Upton Sinclair, Albert Einstein, and Telepathy

[amherst]

Acclaimed Pulitzer Prize-winning author of novels such as The Jungle, and Oil!, Upton Sinclair also penned a book detailing telepathy experiments done with his wife Mary Craig. Entitled Mental Radio, Albert Einstein wrote the preface:

I HAVE READ THE BOOK of Upton Sinclair with great interest and am convinced that the same deserves the most earnest consideration, not only of the laity, but also of the psychologists by profession. The results of the telepathic experiments carefully and plainly set forth in this book stand surely far beyond those which a nature investigator holds to be thinkable. On the other hand, it is out of the question in the case of so conscientious an observer and writer as Upton Sinclair that he is carrying on a conscious deception of the reading world; his good faith and dependability are not to be doubted. So if somehow the facts here set forth rest not upon telepathy, but upon some unconscious hypnotic influence from person to person, this also would be of high psychological interest. In no case should the psychologically interested circles pass over this book heedlessly.

[signed] A. Einstein
May 23, 1930

amherst

 

[CFLarsen]

..........and your point is??

 

[walthrup48]

One wonders if, on review, it were suspected that the facts set forth rested not on conscious deception but unconscious self-deception, would that also be of high psychological interest?

 

[amherst]

Originally posted by JimTheBrit
One wonders if, on review, it were suspected that the facts set forth rested not on conscious deception but unconscious self-deception, would that also be of high psychological interest?

It would be if those suspicions were merited, but I don't think they are:

Walter Franklin Prince (from the addendum)
On July 8, 1928, the first formal set of experiments with drawings began, by arrangement between Mrs. Sinclair and the husband of her young sister; Robert L. Irwin, "a young American business man, priding himself on having no 'crank' ideas." The arrangement was that at the stated hour Mr. Irwin should seat himself in his home in Pasadena, make a drawing, and then fix his mind upon the drawing from fifteen to twenty minutes. At the same hour in her home in long beach, twenty-five or thirty miles distant as the crow flies, Mrs. Sinclair proposed to lie on a couch in semi-darkness and with closed eyes, compose her mind according to the rules she had by this time evolved, and after coming to a decision, make a drawing corresponding with her mental impression. It appears that there was one such experiment on July 8, two on the 9th, two on the 10th, and one each on the 11th and 13th. We have here, then a set of seven experiments under ideal conditions. Since something like thirty miles separated the parties, there could be no contact, no "involuntary whispering" that would carry far and no other conceivable other sources of information or material for surmise.

Here are two examples out of the seven long distance experiments as detailed by Prince:

On July 8, Irwin drew a chair with horizontal bars at the back (Fig. 16). Mrs. Sinclair drew first a chair with horizontal bars (Fig 16a), then a chair with vertical ones. And she distinctly set down on the same paper her sense of great satisfaction with her first drawing, her feeling that the second was not as "Bob" had drawn it, and her feeling that the second may really express the foot of his bed. She also set down that his drawing was on "green paper." Here is a remarkable combination of impressions: (a) his drawing on green paper, (b) seen as a chair "on his paper," (c) his chair with horizontal bars, (d) her chair with vertical bars perhaps derived from "his bed foot." Even had there been, as there was not, a pre-understanding that some object familiar in daily life was to be drawn, to hit exactly the same one would be very unlikely. To do this and also to get the unusual color of the paper he drew on is remarkable. To get all the enumerated particulars exactly correct is incalculably beyond chance expectation. For he drew a chair, on green paper, with horizontal bars, then gazed at the chair through vertical bars of his bed!

On the 13th, Bob drew a table fork (Fig. 1) and Mrs. Sinclair at the same hour, many miles away, drew nothing but wrote, "See a table fork. Nothing else." (Figure 1a).

Upton Sinclair wrote that:

The essence of our procedure is this: that never did she see my drawing until hers was completed and her descriptive words written; that I spoke no word and made no comment until after this was done; and that the drawings presented here are in every case exactly what I drew, with no change or addition whatsoever.

amherst

 

[Rob Lister]

Reading between the lines...

I HAVE READ THE BOOK of Upton Sinclair with great interest...

*** They paid me to read it

...and am convinced that the same deserves the most earnest consideration,

*** Like I said, they paid me.

...not only of the laity, but also of the psychologists by profession.

***And boy does this cat need a professional psychologist.

...The results of the telepathic experiments carefully and plainly set forth in this book stand surely far beyond those which a nature investigator holds to be thinkable.

*** It's utter crap.

...On the other hand, it is out of the question in the case of so conscientious an observer and writer as Upton Sinclair that he is carrying on a conscious deception of the reading world;

*** He's deluded. He actually believes his crap.

...his good faith and dependability are not to be doubted.

***He paid on time and besides, it's not nice to make fun.

...So if somehow the facts here set forth rest not upon telepathy,...

***Which they obviously do not...

...but upon some unconscious hypnotic influence from person to person,

***Which is the nicest way I can explain it...

...this also would be of high psychological interest.

***Get this man some help, either way.

...In no case should the psychologically interested circles pass over this book heedlessly.

***Please look into this. It could be a cry for help.

[/B]

 

[CFLarsen]

amherst,

What is your point in posting the quote?

 

[amherst]

amherst,

What is your point in posting the quote?

I posted the quote because I think many in here may find it interesting that Einstein had a favorable view of these particular psi experiments.

amherst

 

[CFLarsen]

I posted the quote because I think many in here may find it interesting that Einstein had a favorable view of these particular psi experiments.

amherst

Huh? How do you figure that? Please explain.

 

[walthrup48]

It would be if those suspicions were merited, but I don't think they are:

You've read too much into my post, amherst. I think it would be unreasonable of me to judge the experiments in any way given that I've only been provided with the preface to the book. I merely point out that Einstein apparently overlooked an important avenue of investigation should it be decided that the "facts [...] set forth rest not upon telepathy"

 

[amherst]

Huh? How do you figure that? Please explain.

Well, I figured that since Albert Einstein is arguably the most brilliant scientist who has ever lived, and that most people (skeptics especially) have an immense amount of respect for him, his comments on Sinclair's experiments might be of some interest. Maybe I was wrong.

amherst

 

[amherst]

You've read too much into my post, amherst. I think it would be unreasonable of me to judge the experiments in any way given that I've only been provided with the preface to the book. I merely point out that Einstein apparently overlooked an important avenue of investigation should it be decided that the "facts [...] set forth rest not upon telepathy"

And I pointed out that Einstein couldn't have overlooked that avenue of investigation since there was nothing to investigate as far as unconscious self-deception goes.

amherst

 

[CFLarsen]

Where in the quote do you read that Einstein had a favorable view of these particular psi experiments? All he says is that if they are shown to be true, they are very interesting.

I happen to think the same - it's a rather skeptical, open-minded attitude.

 

[Darat]

Well, I figured that since Albert Einstein is arguably the most brilliant scientist who has ever lived, and that most people (skeptics especially) have an immense amount of respect for him, his comments on Sinclair's experiments might be of some interest. Maybe I was wrong.

amherst

Remember that Einstein was not an expert in psychology, parapsychology and the like.

I've certainly no "respect" for him that means I would automatically "respect" his comments outside his expertise. From what little I do know of his reluctance to accept new evidence later on I suspect he was just another normal, but talented in one area human being.

Come to think of it anyone recommend a good biography. I’ve just realised a distinct lack of knowledge about him that I feel I should fill. (Oh I know he married his cousin and was a pacifist!)

 

[Zep]

I'll take silly psychic scams for 500, thanks, Bob!

And here's your answer:

On July 8, 1928, the first formal set of experiments with drawings began, by arrangement between Mrs. Sinclair and the husband of her young sister; Robert L. Irwin, "a young American business man, priding himself on having no 'crank' ideas." The arrangement was that at the stated hour Mr. Irwin should seat himself in his home in Pasadena, make a drawing, and then fix his mind upon the drawing from fifteen to twenty minutes. At the same hour in her home in long beach, twenty-five or thirty miles distant as the crow flies, Mrs. Sinclair proposed to lie on a couch in semi-darkness and with closed eyes, compose her mind according to the rules she had by this time evolved, and after coming to a decision, make a drawing corresponding with her mental impression. It appears that there was one such experiment on July 8, two on the 9th, two on the 10th, and one each on the 11th and 13th. We have here, then a set of seven experiments under ideal conditions. Since something like thirty miles separated the parties, there could be no contact, no "involuntary whispering" that would carry far and no other conceivable other sources of information or material for surmise.

For 500 points , what was the question?

What is a telephone?

CORRECT! Select again...

 

[amherst]

Where in the quote do you read that Einstein had a favorable view of these particular psi experiments? All he says is that if they are shown to be true, they are very interesting.

I happen to think the same - it's a rather skeptical, open-minded attitude.

"I HAVE READ THE BOOK of Upton Sinclair with great interest and am convinced that the same deserves the most earnest consideration, not only of the laity, but also of the psychologists by profession."

If Einstein didn't have a favorable view of the experiments, he obviously wouldn't have been convinced that they deserved an earnest consideration. He also wouldn't have written the preface in the first place.

amherst

 

[amherst]

I'll take silly psychic scams for 500, thanks, Bob!

And here's your answer:

For 500 points , what was the question?

"What is a telephone"

CORRECT! Select again...

So you disagree with Einstein? You believe the Sinclairs carried out a fraud?

amherst

 

[Darat]

amherst - have you read the book and if so do you have a copy to hand at the moment?

 

[amherst]

amherst - have you read the book and if so do you have a copy to hand at the moment?

Yes.

amherst

 

[CFLarsen]

If Einstein didn't have a favorable view of the experiments, he obviously wouldn't have been convinced that they deserved an earnest consideration. He also wouldn't have written the preface in the first place.

Oh, no, you cannot draw that conclusion. To say something deserves consideration is not the same as having a favorable view of it.

 

[amherst]

Oh, no, you cannot draw that conclusion. To say something deserves consideration is not the same as having a favorable view of it.

How isn't it in this case? In order for Einstein, a man of the highest scientific credibility, to recommend that people give serious thought to these experiments, he would have to have been greatly impressed by them. If the results of Sinclair's experiments were due to some obvious mundane explanation, then I think we can agree, Einstein wouldn't have written what he did. In any case, you do at least concede that Einstein didn't have an unfavorable view of these experiments, right? Do you not find that interesting?

amherst