friend and strengthening his faith.4 Sure, it3s all possible, and it can3t be falsified, but how plausible is this account> !art wards off criticism of such anecdotes by skeptics by claiming that we consider them to be -ust stories, probably inaccurate and incomplete, or lies. $ut it3s not the stories that are the problem here/ it3s the fanciful, unfalsifiable interpretive overlays that need to be called into Auestion. Such interpretations as this one by !art seem indistinguishable from cases of apophenia.(0ctually, there is one more thing. 8f !art is truly as openCminded as he seems, he should admit that it is possible that his experience was not telepathic, but that #aweh, !hor, or Deusdirectly implanted the expression coup d'tat in his brain. .aybe the gods knew what was in his mailbox and how he3d likely react if they got him repeating an apparently meaningless expression. .aybe he experienced a divine spark, intended to ignite a bla"e in his brain that would lead to a volcanic stream of consciousness that would leave the gods howling. Eou can3t prove that the gods aren3t tricksters and en-oy pulling one over on a parapsychologist -ust for fun. !his explanation seems -ust as plausible as that .rs. 1 was trying to pull a coup on !art or that he was trying to pull a coup on himself. 8n fact, !art brings up this possibility himself in his chapter on psychokinesis in The End of Materialism. 4Suppose,4 he writes, 4there is, as we consider in this book, a spiritual reality, perhaps with spiritual beings of some sort existing in it> ;sic< 0re the desires and Aualities of these spiritual beings part of our experiments also> 8s the idea of being 3teased3 with inconsistent but unignorable psi results more than -ust a metaphor>4dismissal by skeptics$oth the anecdotal and laboratory evidence for ESP are usually dismissed by skeptics for one or more of the following/ mistaking ordinary perception for psychic ability;not giving alternative hypotheses a chance (i.e., not looking for or seriously considering physical causesfor apparent psi events; sleep paralysis;lack of understanding of probability and wishful thinking leading to farfetched interpretation of personal experience of coincidental events (apophenia;dubious methods such as optional starting and stopping and shotgunning;sensory leakage;experimenter effect;not giving the null hypothesis a chance (assuming that if x happens it is evidence of psi and then when x happens claiming that they now have evidence of psi/the psi assumption;dubious concepts that smack of special pleading, e.g.,displacement, analytical and associative overlay, psiCconducive state, psiCmissing, psiCfocus assumption, and psychicdrift;pathological science;trickery by children or mentalists;cold reading and sub-ective validation;selective thinking and confirmation bias;shoehorning, retrospective clairvoyance, andretrospective falsification;gullibility and selfCdeception;fraud by researchers and cheating by sub-ects being tested for psychic ability.ESP in dogs!he belief in psychic dogs seems to be popular among true believers in the paranormal. !he following case is typical of those cited as proof of ESP involving dogs. !he dog in Auestion is a terrier who has achieved fame as having ESP as exhibited by his ability to know when his owner, Pam Smart, is deciding to come home when she is away shopping or on some other business. !he dog3s name is #aytee. 2e has been featured on several television programs in 0ustralia, the 'nited States, and England, where he resides with Pam and her parents, who were the first to perceive the dog3s psychic abilities. !hey observed that the dog would run to the window facing the street at precisely the moment Pam was deciding to come home from several miles away. (2ow the parents knew the precise moment Pam was deciding to come home is unclear. Parapsychologist %upert SheldrakeFwho has validated a telepathic parrot in ascientific experimentFinvestigated and declared the dog is truly psychic. !wo scientists,&r %ichard ?iseman and .atthew Smith of the 'niversity of 2ertfordshire, tested the dog under controlled conditions. !he scientists synchroni"ed their watches and set video cameras on both the dog and its owner. 0las, several experimental tries later, they had to conclude that the dog wasn3t doing what had been alleged. 2e went to the window and did so Auite freAuently, but only once did he do so near the exact time his master was preparing to come home and that case was dismissed because the dog was clearly going to the window after hearing a car pull up outside his domicile. Bour experiments were conducted and the results were published in the British Journal of Psychology(@)/GHI, ())@..uch of the belief in ESP is based upon apparently unusual events that seem inexplicable.2owever, we should not assume that every event in the universe can be explained. =or should we assume that what is inexplicable reAuires a paranormal (or supernatural explanation. .aybe an event can3t be explained because there is nothing to explain. .ost ESP claims do not get tested, but parapsychologists have attempted to verify the existence of ESP under controlled conditions. Some, like 1harles !art, &ean %adin, 9ary Schwart", and %aymond .oody, claim success; others, such as Susan #. $lackmore, %ichard ?iseman, and 1hris Brench claim that years of trying to find experimental proof of ESP have failed to turn up any proof of indisputable, repeatable psychic powers.&efenders of psi claim that the gan"feld experiments, the 1803s remote viewing experiments, and attempts to influence randomi"ers at Princeton Engineering 0nomalies %esearch have produced evidence of ESP. (Please follow the links for more details and criticisms of those experiments. Psychologists who have thoroughly investigated parapsychological studies, like#im 0lcock (())6, *66I, %ay 2yman (()@), &avid .arks (*666, and Susan $lackmore (()@6, ())H, have concluded that where positive results have been found, the work was fraught with Auestionable assumptions, lack of randomi"ation, serious problems with controls (no use of control groups or controls of any kind, irrelevant controls, statistical legerdemain,lack of replication, or fraud..y opinion of the scientific evidence for psi is given in my 4Short 2istory of Psi %esearch4 and my reviews of &ean %adin3s onscious !niverse and Entangled Minds, and 9ary Schwart"3s"fterlife Experiments# 8 have no reason to think that fraud is more likely in psi research than in any other scientific field. 1heating is a human problem, not a uniAue psiCresearcher problem. 1heats have been exposed in all the sciences and social sciences. !he problem is not uniAue to parapsychology. !here are many problems with psi research, but researcher fraud is not a particularly important one. .ost of the significant cheating in parapsychology research has been done by those being tested. Bor more details, 8 refer the reader to the material mentioned at the start of this paragraph.See also dermoCoptical perception, dream, extraordinary human function, medium, mentalist,psychic surgery, retrocognition,retrospective falsification, sixth sense, s5ance, the SoalC9oldney experiment, Dener cards, and 4?hat8f &ean %adin is %ight>4 by %obert !. 1arrollfurther readingreader comments (psi)books and articles0lcock, #ames E. (()@( # Parapsychology$ %cience or Magic& Pergamon Press.0lcock, #ames E. %cience and %upernature$ a ritical "ppraisal of Parapsychology($uffalo, =.E./ Prometheus $ooks, ())6.0lcock, #ames E. (())H 4!he $elief Engine,4%'eptical (n)uirer . ()(I/ *HHC*JI.0lcock, #ames. *66I. 49ive the =ull 2ypothesis a 1hance,4 in Psi *ars + ,etting To ,rips *ith the Paranormal. ed. #ames 0lcock, #ean $urns and 0nthony Breeman. 8mprint 0cademic, pp. *)CH6.0vailable online here.$em, &aryl #. and 1harles 2onorton (())G. 4&oes Psi Exist>4 Psychological Bulletin , :ol. ((H, =o. (, GC(@.$lackmore, S. #. (()@6. 4!he extent of selective reporting of ESP gan"feld studies,4 European Journal of Parapsychology I/I , *(IK**6.$lackmore, Susan. ()@+. 0 %eport of a :isit to 1arl Sargent3s Laboratory. Journal of the%ociety for Psychical -esearch#HG (@JC()@.$lackmore, Susan. (*66(. 4?hat 1an the Paranormal !each 's 0bout 1onsciousness>4%'eptical (n)uirer , .archM0pril.$lackmore, Susan (*66I.onsciousness$ "n (ntroduction . 7xford 'niversity Press.1hristopher, .ilbourne.E%P, %eers . Psychics(!homas E. 1rowell 1o. ()+6.1hristopher, .ilbourne. (()+H.Mediums, Mystics . the /ccult . !homas E. 1rowell 1ompany.1ole, %ichard. 4'.S. didn3t foresee faults in psychic spies program,4 0ssociated Press, %acramento Bee, =ov. *), ())H, 0*.Bra"ier, ,endrick. editor, %cience onfronts the Paranormal($uffalo, =.E./ Prometheus $ooks, ()@J.Bra"ier, ,endrick. editor. The 0undredth Mon'ey and /ther Paradigms of the Paranormal, ($uffalo, =.E./ Prometheus $ooks, ())(.9ardner, .artin.1ads and 1allacies in the 2ame of %cience(=ew Eork/ &over Publications, 8nc., ()H+.9ardner, .artin.%cience$ ,ood, Bad and Bogus($uffalo, =.E./ Prometheus $ooks, ()@(.9ardner, .artin.0o3 2ot To Test a Psychic$ Ten 4ears of -emar'able Experiments *ith -eno3ned lairvoyant Pavel %tepane'($uffalo, =.E./ Prometheus $ooks, ()@).9ardner, .artin./n the *ild %ide(0mherst, =.E./ Prometheus $ooks, ())*.9ordon, 2enry. Extrasensory 5eception$ E%P, Psychics, %hirley Mac6aine, ,hosts, !fos ($uffalo, =E/ Prometheus $ooks, ()@+.2ansel, 1. E. .. The %earch for Psychic Po3er$ E%P and Parapsychology -evisited($uffalo, =.E./ Prometheus $ooks, ()@).2ansen, 9eorge P. (*66(.The Tric'ster and the Paranormal. Nlibris 1orporation.2ines, !erence. Pseudoscience and the Paranormal ($uffalo, =E/ Prometheus $ooks, *66I.2yman, %ay. The Elusive 7uarry $ a %cientific "ppraisal of Psychical -esearch($uffalo,=.E./ Prometheus $ooks, ()@).2yman, %ay. (())H. 4Evaluation of Program on 0nomalous .ental Phenomena,4 Journal of %cientific Exploration, :olume (6 =umber (.,eene, .. Lamar. The Psychic Mafia(Prometheus, ())+.Luckhurst, %oger. *66* # The (nvention of Telepathy$ 89:;+84 British Journal of Psychology, @)/GHI, ())@.?iseman, %ichardand 1iarQn 7R,eeffe. *66G. 4!esting 0lleged .ediumship/ .ethods and %esults,4 by(paper presented to the Parapsychological 1onvention.Dusne,Leonard and ?arren #ones."nomalistic Psychology$ " %tudy of Magical Thin'ing*nd edition. (Lawrence Erlbaum 0ssoc. ()@).websites=ew 0nalyses %aise &oubts 0bout %eplicability of ESP Bindingsby Scott 7. Lilienfeld, %'eptical (n)uirer, =ovM&ec ()))!he !elepathic !erriernews stories=euroimaging Bails !o &emonstrate ESP 8s %eal0ccording to a *66H 9allup poll, G(S of 0mericans believe in ESP. !his is a decline from surveys done during the last decade of the *6th century that found belief in ESP steady atH6S.Last updated (*CSepC*6(G