Phenomena of materialisation : a contribution to the investigation of mediumistic teleplastics / by Baron von Schrenck Notzing ; translated by E.E. Fournier d'Albe.

  • Schrenck-Notzing, A. von (Albert), 1862-1929.
Date:
1923
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Phenomena of materialisation : a contribution to the investigation of mediumistic teleplastics / by Baron von Schrenck Notzing ; translated by E.E. Fournier d'Albe. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    37/540 (page 17)
    in mankind (experimental religion). As Richet very truly remarks1 44 We must make sure of the facts before we formulate general laws.” It appears to be extraordinarily difficult to place a fact upon so firm a basis as to be unshakable. This requires absolute accuracy. 44 It is a great drawback to scientific progress that spiritists, theosophists, mesmerists and mystics have erected such fanciful structures on such a tiny and insecure basis. Let us be satisfied with faultless experiments. Theorv will follow in the natural course.” In another place Richet2 writes similarly :— 44 At the same time I do not consider myself justified in despising the 4 metapsychic ’ facts, which must be methodically studied without prejudice. ... We must not be appalled by what is strange . . . that which marks a discovery, the unforeseen, the unexpected, the new. It may clash with popular opinion, it may contradict the classic official teaching. Otherwise it would not be a discovery. And after it has come forward, it encounters a thousand denials. Even if it is as clear as the sun, it is not accepted. ... It is only with difficulty that we form the conviction of having lived in error, of having made wrong assertions. . . . Only unusual phenomena astonish us. A thing appears true because we have often seen it, but not at all because we have understood it, for all natural phenomena are incomprehensible.” It is difficult, more especially for savants who have acquired a wide knowledge by hard work, to free themselves entirely from preconceived opinions and old habits of thought. Many an investigator is not convinced by reason. Conviction only sets in when he has himself observed certain facts so often that their existence has become to him a mental habit, a familiar thing. Zollner3 already found this psychic law of inertia, and added : 44 This is a curious phase of the human spirit, and is particularly strong in savants, indeed stronger, in them, I believe, than in others. For this reason we must not always regard a man as dishonest because for a long time he keeps beyond the reach of proof. The ancient wall of belief requires much siege artillery for its demolition.” Careful researches by English investigators have shown that human powers of observation are very imperfect. In his excellent work (already referred to) on Superstition and Sorcery, the well - known psychologist Lehmann of Copenhagen has fully dealt with the sources of errors of observation, especially in mediumistic investigations. These should be minutely studied by any one who approaches these experi¬ ments, so as to avoid self-deception as much as possible. Reports by persons lacking the necessary practice in observation should be received with caution. As a rule, there is hardly time during mediumistic tests, in presence of the often surprising and varying occurrences, to direct the attention to the most essential points. In this connection we must remember the conjuror’s well-known stratagem of directing the attention to quite secondary matters. And, further, the employment of the 1 Richet, Experimental Studies in Thought Transference, with a Preface by v. Schrenck- Notzing (Enke, Stuttgart, 1891). 2 Richet, “The Future of Psychology” (Ubersinnliche Welt, Feb. 1907). 3 Zollner, Abhandlungen, Vol. II. B