Telepathy and the Subliminal Self

by R. Osgood Mason

(1) The agent being in a normal condition—the percipient hypnotized, the hypnotic condition having been produced at a distance of a hundred yards—and from a point from which the percipient could not be seen.

(2) The agent in the hypnotic condition; a definite hallucination strongly desired and decided upon beforehand was produced, the percipient being in a normal state.

(3) The agent was in normal sleep. Hallucination decided upon before going to sleep was produced—the percipient awake and in normal condition.

(4) Both agent and percipient awake and normal—hallucination produced at a distance of four hundred miles. In one case the phantasm is seen by two percipients, and in another case the place only where the phantasm should appear was strongly in the agent’s mind; and while the sisters who usually occupied that room might naturally be expected to be the percipients, as a matter of fact another person, a married sister who happened to be visiting them—a comparative stranger to the agent—was occupying the room and became the percipient.

In each of these cases a definite purpose was formed by the agent to produce a certain hallucination or present a certain picture—generally a representation or phantasm of himself to the percipient. A picture or phantasm is seen by the intended percipient, and, on comparison, in each case it is found that it is the same phantasm that the agent had endeavored to project and make visible, and that it was perceived in the same place and at the same time that the agent had intended that it should be seen.

Can these statements be received as true and reliable? In reply we say, the evidence having been carefully examined is of such a character as to entitle it to belief, and the errors of observation and reporting are trifling, and not such as would injure the credibility of statements made regarding any event which was a matter of ordinary observation; moreover, these cases now have become so numerous and have been so carefully observed that they should be judged by the ordinary rules of evidence; and by that rule they should be received.

Having been received, how can they be explained?

It may be answered:—

(1) That these apparent sequences presenting the relation of cause and effect are merely chance coincidences. But on carefully applying the doctrine of chances, it is found that the probability that these coincidences of time and place, and the identity of the pictures presented and perceived, occurred by chance, would be only one in a number so large as to make it difficult to represent it in figures, and quite impossible for any mind to comprehend. And that such a coincidence should occur repeatedly in one person’s experience is absolutely incredible.

(2) The circumstances of distance and situation render it certain that the phantasms could not have been communicated or presented to the percipient through any of the usual channels of communication—by means of the physical organs of sense—even granting that they could be so transferred under favorable conditions.