Well is it? A field that has never produced a repeatable 'paranormal effect' makes it unique in scientific terms.
I see parapsychology like a kind of pressure group (like Greenpeace). Parapsychology did help to get OBEs, NDEs, chance-perception, apparitional experiences etc, on the mainstream research agenda. That is a good thing. It did it in much the same way other pressure groups get their agendas addressed.
As a result, nowadays mainstream cognitive neruoscience has frameworks and models that provide fascinating insights into these experiences. They no longer seem to be the exclusive property of the parapsychologist who did little to explain them.
With less and less phenomena needing a paranormal explanation, Is Parapsychology dead? Are there benefits to keeping it alive at the University level? If so, should we also be teaching Phrenology?
Cogent thoughts always welcome.
I see parapsychology like a kind of pressure group (like Greenpeace). Parapsychology did help to get OBEs, NDEs, chance-perception, apparitional experiences etc, on the mainstream research agenda. That is a good thing. It did it in much the same way other pressure groups get their agendas addressed.
As a result, nowadays mainstream cognitive neruoscience has frameworks and models that provide fascinating insights into these experiences. They no longer seem to be the exclusive property of the parapsychologist who did little to explain them.
With less and less phenomena needing a paranormal explanation, Is Parapsychology dead? Are there benefits to keeping it alive at the University level? If so, should we also be teaching Phrenology?
Cogent thoughts always welcome.