Are you afraid of the dark ebook


 

Editorial Reviews. From Publishers Weekly. Two gorgeous widows go up against a nefarious multinational think tank in this airbrushed but goofily entertaining. A chilling thriller and a classic from the internationally bestselling Sidney Sheldon , author of The Other Side of Midnight and If Tomorrow medical-site.info New York. All around the globe, people are being reported dead or medical-site.info Berlin, a woman vanishes from the city streets. In Paris, a man plunges from the Eiffel To.

Author:USHA KREUTZBENDER
Language:English, Spanish, Hindi
Country:Nepal
Genre:Politics & Laws
Pages:427
Published (Last):13.08.2016
ISBN:854-5-20954-369-2
Distribution:Free* [*Register to download]
Uploaded by: VERONIQUE

66218 downloads 118085 Views 11.50MB ePub Size Report


Are You Afraid Of The Dark Ebook

Are you afraid of the dark? bySheldon, Sidney. Publication date Topics Research institutes. PublisherNew York: Warner Books. The new novel that Sidney Sheldon's millions of fans all over the world have been waiting for. And, like his seventeen previous books, it is destined for a top. Editions for Are You Afraid of the Dark?: (Paperback published in ), Published March 12th by William Morrow. ebook, pages.

Received Jan 13; Accepted Mar 4. Abstract The popular view of the inherent conflict between science and the occult has been rendered obsolete by recent advances in the history of science. Yet, these historiographical revisions have gone unnoticed in the public understanding of science and public education at large. Particularly, reconstructions of the formation of modern psychology and its links to psychical research can show that the standard view of the latter as motivated by metaphysical bias fails to stand up to scrutiny. I shall argue that generalized psychological explanations are only helpful in our understanding of history if we apply them in a symmetrical manner. Insbesondere die Rekonstruktion der Genese der modernen Psychologie und ihren Verbindungen zu parapsychologischen Forschungen zeigen, dass sich letztere nicht einfach als Ausdruck von metaphysischer Voreingenommenheit verstehen lassen. Eppure, queste revisioni storiografiche sono state trascurate dalla conoscenza comune sulla scienza e dall'istruzione pubblica in generale. In particolare la ricostruzione di come si sia formata la psicologia moderna e dei suoi collegamenti con la ricerca psicologica dimostra una visione standardizzata di questi ultimi, giustificata da pregiudizi metafisici che non reggono la verifica. To be sure, both professions are concerned with human beings, but your clients are obviously alive, while my historical protagonists are long gone. The persons you work with usually seek you out to get help understanding and changing their individual present, whereas I select my historical actors in the hope they might prove useful to me as a lens to understand collective pasts.

Private Paris. Sandra Brown. Dead Memories.

Angela Marsons. The Woman in the Wood. Lesley Pearse. A Treasure Worth Seeking. Fall From Grace. Murder House. All Dressed in White. Mary Higgins Clark. The Melody Lingers On. The Power Trip. Lovers and Liars. Nigel May. Past Perfect. Insatiable Appetites. Stuart Woods. The Bitch. Truth or Die. Nothing Lasts Forever. Rage of Angels. Sidney Sheldon's The Tides of Memory.

The Sky is Falling. Doomsday Conspiracy. If Tomorrow Comes. Memories of Midnight. The Stars Shine Down. Sidney Sheldon's Angel of the Dark. Morning, Noon and Night. Master of the Game.

The Other Side of Midnight. Tell Me Your Dreams.

The Best Laid Plans. The Sands of Time. Windmills of the Gods. Sidney Sheldon 3-Book Collection: The Dark Side of Midnight. The Naked Face. A Stranger in the Mirror.

The Phoenix. June How to write a great review.

Are you afraid of the dark?

The review must be at least 50 characters long. I shall argue that generalized psychological explanations are only helpful in our understanding of history if we apply them in a symmetrical manner.

Insbesondere die Rekonstruktion der Genese der modernen Psychologie und ihren Verbindungen zu parapsychologischen Forschungen zeigen, dass sich letztere nicht einfach als Ausdruck von metaphysischer Voreingenommenheit verstehen lassen. Eppure, queste revisioni storiografiche sono state trascurate dalla conoscenza comune sulla scienza e dall'istruzione pubblica in generale.

In particolare la ricostruzione di come si sia formata la psicologia moderna e dei suoi collegamenti con la ricerca psicologica dimostra una visione standardizzata di questi ultimi, giustificata da pregiudizi metafisici che non reggono la verifica. To be sure, both professions are concerned with human beings, but your clients are obviously alive, while my historical protagonists are long gone.

The persons you work with usually seek you out to get help understanding and changing their individual present, whereas I select my historical actors in the hope they might prove useful to me as a lens to understand collective pasts. You empower your clients to become active collaborators in the therapeutic process by encouraging them to mobilize own resources, while my historical actors are perfectly at my mercy should I chose to distort their lives to make them fit any preconceived narratives of mine.

Yet, it seems that in a crucial sense some of these differences actually indicate a mutual work ethos. Rather than forcing your own way of being in the world upon persons in your care, you will strive to base therapeutic interventions on a thorough understanding of where each is coming from. Ideally, historians are trained to observe very similar methodological maxims.

I expect similar issues to arise as challenges to therapeutic practice.

Editions of Are You Afraid of the Dark? by Sidney Sheldon

After all, most of us were brought up in the belief that science has conclusively shown that these things are impossible, and that something must be wrong with those reporting experiences that appear to suggest otherwise. It is merely as a potential token of assistance with such cases — however small it will be — the present article is written. Science as a candle in the dark? But even if you do, you probably know that it is wise to keep that belief to yourself if you expect your peers to view you as sane, critical and scientifically minded.

For science, we have been brought up to believe, is intrinsically self-correcting and always on the lookout for anomalies that might bring about revolutionary scientific breakthroughs. Moreover, the very essence of scientific practice securing its self-correcting nature are intellectual core virtues — impartial love of truth, open-mindedness paired with discerning rigour, courageous anti-dogmatism and other qualities without which the scientific enterprise would quickly lose its appeal as intrinsically progressive and good.

Those holding this quasi-teleological view of scientific progress are also likely to believe the study of the history of science and medicine is irrelevant: if science always provides the most reliable mirror of reality, its past can constitute little more than a graveyard of errors and obsolete ideas. Science popularizers laudably hammer home the message that science deserves that name only if it is firmly rooted in the intellectual virtues mentioned above, and if it strictly builds on the best available evidence.

Curiously, however, these basic principles — which obviously should guide historical research no less than science — are nearly always dropped as soon as the question of the relationship between science and religion the supposed breeding ground of occult belief is concerned. In fact, the popular notion of the supposedly self-evident opposition of science and religion — each routinely portrayed as monolithic entities epitomizing eternally progressive vs.

Recent studies in the history of neuroscience, for example, have revealed that contrary to present-day popular beliefs, epiphemonenalist standard views are no unequivocal corollary of neuroscientific advances. The view that the brain produces the mind has always been just one among various pre-existing metaphysical presuppositions, for which the modern mind and brain sciences have served as vehicles Hagner, , ; Harrington, ; Smith, ; Vidal, ; Weidman, ; Young, A related myth is the view of the inherent opposition of scientific psychology and the occult.

Myers, Henry and Eleanor M. Sidgwick, and Albert von Schrenck-Notzing. Wills to believe He who believes in it carries out experiments in sorcery, and he who does not believe in it as a rule does not. But since man is known to have a great tendency to find confirmed what he believes in, and to this end might even apply a great ingenuity to deceive himself, to me the success of such experiments only proves that those conducting them believe in them to begin with.

Wundt, , pp. James, , p.

Unproblematic as such statements may seem at first glance, unfortunately the matter is not quite as straightforward. Eschewing constructive dialogues with their targets of attack, opponents offered little dispassionate and constructive methodological critiques and favoured popular magazines and pamphlets rather than formal scholarly channels to get their polemics across. Epistemological positions, methods, aims and arguments of psychical researchers were misrepresented by reliance on generalized allegations of fraud and insinuations of methodological incompetence, the latter being tacitly explained through claims of metaphysical bias Sommer, , a , Chapter 4; Taylor, Moreover, by the late nineteenth century, any empirical approach to marvellous events had already been repudiated from intellectual discourse for over a century.

Again contrary to widespread assumptions, however, it was predominantly political, philosophical and religious concerns rather than scientific work that had made fashionable the Enlightenment notion of belief in preternatural occurrences as an indicator of intellectual, moral and spiritual vulgarity at best, and mental illness at worst cf. Another stubborn myth regarding psychical research is that it has always been a reactionary movement, owing its existence to a childish reluctance to accept the self-evident truth of scientific materialism.

While the history of scientific materialism itself thoroughly refutes the teleological standard narrative of materialism as a science-based and therefore obligatory worldview Gregory, ; Lange, — , not a few leading representatives of psychical research like its doyens in France Charles Richet , Germany Albert von Schrenck-Notzing , Poland Julian Ochorowicz and Italy Enrico Morselli and Cesare Lombroso have either been card-carrying materialists or positivists advocating a distinctively secular and anti-spiritualist psychical research Brancaccio, ; Sommer, a , Chapter 2, a.

To complicate matters further, we would be hard pressed to identify a single representative of scientific materialism among the early vocal psychological opponents of psychical research cf.

Hatfield, Not least, a continued openness to extra-sensory perception ESP within a distinctively materialist tradition, Freudian psychoanalysis Devereux, ; Gyimesi, ; Totton, , should make us sceptical of the psychical research vs.

Yet, unchecked simplistic arguments from metaphysical bias that fail to stand up to historical scrutiny continue to be advanced even in professional philosophical discussions of parapsychology and the demarcation problem Sommer, a. Scientific secularization and the rise of positivism were driven not by a materialist worldview, but mainly by rationalist and predominantly anti-clerical religious thinkers, who more often than not were just as programmatically opposed to materialism as they were to spiritualism and related large-scale occult movements of the time.

The opposition to magical thinking also crystallized in rather dramatic political events. This was a national war against the Catholic church fought throughout the s, which, after the March Revolution in , could be called the German version of the French Revolution.

The crucial thing to understand here is that opposition to investigations of the phenomena of mesmerism and spiritualism came from multiple and often mutually antagonistic camps. To say this was a climate not exactly conducive to parapsychological experimentation would therefore be an understatement. When viewed in its original context, the aggressive opposition by early psychologists such as Wundt and Jastrow to unorthodox scientific activities appears to make sense in terms of a strategic imperative to protect the public image of nascent psychology from dangerous associations with the occult.

But does political calculus and career opportunism really suffice to account for the ongoing bias in the public historiography of science and the occult? Although instances of violent opposition to new ideas is a commonplace in the history even of orthodox sciences, I cannot help but being struck by the persistent vehemence, the often hateful and emotional nature of some of the attacks that continue to inform this historiography.

The American neurologist George M. When Wundt was challenged to justify his dismissal of the experimental evidence presented by eminent German physicists in support of the reality of some of the phenomena of spiritualism, his fears of a downfall of modern culture and religion following in the train of a radical empiricism apparently got the better of his scientific curiosity, for he proclaimed: The moral barbarism produced in its time by the belief in witchcraft would have been precisely the same, if there had been real witches.

We can therefore leave the question entirely alone, whether or not you have ground to believe in the spiritualistic phenomena. But even if you do, you probably know that it is wise to keep that belief to yourself if you expect your peers to view you as sane, critical and scientifically minded. For science, we have been brought up to believe, is intrinsically self-correcting and always on the lookout for anomalies that might bring about revolutionary scientific breakthroughs.

Moreover, the very essence of scientific practice securing its self-correcting nature are intellectual core virtues — impartial love of truth, open-mindedness paired with discerning rigour, courageous anti-dogmatism and other qualities without which the scientific enterprise would quickly lose its appeal as intrinsically progressive and good.

Those holding this quasi-teleological view of scientific progress are also likely to believe the study of the history of science and medicine is irrelevant: if science always provides the most reliable mirror of reality, its past can constitute little more than a graveyard of errors and obsolete ideas.

Science popularizers laudably hammer home the message that science deserves that name only if it is firmly rooted in the intellectual virtues mentioned above, and if it strictly builds on the best available evidence. Curiously, however, these basic principles — which obviously should guide historical research no less than science — are nearly always dropped as soon as the question of the relationship between science and religion the supposed breeding ground of occult belief is concerned.

In fact, the popular notion of the supposedly self-evident opposition of science and religion — each routinely portrayed as monolithic entities epitomizing eternally progressive vs. Recent studies in the history of neuroscience, for example, have revealed that contrary to present-day popular beliefs, epiphemonenalist standard views are no unequivocal corollary of neuroscientific advances. The view that the brain produces the mind has always been just one among various pre-existing metaphysical presuppositions, for which the modern mind and brain sciences have served as vehicles Hagner, , ; Harrington, ; Smith, ; Vidal, ; Weidman, ; Young, A related myth is the view of the inherent opposition of scientific psychology and the occult.

Myers, Henry and Eleanor M. Sidgwick, and Albert von Schrenck-Notzing.

Follow the Author

Wills to believe He who believes in it carries out experiments in sorcery, and he who does not believe in it as a rule does not. But since man is known to have a great tendency to find confirmed what he believes in, and to this end might even apply a great ingenuity to deceive himself, to me the success of such experiments only proves that those conducting them believe in them to begin with.

Wundt, , pp. James, , p. Unproblematic as such statements may seem at first glance, unfortunately the matter is not quite as straightforward. Eschewing constructive dialogues with their targets of attack, opponents offered little dispassionate and constructive methodological critiques and favoured popular magazines and pamphlets rather than formal scholarly channels to get their polemics across.

Epistemological positions, methods, aims and arguments of psychical researchers were misrepresented by reliance on generalized allegations of fraud and insinuations of methodological incompetence, the latter being tacitly explained through claims of metaphysical bias Sommer, , a , Chapter 4; Taylor, Moreover, by the late nineteenth century, any empirical approach to marvellous events had already been repudiated from intellectual discourse for over a century.

Again contrary to widespread assumptions, however, it was predominantly political, philosophical and religious concerns rather than scientific work that had made fashionable the Enlightenment notion of belief in preternatural occurrences as an indicator of intellectual, moral and spiritual vulgarity at best, and mental illness at worst cf.

Another stubborn myth regarding psychical research is that it has always been a reactionary movement, owing its existence to a childish reluctance to accept the self-evident truth of scientific materialism. While the history of scientific materialism itself thoroughly refutes the teleological standard narrative of materialism as a science-based and therefore obligatory worldview Gregory, ; Lange, — , not a few leading representatives of psychical research like its doyens in France Charles Richet , Germany Albert von Schrenck-Notzing , Poland Julian Ochorowicz and Italy Enrico Morselli and Cesare Lombroso have either been card-carrying materialists or positivists advocating a distinctively secular and anti-spiritualist psychical research Brancaccio, ; Sommer, a , Chapter 2, a.

602 - The Tale of the Forever Game

To complicate matters further, we would be hard pressed to identify a single representative of scientific materialism among the early vocal psychological opponents of psychical research cf.

Hatfield, Not least, a continued openness to extra-sensory perception ESP within a distinctively materialist tradition, Freudian psychoanalysis Devereux, ; Gyimesi, ; Totton, , should make us sceptical of the psychical research vs.

Yet, unchecked simplistic arguments from metaphysical bias that fail to stand up to historical scrutiny continue to be advanced even in professional philosophical discussions of parapsychology and the demarcation problem Sommer, a.

Scientific secularization and the rise of positivism were driven not by a materialist worldview, but mainly by rationalist and predominantly anti-clerical religious thinkers, who more often than not were just as programmatically opposed to materialism as they were to spiritualism and related large-scale occult movements of the time. The opposition to magical thinking also crystallized in rather dramatic political events.

You might also like: BATTLEFIELD EARTH EBOOK

This was a national war against the Catholic church fought throughout the s, which, after the March Revolution in , could be called the German version of the French Revolution. The crucial thing to understand here is that opposition to investigations of the phenomena of mesmerism and spiritualism came from multiple and often mutually antagonistic camps.

To say this was a climate not exactly conducive to parapsychological experimentation would therefore be an understatement. When viewed in its original context, the aggressive opposition by early psychologists such as Wundt and Jastrow to unorthodox scientific activities appears to make sense in terms of a strategic imperative to protect the public image of nascent psychology from dangerous associations with the occult. But does political calculus and career opportunism really suffice to account for the ongoing bias in the public historiography of science and the occult?

Although instances of violent opposition to new ideas is a commonplace in the history even of orthodox sciences, I cannot help but being struck by the persistent vehemence, the often hateful and emotional nature of some of the attacks that continue to inform this historiography. The American neurologist George M. When Wundt was challenged to justify his dismissal of the experimental evidence presented by eminent German physicists in support of the reality of some of the phenomena of spiritualism, his fears of a downfall of modern culture and religion following in the train of a radical empiricism apparently got the better of his scientific curiosity, for he proclaimed: The moral barbarism produced in its time by the belief in witchcraft would have been precisely the same, if there had been real witches.

We can therefore leave the question entirely alone, whether or not you have ground to believe in the spiritualistic phenomena. Wundt, , p. If the influence of mind upon matter does not cease at the surface of the skin, there is no safety left in the world for anyone quoted in Sudre, , p. At the same time, once we acknowledge that cultural and personal biases constitute fundamental problems in any realm of human activity, the insight that we have to deal with them somehow seems inescapable.

In the philosophy of science, the problem of incommensurability as formulated by writers like Thomas Kuhn and Paul Feyerabend already boils down to a squarely psychological one. In the Kuhnian sense, these are fundamental propositions which scientists cannot afford to question or investigate but simply have to take for granted, such as the concept of causality, and the very possibility to get at fundamental truth in the first place. After stating that some of our most fundamental knowledge comes second hand and from unquestioned authorities, William James observed: Our belief in truth itself, for instance, that there is a truth, and that our minds and it are made for each other, — what is it but a passionate affirmation of desire, in which our social system backs us up?

For James, a radical empirical psychology of belief was forced to acknowledge the tautological or self-confirming nature and foundation of much supposedly rational belief. In the final analysis, it was passion rather than reason that James found decided metaphysical positions and their rationalizations: Like anybody else, the philosopher consciously or unconsciously wants to be the world a certain way.

It was his inevitable will to believe that loads the evidence for him one way or the other, making for a more sentimental or a more hard-hearted view of the universe, just as this fact or that principle would.

He trusts his temperament. Wanting a universe that suits it, he believes in any representation of the universe that does suit it James, , p. But if we grant a near infinite variability of mixtures existing between these temperamental poles, it might serve some analytical purpose after all — particularly, if we are to get at possible reasons for the immense public appeal of the indefinitely more monstrously crude stereotypes regarding science, religion and the occult.

If this is the case, how likely are we to welcome the prospect of others potentially having access?

There might be good reasons why psi researchers have not only considered the fear of psi as a political problem, but also occasionally addressed it as a methodological issue e.

Similar articles


Copyright © 2019 medical-site.info.
DMCA |Contact Us