Writing Belief as an Observer

[the bunny hugger]

I am currently working on a book chapter which is on the topic of paranormal studies. I am collecting some information about scientific studies in the area and summarising the findings for a frankly unsympathetic audeince (typical biologists).

I got on board a co-writer who is, to some extent, a believer. So now I am trying to develop a corrcet tone summarsing the data with sympathy for the original researcher's beliefs, providing information for an unsympathetic audience as a non-believer myself. Aargh.

Add to that the typical comment from my own colleagues is along the lines of 'most people only write about that sort of topic *after* they get tenure.'

Any tips on how to hit the write tones without opening with somthing Seinfeldian like 'I do not beluieve in the paranormal, not that there's anything wrong with that.'

?

[Cathy C]

Okay, let me see if I have this correct.

1. You're writing a book chapter about the paranormal in a book that's NOT about the paranormal (so, I presume a non-fiction scientific type book?)

2. You're picking up the pieces of someone else's research who wrote his notes in a biased fashion so that any potential of a REAL paranormal event is discarded in favor of his views that such things can't exist?

3. You, yourself, ALSO don't believe, but you're trying to present the material in a neutral "make of this what you will" manner by presenting both sides?

Yes?

And now you're trying to figure out either:

a) How to pull valid data from the biased notes; or

b) How to write the chapter so it doesn't appear biased.

If a), you're likely to fail. You'd have to guess at events that are hinted at but not explored. You'd have to do an interview with the researcher and guide him/her into answer yes/no style questions about what you THINK he/she was saying.

If b) you'd probably be best writing the chapter and then having someone who DOES believe in the paranormal, or at least is genuinely skeptical about it (meaning he/she doesn't have bias either way) reader it over to be certain you've offered both sides of the argument.

Or did I miss your point altogether? :)

[the bunny hugger]

Thyanks fortrying to make sense of me :)

1. You're writing a book chapter about the paranormal in a book that's NOT about the paranormal (so, I presume a non-fiction scientific type book?)

Yes, the book is about animal behavior, with a scietific tine and for a science/academic publisher.

2. You're picking up the pieces of someone else's research who wrote his notes in a biased fashion so that any potential of a REAL paranormal event is discarded in favor of his views that such things can't exist?

I am reporting reputable research from people who can be presumed to be honest and have a science education--although ofthen the data and methods are not reported in enough detail to allow full replication/analysis. The researchers identify as parapsychologists and explicity do believe in pscychi abilities.

3. You, yourself, ALSO don't believe, but you're trying to present the material in a neutral "make of this what you will" manner by presenting both sides?

I don't believe in psy--but I do find the studies (largely experimental) to be interesting and indicative of sensitivties in animals that are not properly understood or appreciated. And it bugs me that non-believers do nt read these reports because the results are intiguing regardless of what you beleve.

b) How to write the chapter so it doesn't appear biased.

I am trying to the the chapter 'to' a non-believing audience without condescending to believing readers or end up looking like a crank. I do want to acknowledge my own position as a non-beliver who doesn't ignore experimental data because I don't like the fully qualified and honest researcher's beliefs. (If paranormal researchers were routinely dishonest they would, frankly, get better results)

If b) you'd probably be best writing the chapter and then having someone who DOES believe in the paranormal, or at least is genuinely skeptical about it (meaning he/she doesn't have bias either way) reader it over to be certain you've offered both sides of the argument.

I did recruit a believer co-writer although it is hard to communicate with her as we are on different continents. But I feel she is pulling the text to far to assuming psi does exits, when the typical reader will assume it does not or be used to not seeing it as a matter for science to address. But I worry that pulling to hard the other way will be disrespectful tot he research's original nature.

What I want to say is something like, hell, look, these are honest experiments. If there is no psi how would you explain the results, do you learn anything by this exercise--right, then shouldn't you read more outside the box from time to time? the experiments we do tend to confimr our believes, the experiments 'others' do tend to challenge and test them. To some extent the latter is better science.

Even just typing about this is helping clear it up in my head.

[Cathy C]

I don't know that there's a "typical reader" within the scientific community. Personal beliefs tend to skew our impressions of what we read. What you might consider doing is seek out UK or U.S. accredited universities/colleges that have a parapsychology department to ask if they've re-examined any of the studies you'll be using. That way, you're using quotes from third parties, also experts in their field, to judge the accuracy of the methodology used in the experiments. That eliminates both your personal bias and gives the reader another credible viewpoint.

Accredited schools with parapsychology departments:

University of Edinburgh Koestler Parapsychology Unit (http://moebius.psy.ed.ac.uk/)
University of Hertfordshire, specifically Professor Richard Wiseman (http://www.psy.herts.ac.uk/wiseman/index.html)
University of Arizona (U.S.) Center for Consciousness Studies (http://www.consciousness.arizona.edu/mission.htm)
Princeton University (New Jersey, U.S.) Anomalies Research (http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/)

An email to the general department might get you an interview with someone that can discuss the particular experiments. At the very least, they might know someone who has.

Good luck! :)

[the bunny hugger]

I mean the typical reader I identified for my book when it was proposed, a specific audience the book will be marketed to. They are largely my colleagues and students in my sub-discipline who I know do not take psi seriously, at least in public--in fact they openly mock it if the subject comes up. Although some of the students will tend to admit some divergent personal beliefs when the other profs are away they do so with a degree of embarrassment that suggests belief is not an acceptted norm.

And the experiemnts I am reading are conducted largely by the programs you identify or the historical work they frequently cite -- so I imagine they consider them reputable.

I'm obviously not explaining myself very well. The science is good and I understand it. I just don't know how to pitch it, what the best angle would be especially re: communicating my own lack of belief to help get the ideas across to a non-believing audience without disrespecting the belief itself or my coauthor.

[Cathy C]

Hmm... okay, I see what you're saying. Here's my question: Why do you feel you NEED to state your own bias in the text? Does your own opinion serve a purpose in the framework of the chapter? I think a better method would probably be to open the chapter with something like, "Ask ten animal behaviorists if paranormal abilities in pets and wildlife can be proved and you'll likely get eleven answers. That said..." You've opened it with the acknowledgment and not stated your own view. Is that sort of what you're looking for? :)

[the bunny hugger]

My personal reasons for stating my belief (one issue I am certainly not comfortable with) would be in the hopes of eventually getting tenure (almost no Dean will hire the psychic animal freaky woman to teach their undergrads, or at the very least it will narrow my already slender options) and to get initial credibility with the audience as 'one of them'. Otherwise I suspect I will have most of them skipping to the next chapter within a paragraph (that being the whole problem, they won;t read this sort of material and they should)... IMHO....

[Cathy C]

Ah! Didn't realize you were already faculty. NOW I understand the issue, having known many professors seeking tenure. Okay, here's my best advice:

You start with something like this:

"Behaviorists at a number of universities have conducted studies which suggest certain animals have the potential for precognition, empathy and telepathy. Admittedly, I read these studies with a critical eye, having an expectation of finding them overhyped or staged. However, even the most strident non-believer will be interested to learn..."

Then lead in with the strongest PRO-paranormal event, back off to argue the point and then move on to the next case. You've stated both your bias AND your reasonableness.

Help any?