The main problem with experiments in telepathy falling short of producing adequate results is due to said experiments being based on misconceptions about telepathy rather than the reality.
Contrary to popular belief, telepathy is not mind reading. It’s communication, and must be treated as such. A person can’t just simply hold a shape in one’s mind and expect the other party to somehow know what it is. This doesn’t work because it’s not communicating it’s an attempt at mind reading.
Telepathy is composed of a communication between a sender and receiver. Not unlike a conversation where one person actively speaks and the other passively listens. There is a direction of flow of information. When one person is speaking and the other attempts to speak the flow is disrupted and of course if both parties are listening there is no flow at all.
In telepathy there is the speaker known as the sender and the listener known as the receiver.
Another misconception is that if the burden is on the receiver to get an accurate result or to accurately describe the sent information. This is false, the burden of course is on the sender to effectively send information. If in a conversation the speaker is unclear then it is by no means the fault of the listener for not hearing correctly.
It’s up to the sender to insure that the information is properly communicated to the receiver. The receiver should never be concerned about results. This is for two reasons the first is it’s not their job to be responsible for the transmission of information. The second reason is if the receiver is focused on the result then they are dividing their attention and not as focused on the information being sent. This is much like a student who daydreams during a lecture, he misses vital points of information because his mind is preoccupied.
The sender must remain focused on making sure the information is clear and understandable. The sender is the active party who must visualize and formulate and produce a clear image, feeling, or thought. When the sender doesn’t do this it’s like a lazy speaker who mumbles instead of using clear language and easily decipherable language.
Although the role of the receiver is passive it is not without effort. The receiver can’t allow their mind to wander or their imagination to run and cloud their perception with their own ideas for what the information could be. They can’t be guessing because to guess is an active imagination and not a passive listening. Like mentioned above the receiver can not be daydreaming about what the speaker could be wanting to say but must be paying close attention to what is being said. The receiver must keep his mind blank and open yet focused on the senders information and not imaginations, guesses, curiosities or outside influences that could distract from the information it’s self.
This research is not about proving or disproving the existence of mental telepathy. In this research we make the assumption that it does in fact exist. To prove or disprove the existence of verbal communication amongst individuals who do not know how to verbally communicate or prove or disprove the existence of verbal communication between two individuals who speak completely different languages would be a useless and futile endeavor. Leading to a type one error or false negative inevitably. The same is true of telepathic communication.
Both parties must be well aware of how to communicate and be speaking the same language.
For this reason the research is based on the assumption that telepathic communication is possible and the emphasis is placed on developing the appropriate methods, and techniques or common language from which communication can take place.
The existence of telepathic communication presents it’s self just as the existence of verbal language becomes self evident when both parties can effectively speak and listen, and communication takes place.
Let us for a moment imagine what it was like for early hominids first developing language. The idea that verbal communication could be achieved was not even a working concept in the mind of the primate. The only evidence of verbal communication was grunts and sounds that over time became more complex and well defined enough to be recognized as words that represented concepts or ideas. The constructs had not yet been formed. Language was an evolutionary process. We must accept these facts about telepathic communication as they had applied to verbal communication. However we do have one advantage that early hominids didn’t have and that is the preconception that such a communication can happen. And so the early hominids grunting and unaware that they could one day develop and evolve into something with a verbal language differ from us in that we are aware that we can in the future develop our grunts into a language. We know that by focusing on our grunts and sounds and advancing and developing them with greater complexity and sophistication we can take control of the evolutionary process and create language something that early humans would have never even conceived of.
I invite those interested in to follow this thread and explore the possibilities with us. In another thread I had given a format for the practice of telepathy in the form of a game. Since the results were phenomenal I will do the same here.
