Robert G. Jahn founded a Princeton laboratory that is closing after almost 30 years of disputed research on telekinesis and the ability of the mind to influence machines. Brenda Dunne is the laboratory’s manager.  Extra Sensory Perception is one of those wacky arenas where the proponents are fanatical in their convictions and opponents are completely dismissive in their attitudes of disdain and rejection. But my alma mater, the Princeton University campus, is a surprising location for the attempt to gain credibility for mind over matter issues.

Certainly the scientists and administration have been embarrassed over the years at this connection:

“It’s been an embarrassment to science, and I think an embarrassment for Princeton,” said Robert L. Park, a University of Maryland physicist who is the author of “Voodoo Science: The Road From Foolishness to Fraud.” “Science has a substantial amount of credibility, but this is the kind of thing that squanders it.”

Just a cursory introduction to some of their findings over the years does not seem that impressive to me:

In one of PEAR’s standard experiments, the study participant would sit in front of an electronic box the size of a toaster oven, which flashed a random series of numbers just above and just below 100. Staff members instructed the person to simply “think high” or “think low” and watch the display. After thousands of repetitions — the equivalent of coin flips — the researchers looked for differences between the machine’s output and random chance.

Analyzing data from such trials, the PEAR team concluded that people could alter the behavior of these machines very slightly, changing about 2 or 3 flips out of 10,000. If the human mind could alter the behavior of such a machine, Dr. Jahn argued, then thought could bring about changes in many other areas of life — helping to heal disease, for instance, in oneself and others.

That seems like a gigantic leap of faith to me. If they were so convinced of the validity of their results you would think that they would not have to rely on generous donations from wealthy friends to fund their research. They could just sit at the craps tables and influence the roll of the dice in a favorable direction! (But I guess they could argue that their mental wishes would be canceled out by the house rooting in the contrary direction).

Apparently the standard industry journals have been equally unimpressed. They have turned down repeated submissions of research papers and data findings from the PEAR team (the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research laboratory). One editor famously told Dr. Jahn that he would consider a paper “if you can telepathically communicate it to me.” That is not to say that the movement is without loyal followers:

And many people, in and out of science, joined what Ms. Dunne called the PEAR Tree, a kind of secret society of people interested in the paranormal, she said. Many PEAR Tree members who are science faculty members will not reveal themselves publicly, Ms. Dunne said.

I think I will stick with the more academically credible Apple Tree — the product of Apple Academy (in our own homegrown homeschooling context). I have no problem advocating the biblical model that prayer changes things. But I would not want to approach this subject from the humanistic vantage point of scientific repeatability but from the spiritual vantage point of divine sovereignty — God is in His heaven and can do whatever He pleases — including answering the prayers of His children.

Related posts:

1. Harvard Turns Crimson As Princeton University Ranked #1
2. Chevy Chase Bombs In Disgraceful Manner As Keynote Speaker At Princeton University Class Day
3. “Top Ten” – Reasons Gifts To Princeton University Have Dropped So Sharply
4. Princeton Footnotes March Concert Captured on YouTube
5. Princeton Students Organize Filibuster Against Senator Frist