Parasikolohiya

Mga ladawan na suboot nagpapahiling nin mga multo o mga ispirito na popular durante kan ika-19 na siglo.

An parasikolohiya iyo an pag-aadal kan suboot sikikong phenomena (extrasensory perception, telepatiya, teleportasyon, prekognisyon, clairvoyance, sikokinesis (pig-aapod man na telekinesis), asin psychometry) asin iba pang mga paghinangakong paranormal, por ehemplo, idtong igwang kinaaraman sa near-death experiences, synchronicity, apparitional experiences, asbp.^[1] Pigkritiko bilang sarong seudosiyensya, an mayoriya kan mainstream na mga siyentista pigsasayumahan iyan.^[2]^[3]^[4] Pigkritiko an parasikolohiya huli sa nagpadagos na imbestigasyon sa ibong kan dai nakayanan na magtao nin reproducible na ebidensya para sa eksistensya kan maski arin na psychic phenomena pagkatapos kan labi sa sarong siglong pagsaligsig.^[1]^[5]^[6]

An pagsaligsig sa parasikolohiya bihirang maglataw sa mainstream scientific journals; sarong dikit na niche journals napupublikar nin dakol na mga papeles manungod sa parasikolohiya.^[7]

Toltolan

1 2 Schmidt, Joachim (2007). "Parapsychology". In von Stuckrad, Kocku. The Brill Dictionary of Religion. Leiden and Boston: Brill Publishers. doi:10.1163/1872-5287_bdr_COM_00339. ISBN 978-9004124332.
↑ Gross, Paul R.; Levitt, Norman; Lewis, Martin W. (1996). The Flight from Science and Reason. New York Academy of Sciences. p. 565. ISBN 978-0801856761. The overwhelming majority of scientists consider parapsychology, by whatever name, to be pseudoscience.
↑ Pigliucci, Massimo; Boudry, Maarten (2013). Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 158. hdl:1854/LU-3161824. ISBN 978-0226051963. Many observers refer to the field as a 'pseudoscience'. When mainstream scientists say that the field of parapsychology is not scientific, they mean that no satisfying naturalistic cause-and-effect explanation for these supposed effects has yet been proposed and that the field's experiments cannot be consistently replicated.
↑ Carroll, Sean (May 11, 2016). "Thinking About Psychic Powers Helps Us Think About Science". Wired. New York City: Condé Nast. Today, parapsychology is not taken seriously by most academics.
↑ Error sa pag-cite: Imbalidong <ref> tatak; mayong teksto na ipinagtao para sa reperensiya na pinagngaranan na "Cordón"
↑
- Hyman, R. (1986). "Parapsychological research: A tutorial review and critical appraisal". Proceedings of the IEEE 74 (6): 823–849. doi:10.1109/PROC.1986.13557. https://archive.org/details/ieee-proceedings_1986-06_74_6/page/823.
- Kurtz, Paul (1981), "Is Parapsychology a Science?", in Kendrick Frazier, Paranormal Borderlands of Science, Prometheus Books, pp. 5–23, ISBN 978-0879751487, If parapsychologists can convince the skeptics, then they will have satisfied an essential criterion of a genuine science: the ability to replicate hypotheses in any and all laboratories and under standard experimental conditions. Until they can do that, their claims will continue to be held suspect by a large body of scientists.
- Flew, Antony (1982). Grim, Patrick, ed. Parapsychology: Science or Pseudoscience? in Philosophy of Science and the Occult. State University of New York Press. ISBN 978-0873955720.
- Bunge, Mario (1991). "A skeptic's beliefs and disbeliefs". New Ideas in Psychology 9 (2): 131–149. doi:10.1016/0732-118X(91)90017-G. https://archive.org/details/sim_new-ideas-in-psychology_1991_9_2/page/131.
- Blitz, David (1991). "The line of demarcation between science and nonscience: The case of psychoanalysis and parapsychology". New Ideas in Psychology 9 (2): 163–170. doi:10.1016/0732-118X(91)90020-M. https://archive.org/details/sim_new-ideas-in-psychology_1991_9_2/page/163.
- Stein, Gordon (1996), The Encyclopedia of the Paranormal, Prometheus Books, p. 249, ISBN 978-1573920216, Mainstream science is on the whole very dubious about ESP, and the only way that most scientists will be persuaded is by a demonstration that can be generally reproduced by neutral or even skeptical scientists. This is something that parapsychology has never succeeded in producing.
↑
- (Pigliucci, Boudry 2013) "Parapsychological research almost never appears in mainstream science journals."
- (Odling-Smee 2007) "But parapsychologists are still limited to publishing in a small number of niche journals."

Sarong tamboan an artikulong ini. Makakatabang ka sa Wikipedia sa pagpoon kaining pahina.

[Stuckrad_2007-1] 1 2 Schmidt, Joachim (2007). "Parapsychology". In von Stuckrad, Kocku. The Brill Dictionary of Religion. Leiden and Boston: Brill Publishers. doi:10.1163/1872-5287_bdr_COM_00339. ISBN 978-9004124332.

[2] Gross, Paul R.; Levitt, Norman; Lewis, Martin W. (1996). The Flight from Science and Reason. New York Academy of Sciences. p. 565. ISBN 978-0801856761. The overwhelming majority of scientists consider parapsychology, by whatever name, to be pseudoscience.

[:0-3] Pigliucci, Massimo; Boudry, Maarten (2013). Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 158. hdl:1854/LU-3161824. ISBN 978-0226051963. Many observers refer to the field as a 'pseudoscience'. When mainstream scientists say that the field of parapsychology is not scientific, they mean that no satisfying naturalistic cause-and-effect explanation for these supposed effects has yet been proposed and that the field's experiments cannot be consistently replicated.

[4] Carroll, Sean (May 11, 2016). "Thinking About Psychic Powers Helps Us Think About Science". Wired. New York City: Condé Nast. Today, parapsychology is not taken seriously by most academics.

[Cordón-5] Error sa pag-cite: Imbalidong <ref> tatak; mayong teksto na ipinagtao para sa reperensiya na pinagngaranan na "Cordón"

[6] 
Hyman, R. (1986). "Parapsychological research: A tutorial review and critical appraisal". Proceedings of the IEEE 74 (6): 823–849. doi:10.1109/PROC.1986.13557. https://archive.org/details/ieee-proceedings_1986-06_74_6/page/823.

Kurtz, Paul (1981), "Is Parapsychology a Science?", in Kendrick Frazier, Paranormal Borderlands of Science, Prometheus Books, pp. 5–23, ISBN 978-0879751487, If parapsychologists can convince the skeptics, then they will have satisfied an essential criterion of a genuine science: the ability to replicate hypotheses in any and all laboratories and under standard experimental conditions. Until they can do that, their claims will continue to be held suspect by a large body of scientists.

Flew, Antony (1982). Grim, Patrick, ed. Parapsychology: Science or Pseudoscience? in Philosophy of Science and the Occult. State University of New York Press. ISBN 978-0873955720.

Bunge, Mario (1991). "A skeptic's beliefs and disbeliefs". New Ideas in Psychology 9 (2): 131–149. doi:10.1016/0732-118X(91)90017-G. https://archive.org/details/sim_new-ideas-in-psychology_1991_9_2/page/131.

Blitz, David (1991). "The line of demarcation between science and nonscience: The case of psychoanalysis and parapsychology". New Ideas in Psychology 9 (2): 163–170. doi:10.1016/0732-118X(91)90020-M. https://archive.org/details/sim_new-ideas-in-psychology_1991_9_2/page/163.

Stein, Gordon (1996), The Encyclopedia of the Paranormal, Prometheus Books, p. 249, ISBN 978-1573920216, Mainstream science is on the whole very dubious about ESP, and the only way that most scientists will be persuaded is by a demonstration that can be generally reproduced by neutral or even skeptical scientists. This is something that parapsychology has never succeeded in producing.

[mwhA] Hyman, R. (1986). "Parapsychological research: A tutorial review and critical appraisal". Proceedings of the IEEE 74 (6): 823–849. doi:10.1109/PROC.1986.13557. https://archive.org/details/ieee-proceedings_1986-06_74_6/page/823.

[mwlg] Kurtz, Paul (1981), "Is Parapsychology a Science?", in Kendrick Frazier, Paranormal Borderlands of Science, Prometheus Books, pp. 5–23, ISBN 978-0879751487, If parapsychologists can convince the skeptics, then they will have satisfied an essential criterion of a genuine science: the ability to replicate hypotheses in any and all laboratories and under standard experimental conditions. Until they can do that, their claims will continue to be held suspect by a large body of scientists.

[mwoA] Flew, Antony (1982). Grim, Patrick, ed. Parapsychology: Science or Pseudoscience? in Philosophy of Science and the Occult. State University of New York Press. ISBN 978-0873955720.

[mwqQ] Bunge, Mario (1991). "A skeptic's beliefs and disbeliefs". New Ideas in Psychology 9 (2): 131–149. doi:10.1016/0732-118X(91)90017-G. https://archive.org/details/sim_new-ideas-in-psychology_1991_9_2/page/131.

[mwug] Blitz, David (1991). "The line of demarcation between science and nonscience: The case of psychoanalysis and parapsychology". New Ideas in Psychology 9 (2): 163–170. doi:10.1016/0732-118X(91)90020-M. https://archive.org/details/sim_new-ideas-in-psychology_1991_9_2/page/163.

[mwyw] Stein, Gordon (1996), The Encyclopedia of the Paranormal, Prometheus Books, p. 249, ISBN 978-1573920216, Mainstream science is on the whole very dubious about ESP, and the only way that most scientists will be persuaded is by a demonstration that can be generally reproduced by neutral or even skeptical scientists. This is something that parapsychology has never succeeded in producing.

[7] 
(Pigliucci, Boudry 2013) "Parapsychological research almost never appears in mainstream science journals."

(Odling-Smee 2007) "But parapsychologists are still limited to publishing in a small number of niche journals."

[mw2Q] (Pigliucci, Boudry 2013) "Parapsychological research almost never appears in mainstream science journals."

[mw2g] (Odling-Smee 2007) "But parapsychologists are still limited to publishing in a small number of niche journals."

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]