I meant to post on Mind-Reading last week, but there was a story out there that kept me from committing to it (the link is posted below.) Instead, I hoped you enjoyed the brief peak at ESP. So, let’s look at mind-reading. There’s really a good amount of complexity to this one. After pausing and thinking about the term, one could draw the conclusion that we might pay a psychologist to read our mind. And this is precisely where the term originates from; the OED (Oxford English Dictionary) provides this definition: “the act or process of discerning (or appearing to discern) what another person is thinking” (n.). This indicates that the term is really pretty new. There is an entry in the OED that shows a perfect example of how mind-reading was meant to be understood: “1882 Catholic World May 282 Historians of Mr. Froude’s stamp. are endowed with that strange gift of ‘mind-reading’, but, what is stranger still, they read the most secret thoughts of people who have been dead and buried for centuries.” So let’s take a look at who the original mind readers are, and what the author above could have possibly intended by saying that they read the “thoughts of people who have been dead and buried for centuries.”

The origins of mind reading, as established above, originate from the idea of having a mind that is separate from actions or appearance of a person. In other words, the concept of people having a conscious that is a separate space that is private and cut-off from the external world in which we all interact is essential in developing a space in which a person can “read.” In simpler terms, people had to believe that there was a text, a book of the mind, that existed for reading. The internal space was indeed explored significantly by none other than Sigmund Freud. The biggest contribution that he posited to psychology (I am speaking incredibly generally) is the emphasis he laid on a separation between the conscious and the unconscious mind. Essentially, he argued that people could be doing things (acting in ways) that they are not even aware of why (the reasoning or mental processes involved in getting a person to behave that way) they are doing them. What is interesting in looking at Freud’s examinations, is that Freud not only applied his research to his patients, but he began to see if literature would hold up to his speculations. Why literature you may ask? Well, think about it. When you go to the psychologists, he doesn’t read your mind by bonding with you like some weird Avatar creature. He stereotypically asks you about your mother. There is the connection: speech and text offer a written insight into the mind. Speech and language are how we allow people to read our minds.

So, to de-mystify this a bit, let me offer this mundane account of mind-reading. A dude comes home and, in front of his roommate, proceeds to punch a hole in the wall. The roommate is probably going to say something like, “Dude! Why’d you punch a f***ing whole in the wall?” And the aggressive guy is going to respond with something that will give some kind of insight into his inner workings. In essence, the roommate that watched the punching of the wall is attempting to read the mind to try and understand why he would punch the wall. Pretty boring, right? Essentially, psychologists try to do the same. You repeatedly cheat on your spouse? Why? How does that make you feel? They’re asking questions to try and discern a rational pattern of logical events. Now, assuming that you’re able to give a (if not still twisted and warped) logical response that follows somewhat rationally, then you can be diagnosed. The responses you give, in term themselves give insights to a particular way of acting that may be universalized. Other people may have the same reasons (again, perhaps twisted and warped, but still reasons) that can be stated rationally. If you give absolute gibberish as your response, well then your mind is inaccessible to everyone and you become bat-sh** crazy. Example: Charles Manson.  There’s a link in being able to explain yourself and being sane, and lacking that ability and being crazy. You’ll notice that Charles Manson can’t seem to explain himself very well here; how would you classify him?

Where the mundanality of the term “mind-reading” comes to us is in the exploration of technology. The earliest form of alleged mind-reading (not future reading) ability that I encountered in youth was the folks at carnivals that try to guess your weight or age. They use the information they have at hand to make an incredibly informed guess at the reality. The odds are stacked in their favor, and as we all know, the exceptions are usually pretty surprising. Let’s begin expanding the idea. If you’ve used a web-browser, the machine is attempting to read your intentions of where you want to go by reading your mind and making predictions about your spelling habits and where you’ve gone in the past. Essentially, every time you use a search engine, the computer is reading your mind. Speaking of mind reading computers…this was the article that was holding me up. I am used to computers being able to read your physical motions, but this computer is able to receive information about the way your neurons fire up and then make a prediction based on a limited number of options. Doesn’t sound as impressive as “Telepathic Computer” but it really is the same process that we use to delve into a person’s inner thoughts. Essentially, the computer is using the same process of determining information as the carnival guesser, but the computer can gather a lot more information. When going through school, I was told of machines that are mounted to the eyes in order to determine how people read texts. This does appear to take it one step further in also determining the way in which your neurons fire when experiencing text (or film or whatever). Now, what is interesting to consider is how a complete mind-reading machine, capable of predicting your speech based on your emotions, might impact philosophical concepts like free-will and fatalism. Not quite sure what next week’s topic will be, but I’ll see you then.

Extra-Sensory Perception. The term itself is somewhat questionable and offers some troubling connotations. A simple glance for synonyms on the internet yields the following busload of equally troubling terms: clairvoyance, extrasensory perception, insight, mind-reading, parapsychology, premonition, presentiment, second sight, sixth sense, spiritualism, telepathic transmission, telesthesia, and thought transference. Some of these terms offer nothing in the way of clarity, but there are some words and phrases there that offer an opening for understanding.

A workable definition for perception from the Princeton Online Dictionary defines it as “the ability to become aware of something via the senses.” The most relevant part of this definition is the final phrase: “via the senses.” People are created almost identical in terms of genetic, but they are far from alike in terms of ability. Some people are born without a sense of sight. Some people are born without a sense of hearing. Some people have a limited sense of smell. Some people can not feel even their own limbs. Some people can cognate faster than others. The simple fact is that some people are gifted with senses that are beyond the usual scope of humankind. These people, by definition of the average human with average senses, would possess extrasensory perception.

In searching for a better definition, I encountered that which was presented in the Oxford English Dictionary (OED): “Of perception: made by other means than those of the known sense-organs, e.g. by telepathy, clairvoyance, etc.; hence, received by such means; of or pertaining to the study of such perception. (extra-sensory perception is often abbreviated to E.S.P., ESP.).” Accompanying this definition, are some examples of usage that appeared in text; J. B. Rhine coined the phrase in this passage, “J. B. RHINE Extra-Sensory Perception (1935) p. xxx, Let us merely say..‘perception by means that are outside of the recognized senses’, and indicate this meaning by ‘Extra-Sensory Perception’ or E.S.P.” J.B. Rhine is a prominent figure to check out when discussing the paranormal in any detail. More information will follow in a separate blog post about this particularly interesting fellow. But the term extra-sensory perception is still quite a modern term (as you can see from above, the initial date and usage of the phrase is 1935). I think it is worth the time and trouble to see if we can find a definition that goes back a little further than that. The term that I will focus on for this post will be clairvoyance.

Clairvoyance is an older term, but still retains a pretty modern meaning. One of the definitions from the OED that I find particularly interesting states, “Keenness of mental perception, clearness of insight; insight into things beyond the range of ordinary perception.” This is completely synonymous with the definition presented above for extra-sensory perception. Here is an interesting example of the usage of clairvoyance: “1884 SYMONDS Shaks. Predec. ii. §19. 79 What may be called..clairvoyance in dramatic matters. Ibid. 81 This clairvoyance gave them insight into things beyond their own experience. Shakespeare painted much that he had never seen.” I believe that Symonds offers a very touching interpretation of what clairvoyance can be taken to stand for in the harsh world of the social norm that we find ourselves in.

In popular culture, there are all sorts of characters that have specially designed powers that are based on the criteria stated above. A few that come to mind are Daredevil, Spiderman, Master-Chief, and Wonder-Woman. But other than thinking that extra-sensory perception is just related to fiction, I feel that Symonds offers us a way to look into our world today and note those that are able to capture expressions that others miss. Essentially, I feel that the above delving into the word “extra-sensory perception” (which, mind, I know is a very shallow delve), offers us to see ESP as an appreciation of something that is often missed. In an artistic sense, this discussion should give you a reason to appreciate any time a person gives an insight that most of us would have otherwise missed, through any medium. But, I think we can also think of ways in which technology can give us a boost with perception.

The most recognizable form of extra-sensory perception that people in this generation would recognize is night-vision goggles. These goggles do exactly what the information above describes; they give a person the ability to have a perception that is beyond the norm. How do night vision goggles work? You can check this link out for the specifics, or you can trust me when I say that night-vision has amazing properties. Essentially there are two major forms of night vision: image enhancement which uses light, even lower portions of the infrared light spectrum, or thermal imaging which detects the upper portion of the infrared spectrum and displays the natural heat emitted by objects. But that is precisely what the issue is here. These magic goggles can let you see in the dark with amazing clarity. They let you perceive what was otherwise un-perceivable. Obviously, this power can put you at great advantage in a combat situation, but are there other purposes to this kind of perception? Can we expect cars to have light amplification night-driving modes in the future? Lightweight versions that fit like sunglasses and can be fitted into common frames for outdoor use? Or is this power to great for common people to posses? Is it something that we need to perceive for our armed elite?

In this example, you can see that the military uses night vision to both find their enemy more effectively, but also to avoid certain targets that otherwise would have been covered with an insane amount of lead and explosives. I don’t want to mislead anyone though, misdirection is another trick that is often employed when people have superior technologies. Since the time of the Trojan War, people have been duping other people with superior technology. Here is a picture of a wooden German tank during World War II that was meant to waste allied munitions, gasoline, and supplies in general in pursuing their destruction. This reminds me of an old Chinese proverb, “he who knows his heart mistrusts his eyes.” Other ways of extra-sensory perception can be devices that we don’t necessarily consider extrodinary anymore, but they do enhance our natural senses. An obvious device that enhances our speech is a microphone. It’s not unusual anymore, but think of the implications that this device had with it when it was first introduced. The ability to amplify the human voice so that it carried to the ears of thousands instead of hundreds. There are probably hundreds of examples, but I feel that these are a few of the places you can justly defend calling “extra-sensory perceptions.”