Blog » Chris French: being 'crazy' and belief in the paranormal
I was at the British Psychological Society Division of Clinical Psychology conference last week on Thursday, and the keynote speaker for the morning was Prof Chris French, who is a very pleasant and intelligent sceptic, and is well known for his TV appearances. His talk was entitled ‘You Don’t Have to Be Crazy to Believe in the Paranormal But it Helps’. He described a number of studies that showed a link between paranormal beliefs and the clinical construct ‘Schizotypy’. This was his evidence for a link between mental health problems and paranormal beliefs. Now, as a psychologist I am very aware what schizotypy is. It is a DSM-recognised ‘personality disorder’ in which individuals manifest ‘odd’ beliefs and ‘odd perceptual experiences’. The DSM diagnostic criteria include the following;
odd beliefs or magical thinking that influences behavior and is inconsistent with subcultural norms (e.g., superstitiousness, belief in clairvoyance, telepathy, or "sixth sense"; in children and adolescents, bizarre fantasies or preoccupations)
unusual perceptual experiences, including bodily illusions
odd thinking and speech (e.g., vague, circumstantial, metaphorical, overelaborate, or stereotyped)
inappropriate or constricted affect
behavior or appearance that is odd, eccentric, or peculiar
This is obviously a woefully subjective list, with words such as ‘inappropriate’, ‘overelaborated’ and ‘odd’ being open to a thousand interpretations. Why on earth, you may be thinking, is this a checklist for a so called mental disorder? Well, schizotypy is category that is a ‘risk factor’ for schizophrenia. Evidence does indeed suggest that schizotypals are more likely to get schizophrenia, but so what? Women are more likely to get depressed, and that’s not a reason for not being a woman. ‘Schizotypals’ may be more likely to go a bit crazy, but are also more likely to be groundbreaking thinkers. There is no doubt that Newton was get a schizotypy diagnosis if he were alive now, for he had some pretty ‘odd’ beliefs about alchemy and spirituality.
This is a classic example of the medicalisation of human idiosyncrasy. To disavow the worth of these unusual ways of being may be protective of schizophrenia, but it may be equally protective of important unconventional thinking and colourful human difference.
So schizotypy is one of those categories that is a silly clinical construct and will very likely soon be erased from diagnostic systems, consigned to the same bin as drapetomania (the illness that made slaves want to run away). Yet Chris French was using the correlation between paranormal belief and schizotypy as the main bulk of evidence for his claim that you are probably mentally ill if you believe in the paranormal. What French’s research in fact was showing us is that people who tend to have unconventional beliefs are happy to openly report that they do indeed have such beliefs. How’s that for revolutionary. I am all for healthy scepticism, but this is shoddy science.
It feels appropriate to finish with a quote from John Stuart Mill;
“In this age, the mere example of non-conformity, the mere refusal to bend the knee to custom, is itself a service.”
Olly Robinson
That is interesting - this does not seem a serious or impressive approach.
As a psychiatrist - schizotypal personality is rare in clinical practice. Of course we see many hypomanic patients with religiose delusions, many people with schizophrenia who claim telepathic experiences and hear voices, some people have epiphanies associated with organic disorders. These experiences usually fade as the illness resolves.
A few psychiatric reductionists still believe that all unusual spiritual or psychological experiences represent psychopathology. Some Soviet psychiatrists believed that dissidents had "sluggish" schizophrenia. Some Freudians thought Jung had schizophrenia and therefore his ideas could be dismissed. The model of spiritual emergency seems to fit better Jung's crsis and impressive emergence from it. Most psychiatrists can usually differentiate between madness, eccentricity and creativity. The borderland between the "psychotic" and the phenomenology that is not part of the standard paradigm is an interesting area.
Did French quote any research in favour of psi? Radin, Sheldrake, Jahn and Dunne etc? I think there is enough evidence supporting psi to counter such dismissiveness.
Incidentally - Rupert Sheldrake is presenting his work at a psychiatry and spirituality conference at the Royal College of Psychiatrists in april and I am certain his work will be very well received.
Tim
Posted by Tim, 21/12/2008 11:52am (3 years ago)
Hi Olly,
While they can be annoying, I find skeptics fascinating subjects for study.
Gertrude Schmeidler’s brilliant observation is well validated in psi research: skeptics perform significantly poorer than chance levels on psi tests. Labeled the ‘sheep/ goat effect,’ this means that skeptics have psi abilities to approximately the same degree as believers, but skeptics manifest their psi awarenesses into consciousness in ways that are consonant with their beliefs/ disbeliefs.
This was discovered when psi research moved from individual, one-on-one testing of psi functions (telepathy, clairsentience, precognition) to group testing. While the researchers had been able to get reliable results in 1:1 testing, they got null results in group testing, despite repeated efforts in various labs around the world. It was only when Schmeidler suggested assessing the results for believers and disbelievers separately that they realized the disbelievers were scoring significantly at levels equivalent to those of believers but in the reverse direction. In other words, skeptics were so thoroughly making wrong guesses that their results were way beyond chance and cancelled out the positive results of the believers.
I’ve posted brief summaries and references for psi research (excluding sheep/goat effects, which will be in a later blog entry) at: http://www.wholistichealingresearch.com/psi_research
Blessings
Dan
Posted by Dan, 18/12/2008 11:51am (3 years ago)
RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments