| I don't know anything about this course except what was written here,
so this is in no way a criticism of this course, but I have a general
comment.
Most courses which purport to teach parapsychology do nothing of the
sort.
Parapsychology is a specific scientific discipline, with specific
standards of evidence, precisely defined technical terms, a body of
accepted experimental techniques, etc., etc.
Most courses on "parapsychology" are essentially non-scientific courses
involving the teachers interpretation and beliefs about psychic
phenomena. It may be based on the teacher's personal experience,
on anecdotes, on an abstract philosophy, on the teachings of a
particular tradition or school, or (most commmonly) on a combination
of the above. Some awareness of parapsychology may have some
influence, but generally based on more-or-less inaccurate and
incomplete accounts of research rather than the research itself.
This is not to say that the "scientific approach" is the only or even
the best approach for individuals who want to learn about these
phenomena. But the term "parapsychology" was coined (by J.B. Rhine)
to refer to a specific approach and these subjective approaches,
however worthwhile, are simply not that approach.
Unfortunately, use of "parapsychology" to refer to *any* kind study of
psychic phenomena leads to confusion in communication, to
disappointment by students in the courses, and seriously impairs
parapsychologists' efforts to do scientific research.
I repeat, I do not know whether or not this course is one of the
exceptions and is accurately labeled (although the topics included
makes me doubt it; for example for better or for worse in a
parapsychology course, all the available material on the aura is
worth maybe 10 minutes of lecture -- unless the lecturer has
unpublished scientific experimental work of his/her own to present),
and inaccurate labeling does not in any way mean it isn't worthwhile.
Topher
|
| I knew Jane Graham personally 14 years ago. At that time, she had been
styding parapsychology for a few years already. She studied under
several teachers, and in several "schools."
I have been out of touch with her for several years, but I would put my
bet on Jane presenting meaty, tested and well researched information.
She was a good teacher 14 years ago--time can mature teachers well.
|