The Paranormal
I’ve had an interest in the paranormal since I was a child. My mother always got books out of the library about ghosts and UFO phenomenon, so in some respects I was influenced by her reading habits. As a child such tales were by default interesting and any potentially scary element naturally made them more enjoyable. However, my father being an academic had taught me to question everything, so I felt fairly evenly equipped when exploring these subjects. Further to this point, over the years I have learned that humans have a very unique perspective on the world. We are hard wired to see patterns, regardless of whether they’re there or not. Our senses can also be fooled and often are. Perhaps the most important aspect of our nature that impacts upon any analysis we make into the paranormal is our penchant for creating stories. Hence unusual experiences can be subconsciously misremembered and “retconned” to form more precise narratives.
My interest in the paranormal is mainly to do with people who have such experiences, rather than the specifics of the experience themselves, which are frequently generic. A lot of people who experience events that they cannot explain are sceptical of such things to begin with and profoundly affected by them afterwards. Humans like the illusion of certainty and can be severely traumatised when something shakes their existing world view. Hence, when listening to tales of the paranormal, I do not immediately distrust what I am told, in so far that I believe that the subjects of such things genuinely feel their experiences are real. More often than not, admitting publicly that you’ve had a paranormal experience is positively detrimental to your life, so fabricating a story is a potential risk. Yes there are individuals who will lie for profit or some other underlying psychological need but I do not assume this to be the case in all instances.
Ghost Hunters US TV Show
However, the field of paranormal study is fraught with problems. Much of the discourse surrounding the subject is hyperbolic and intentionally designed to be sensational. Books, TV shows and online discourse about the supernatural is intended to grab your attention and first and foremost, driven by the need for ratings and clicks. The paranormal also intersects regularly with religion which is contentious and highly subjective. Sadly at the fringes of the paranormal there are conspiracy theories, “woo” science and those with mental health issues which muddies the waters. The field also attracts a lot of charlatans. Furthermore, the paranormal has had such an influence upon the zeitgeist, that often the existing pop culture tropes born of film, TV and literature impact upon our understanding of the subject and prejudice our opinions. Which is why there was a marked increase in reported UFO siting after the release of Close Encounters of the Third Kind in 1978.
Now that I’ve stated my interest in the paranormal, I guess the most obvious question to ask is do I believe in ghosts. However, before we can even discuss a subject such as “ghosts”, we require a commonly agreed and recognised definition. Unfortunately, there doesn’t appear to be one and so any in-depth discussion can potentially fall at the first hurdle. Which leads me to my wider thoughts on the paranormal. Although I find it a fascinating subject, I feel that it is not really being researched in an appropriate manner. Possibly because research funding is mainly allocated to things that have a commercial application. Hence, those who are active in the field of research are not necessarily the best fit, academically or ethically. Consider Harry Price, Uri Geller and Derek Acorah. Let us also reflect upon the plethora of questionable supernatural TV shows with boisterous Americans incorrectly using scientific equipment and bellowing at alleged ghosts.
Alleged Spiritual Medium Derek Acorah
I was asked once, because I lean towards scepticism why do I find the paranormal so compelling. To which I replied “because of the human element”. I also went on to add, that it is possible that what is broadly labelled as the paranormal is actually something else that has been incorrectly observed and documented. It is not unreasonable to consider that as human knowledge advances, we may eventually be able to validate these things but within a scientific framework, establishing them as part of the universe. What I don’t care for is the deliberate setting of alleged paranormal activity into some separate and distinct category. It smacks of trying to appropriate something, take ownership of it and keep it free of any scrutiny. Something that exists but only on the terms that you dictate. That is a little too similar to the culture of conspiracy theories for my liking.
As you can see, I don’t see the paranormal is simple terms. I think there is a lot to unpack and it is a subject that has numerous layers to it. These can be scientific, spiritual, psychological, sociological and cultural. Due to the sprawling nature and complexity of many of these elements it makes it exceedingly hard to determine the facts of a case and process them. Which is why I often choose not to. I am a fan of the Uncanny podcast with Danny Robins and am going to see the live version of the show at the Churchill Theatre in March. For me the biggest appeal of Uncanny are the stories and the people telling them. I don’t expect a definitive answer to be given at the end of each episode and often all I can do in response to such stories is recognise that I cannot explain them. Once again, I would like to see a third option added to standard binary stance on the paranormal. I think that “there is insufficient data to draw any definitive conclusion” is a perfectly valid position and should be encouraged more.
