Skip to main content

The Telepathy Game

June 17, 2012
The Telepathy Game
Suppose telepathy is possible; that is, human minds can communicate using some mechanism not among the known senses.   There have been lots of suggestions for the mechanism of information transmission and reception, from brain waves of some form, to electromagnetic waves, to quantum effects, and more.  Let’s agree to ignore this part of the story, and simply assume some type of telepathic communication exists in some type of people under some types of circumstances.  We are proposing a thought experiment, something the physicists like to run.

What we consider here are those that may be senders, receivers, both senders and receivers, and neither.   All of the first three categories have something to do with person-to-person interactions; the fourth is not.  A small list follows

  • Senders: teachers, preachers, leaders, actors, parents.
  • Receivers: students, psychologists, doctors, nurses
  • Both senders and receivers: diplomats, politicians
  • Neither:  pharmacist, brick layer, artist, laborer, machinist, skilled tradesmen in general, chemist, engineer

You are free to examine and categorize.

We have considered only professions where there may be other mechanisms for the communication.  The foremost of these is anything toward an intuitive sense of what is being communicated.  This can include body language, voice tone, facial expressions,  and level of interaction.  For the most part, these are visual and aural, though other senses could be involved.  Yet, other channels are possible.

Could it be that many are attracted to an occupation where their particular “telepathic” communication is favored?  The neither category is both important and revealing.

Could it be that the Zener cards are exactly the wrong way to test for telepathy?   See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telepathy.  Viewing such cards is substantially passive.  Perhaps what is needed is a test that more profoundly excites the brain to higher energy states.   Examples: fear, anger, love, ...  Yet, conclusions have been made upon the basis of the non-evidence produced by these experiments.
What about telepathic communication where no personal immediacy is involved?  Possibly, two people become so much alike in thinking that they are more likely than not to arrive at similar conclusions and guesses.  At a distance, “telepathic” communication between random individuals is simply not understood.  But this is not to count it out.  The mind is a most powerful tool, and we’ve only scratched the surface of determining its power and depth.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view