Smythe was keen, but he needed to persuade the chairman of the publishing company, Sir Robert Meyer, that this wasn't all a hoax. So Raudive laid on a series of electronic seances in Gerrards Cross, one of which Sir Robert attended.
As luck had it, the late pianist Artur Schnabel was on the line, and spoke - at least to the satisfaction of Lady Mayer, who was also present and had known Schnabel. The book, called Breakthrough, went ahead, and EVP was on the scene. More technologically up-to-date than spirit slate-writing and less messy than ectoplasm, it dragged the world of spiritualism into the late 20th Century.
Nowadays, EVP is a standard tool of ghost hunters worldwide. There are hundreds of internet EVP forums and many serious and well-educated people who see it as proof positive that the dead are trying to talk to us. For example, Anabela Cardoso, a former Portuguese career diplomat who lives in Spain and publishes the Instrumental Transcommunication Journal.
She has a well-equipped recording studio and claims to have replicated the Gerrards Cross findings. Raudive had wanted us to believe that Hitler spoke to him in Latvian, not a language he ever mastered while alive.
He said things like "kindle willingly", and "you are a girl here, or else you are thrown out". I put it to Smythe that these were surely not the kind of utterances we associated with the Fuhrer. But, he points out, it could be identity theft.
They could be using the names of famous people in the hope of that they will be taken notice of. In a store room in Smythe's house, almost impossible to get into for boxes, we finally found seven quarter inch reel-to-reel tapes, probably unplayed for four decades.
And on one was Raudive, summoning up the dead. According to a book published at the time by Smythe's partner, a Russian voice at that session said "Stefan is here. But you are Stefan. You do not believe me. It is not very difficult. We will teach Petrus. Online Issn: Leonardo Music Journal 77— Article history Received:. Cite Icon Cite. You do not currently have access to this content. View full article. Sign in Don't already have an account? Client Account.
You could not be signed in. Sign In Reset password. Sign in via your Institution Sign in via your Institution. Buy This Article. Email alerts Article Activity Alert. Latest Issue Alert. Objectivity in EVP research is equated with the use of a technological recording device per se, but subjectivity permeates the critical step of interpreting what the sounds mean.
In science, objectivity is a critical value for researchers — an ideal that we attempt to apply to all aspects of inquiry — rather than a feature of our equipment. Another characteristic of pseudoscience is a lack of integration with related areas of inquiry. There is a rich history of using experimental methods to examine auditory perception, yet EVP enthusiasts are either unaware or willfully ignorant of this relevant work. Science also values parsimony — the idea that the simplest explanation is preferred.
To explain EVP as the result of human auditory perception, we need a theory to account for how and why a human listener sometimes misperceives ambiguous stimuli. In fact, this very tendency is one of many well-documented cognitive shortcuts that may have adaptive value.
A voice may indicate the presence of a potential mate or foe, so it may be useful to err on the side of perceiving agency in ambiguous auditory stimuli. A paranormal theory is much more complex. We have to explain how disembodied entities acquire agency. We have to explain why they have the ability to produce sound but only communicate in audio recordings instead of simply speaking aloud.
Many forms of popular entertainment require the suspension of disbelief, and viewers of paranormal reality shows are hopefully tuning in for the entertainment rather than scientific value of these programs. There are many important public issues, however, for which pseudoscientific beliefs have harmed public discourse.
Currently, there is only limited, tentative evidence to link exposure to pseudoscience on television to pseudoscientific beliefs.
Still, one study showed that people find paranormal research to be more credible and scientific when it is shown using technological tools such as recording devices. Other evidence has suggested that popular opinion may outweigh scientific credibility when people evaluate pseudoscientific claims. A good ghost story may hold entertainment and even cultural value, but the popular portrayal of pseudoscientific practices as science may be detracting from efforts to cultivate a scientifically literate public.
Edition: Available editions United Kingdom. Become an author Sign up as a reader Sign in. Did you hear that? Michael Nees , Lafayette College.
0コメント