TMI Journal 2011-1&2 (Winter/Spring)

separate thing. Even if there were a million experiments that found there was no evidence of ESP, I think these things are still valuable to study. People have experiences and sometimes they are life transforming and bring people great meaning and [improved] mental heath. There is value [to these experiences], even if there is no ESP. HW: Exactly. Asking, “What is the meaning behind it for people?” CSM: Yeah. HW: So tell me a little about how The Rhine approaches the study of consciousness—its methodologies, basic philosophies. CSM: Traditionally, The Rhine Center has been very experimental. If you go back to the days of J. B. Rhine, J.B. Rhine revolutionized the study of paranormal phenomena by developing the card-guessing tests and also the systematic revision of methodologies [so that they are] sensitive to criticism. And also trying to develop methods where you can test a lot of people—not necessarily just special claimants but students. That was one thing that Rhine started—the idea that you don’t necessarily have to have people who think that they are very, very psychic—although those people do come in and Rhine certainly started off by testing mediums at the very beginning of his career. So, yeah, rigorous, repeatable methods and being able to test lots of people [is part of The Rhine legacy]. In the middle years, they were focusing more on the experimental methods—card tests and then looking at PK research and seeing if people could influence the die, and then Dr. Helmut Schmidt developed PK machines that were based on random-event generators. Again, it was this idea of, “Let’s find something that we can actually measure; let’s measure the deviation away from chance.” So, historically, The Rhine has always focused on statistics and using the scientific method to see whether you’ve got an anomaly and then seeing if you can repeat that anomaly and see if you can find patterns there. At the same time, the history of The Rhine has also embraced subjective experiences in the work of Louisa Rhine, so I suppose always there has been the history of both: rigorous, repeatable experimental methods, Next Page 16 TMI JOURNAL Winter/Spring 2011 looking for patterns—as in, is there ESP? Is there PK?—but also what do people [subjectively] experience in the real world? What are people reporting? The current research group at The Rhine, we’ve got [researchers interested in both experimental and qualitative methods]. I think that using complementary and mixed methods is the ultimate way to find out how something is working and getting the fullest picture of that thing. I’ve been trying to promote the qualitative. I’m fascinated by experimental methods but also by personality. I’m fascinated by experiences, [regardless of ] whether there is any truth to them or not, just because I think they are part of human nature. What I’ve gotten interested in lately are the differences between “healthy” and “less healthy” paranormal experiences. For example, can you do something to help people become more healthy if they have less healthy experiences? Most of my recent studies have been like that, trying to approach a subject from lots of different perspectives. What I’m trying to do as well is link things between normal and paranormal. HW: What’s your vision for the future of this field? CSM: I would like there to be more fusion between consciousness studies, parapsychology, anomalistic psychology, and mainstream psychology. I think they have a lot to say to each other. It frustrates me a lot of the time [that] mainstream psychology is so compartmentalized. For example, I have colleagues who are investigating the psychology of belief from the perspective of the psychology of religion. There are many parallels here with parapsychology. There are so many [different fields] that have parallels, but they don’t talk to each other. I just wish that things could be a little more integrated. People need to be doing more experiments that cross the boundaries. And I think parapsychologists and people researching this should do normal research as well as asking the psi questions because I think more studies that are crossing the boundaries will be [essential] for pushing this field forward. I think it’s a shame that in the U.S. the parapsychology units are separate from the universities. There’s an advantage at some level with that because you can do more quirky, interesting research properly if you’re not in the university and you’ve got more time to do research. But, then, you’ve got the problem of funding, and so you see a lot of places struggling or trying to work out a way to bring in money. It would be nice if there were some kind of sustainable way of being able to do this research and push it forward. It always seems to me that the best place is within the university environment. But I don’t know how that’s going to shift unless there can be a Bob Morris-type model in which people can sell themselves doing something normal and then gradually bring in the other stuff. None of this work is so frightening. We are asking questions that are actually quite normal at some level. A lot of people [in the parapsychology field] are not even asking the psi questions, and, even when they are, it shouldn’t be frightening. It should be about asking questions and seeing what the data tell you. So, my dream would be for there to be more of a fusion. I don’t know if that is an unrealistic dream. Some days it feels like it’s possible and other days it doesn’t. Maybe the publication of [the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology] article will stimulate conversation around that. Maybe that will encourage more discussion. Or a debate, at least! The APA meeting this August is supposed to be a debate with skeptics and proponents discussing this topic, based on the book that Stanley Krippner and Harris Freidman just published [Mysterious Minds: The Neurobiology of Psychics, Mediums, and Other Extraordinary People (with H. L. Friedman) (2009). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger]. It’s really an interesting book. With more things like that in the public domain, APA sponsored, that’s excellent. That’s going to move things forward. Christine Simmonds-Moore can be reached at Christine@rhine.org. The Rhine Research Center website is www.rhine.org. Next Page 17 TMI JOURNAL Winter/Spring 2011 The Rhine Research Center (RRC) launched its first online course, Introduction to Parapsychology, in March, 2011. Simmonds-Moore was recently awarded a Bial grant, which is seeking people who are synesthetes to take part in an interesting study. If you are a synesthete (or even if you are not) and would like to participate in studies at the RRC, please contact Christine Simmonds-Moore at the above email address. Likewise, Dr. John Palmer (the Director of Research at the Rhine Research Center) has also just been awarded a Bial grant and is also seeking research participants. People who are generally interested in getting involved in the research at the RRC should sign up to the participant pool, which can be accessed via the website at http://www.rhine.org/researchcurrent.htm. (Endnotes) 1 A list of some of these universities is provided on the TMI Research Division web pages: http://www. monroeinstitute.org/research/other-consciousness-research-and-education-institutes/ The human consciousness is really homogeneous. There is no complete forgetting, even in death. ~D.H. Lawrence Next Page 18 TMI JOURNAL Winter/Spring 2011 Applications of Altered States of Consciousness in Daily Life by Ruth-Inge Heinze, Ph.D The Annual International Conference on the Study of Shamanism and Alternative Modes of Healing was founded in 1984 by Dr. Ruth-Inge Heinze to preserve and further the integrity of shamanism and share the latest insights in the field of alternative healing. Each year for the last 24 years, scholars and practitioners from a wide range of disciplines related to shamanism have gathered to compare notes and discussed future cooperation. The conference is a unique opportunity to test the results of past year’s work in discussions with colleagues, be confirmed, and also be stimu- lated by the work of others. For conference information, go to: http://shamanismconference.org/ Thie following paper was presented at the annual meeting of the American Philosophical Association (Pacific Division), Los Angeles on March 31, 1994. This paper is reproduced by permission of the American Anthropological Association and the estate of Ruth-Inge Heinz. Originally published in Anthropology of Consciousness, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp. 8-12, 1994. Not for sale or further reproduction. ABSTRACT First, I discuss the importance of recognizing different states of consciousness. Knowing how these states differ from each other and recognizing their specific qualities determines their use, increases our self-knowledge, balances our behavior, and adjusts our course of action. Second, I report on workshops conducted in the United States, Russia, Lithuania, and Estonia. The examples illustrate the nature of material retrieved during different states of conscious- ness. Third, I evaluate the respective techniques that can be used to access different states of consciousness and show how they can be applied to everyday life. Introduction When we begin to recognize the qualities of specific states of consciousness, we are able to develop a tool chest. We can then decide which tool to use when we want to increase not only our knowledge of self and others, but also seek access to vitally important information that has not yet reached the level of consensus reality. I will start with the seminal definition of altered states of consciousness, provided by Ludwig (1966). In his opinion, altered states of con- sciousness are any mental state(s) induced by various physiological, psychological, or pharmacological maneuvers or agents, which can be recognized subjectively by the individual himself (or by an objective observer of the individual) as representing a sufficient deviation in subjective experience or psychological functioning from certain general norms for that individual during alert, waking consciousness. (p. 225) Ludwig (1966) admitted that “there will be some conceptual pitfalls in such a general definition.” A whole gen- eration of researchers has, indeed, continued the search for better definitions and methods to operationalize specific states of consciousness. In other words, scholars began to look for ways in which experience of such states can be