It was recently announced that the Society for Psychical Research (SPR) received a £2-million donation (approximately $2.65-million in U.S. currency) from Professor Yew-Kwang Ng, emeritus professor of economics at Monash University in Australia. It is apparently intended specifically for “survival research” and is believed to be the largest endowment ever to fund such research. It was reported that Ng holds chairs in professorship at a number of universities and was the recipient of prestigious awards in economics and social sciences. He has authored books and papers in economics, biology, cosmology, mathematics, philosophy, psychology, and happiness studies and recently authored Do We Survive Our Biological Death? A Rational Examination.
While I welcome the news, I have to wonder if future psychical research can really add anything to the past research in mediumship, near-death studies, and other psychic phenomena. I also wonder, as discussed in this my blog of December 29, whether we can erase all doubts about survival. Some of our greatest philosophers and researchers are quoted as saying that absolute certainty is not in the best interest of humanity. That is, some doubt is necessary for the “Divine Plan” to function properly.
In my essay for the Bigelow essay competition of 2021, I argued that we had overwhelming evidence for survival before 1920 (see www.bigelowinstitute.org) The problem was that it was too complex, too convoluted, too confusing, too complicated, and even too conflicting, for the vast majority of people, even skeptical researchers, to understand. It was too much like religion, which Science had supposedly impeached. I’ve encountered a number of modern-day researchers who knew next to nothing about the old research. They had heard about Professors William James, Oliver Lodge, William Barrett and other dedicated researchers, but they had only scratched the surface of the research in attempting to understand it. The little they did read about was usually distorted, twisted, or misrepresented based on false assumptions and ignorance of the anomalies involved with inter-dimensional communication by those reporting on it. They were satisfied with the Wikipediasummaries, nearly all of which debunked the various phenomena. One needs to dig deeply into a particular phenomenon to understand it and that requires the slow digging, sifting, and discernment required in excavating ancient ruins.
Early Research
I initially suspected that Professor Ng is one of those not very familiar with the research of yesteryear. However, when I looked at the bibliography of his 2024 book, I noted that my Bigelow paper was one of the references, as were a number of other Bigelow award winners. Thus, he was and is aware of the early research. He gave special attention to the study of medium Leonora Piper and mentioned the research of Barrett, Lodge, Alfred Russel Wallace, Frederic Myers, Richard Hodgson, and James Hyslop, all of whom saw their research as strongly suggesting survival. Ng further discusses the research of Ian Stevenson, Stephen Braude, Raymond Moody, Bruce Greyson, and many others.
Those familiar with all of the past phenomena and research examined in Ng’s book might wonder what future research can possibly add to it all. Is it simply “reinventing the wheel”? It often seems so. However, the fact is that books about such research, unlike fiction and fantasy best sellers, reach only a small percentage of the population and therefore the vast majority of people remain ignorant or indifferent to the evidence.
Moreover, considering the fact that the scientific world is still caught in the web of simple materialism and for the most part unappreciative of all the past research, it seems clear that efforts must continually be made to educate the masses in the most important matter concerning them – that consciousness does survive death in a larger world. Whether it is attempting to simplify and explain the past research or develop new research, historians and researchers are still required.
Read More – Is Future Psychical Research Merely ‘Reinventing the Wheel’?
Leave a Reply