BELIEF IN GHOSTS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 11669, 8 April 1916, Page 8

BELIEF IN GHOSTS.

There is a deeper and more widespread belief in ghosts at the present day than at any time since j scientific methods of thinking came into forco, in spite of the opinion _ of the man-in-the-street that suoh things arc "pure rubbish" and that "medical science" has shown thonl to be nothing more than " popular superstitious." This you may readily prove by a preliminary census among your friends. If you question thorn you will be surprised to find how many of them havo had some experience of the kind, though they may not caro to have it known, especially if you are not sympathetic. But nearly everyone has had some sort of occult or strange experience in his or hor life, if you question them deeply enough, and this fact was brought out by tho startling census taken some years ago in England, when it was mathematically shown tliat about 10 per cent of the average population had had some experience of this character. This is astonishing, but it is a fact. Ghosts have, so to say, received the endorsement of science to some extent. But in thus saying that ghosts exist I must not be understood to say that the ghost of tradition is with us still. The ghosts which were semi-material beings and paraded about in sheets, clanking chains behind them, are no more. Their place has been taken by a more ethereal being, by a creature which even our science can accept. Thus, when .1 say that ghosts exist, or that such tilings as haunted houses certainly exist, we must understand what we mean by these terms asK ourselves the question, " is a Ghost?" And "What is a Haunted House?" I say that suoh things as haunted houses exist, but I do not pretend thau material phantoms walk _ about such houses, tormenting , the inmates and making their lives miserable: But that there are certain peculiar influences fit work in some localities which canuo be accounted for no one would deny who has had much experience < with these phenomena or who has himselr lived in a 1 haunted house for any length of time. PRELIMINARY FACTS.

Before I, can answer or define accurately and simply tho modern scientific conception of a. " ghost," a few preliminary facte must be stated. . When tho Society for Psychical Research bsgan collecting its material, it soon found this remarkable fact:-r-Tliat of the ghost stories colleoted tne great majority of them seemed' to hinge upon tho moment of death. Most of tlio apparitions which, were seen wero found to correspond, in point of time, with the death of the person represented. Perhaps the see'r might only have oxporisnced a case of this character once in his lifetime, yet that once was found to correspond* in a very remarkable manner with a distant and tragic event. The question, of course, at once arose, Are these cases due to chance. One might bo, perhaps a dozen, a score, but when tho coincidental cases began to mount into the hundreds the theory of coincidence had to bo strained to the utmost to make-it work. In fact, when it was mathematically figured out 'I was found that the chances were millions to one against this groat number of cases happening at the supreme moment they aid. Several hundred sucn cases were published in a. book entitled "Phantasms of the Living,which mads a great sensation at the^time. But the cry was 'at once raised—- " Too few cases! Your point is not yet proved." Some thirty thousand cases of all kinds were then collected. These were put to the test, and it was again proved mathematically that the chances against possible coincidence were so huge as to render that hypothesis all but inconceivable. Thus, Professor Sidgwick's committee was forced to the following conclusion : "Between deaths and apparitions of the dying person a connection exists which is "not due to chance alone. This wo hold as a proved fact." Now, coincidental *cases of this type are called " apparitions of the dying," to distinguish them from the " apparitions of tlio living"—that is/figures appearing of people still living, as occasionally happens;'and " apparitions ■if the dead"—or f bant asms which have appeared long after the d'eath of the T>3rson symbolised. There are tlras these three broad classes of "ghosts" to begin witli. The question arose, therefore, might not all these cases bo explained by some underlying cause wliich is the same m all cases? We now believe that thy can to a very large extent. But to mako plain what this cause is we shall have to digress for a moment to explain another factor involved in our problem. TELEPATHY GENERALLY ACCEPTED.

This is telepathy, or thought transference. Most people now believe that telepathy between living people takes place on occasion, and, if thy don't believe it, they are referred to tlio records, where proof is to be found (the proceedings of the S. P. R.)., If you think of a playing card, for instance, the nee of hearts, the recipient of the impression will see the ace of hearts if the experiment is successful. It takes visual form in his mind. It is a hallucination —a mental picture—yet it owes its origin to another mind, external to itself. It is subjective, yet at the same time objective. It is a real thing, yet does not interfere with the mechanical laws of our world. We believe that much the same thing takes place in apparitions of the living. of the dying, and of the dead. In cases of apparitions of the living, one mind influences another iu sleep, trance, in ill-health or for reasons as yet undetermined, and the percipient of the apparition sees the figure of this person, as previously he saw the vision of the playing card. Incases of apparitions of the dying, some mental energy seems liberated, facilitating this telepathic impulse fronr mind to mind. And m cases of apparitions of the dead—ghosts, proper —this telepathic impulse is supposed to en.ar-a.te from the mind of the "dead" person, still living and active, however, in another sphere, but yet able to influence the mind of a friend or relative yet alive and cause him or her to see the vision of the departed one. In all cases the apparitions are of telepathic origin.

In a similar way mysterious voices and touchings are explained. Experimental thought transference has shown us that a name, a sensation, ail emotion, a sensory impression of any kind, can be transferred from mind to mind almost as easily as a visual image. It all depends upon tho form the phantasmal impression takes. For instance, wo can "will" the subject to hear tho word " mother" spoken, and ho will hear it; or that he shall feel a grasp on his right arm, and he will. Yet there was no real, external sound —such as would be recorded by a phonograph—and no real material ~ hand which grasped his. WHEN WE "SEE" A THING. The reader may well inquire here how such a thing is possible—how science explains the kctual meiibaniSn'i at jrork in the production of phai-tasraal i . ' -ay—jgr JL--

REAL OR JUST MENTAL ILLUSIONS ? MODERN THEORIES BRIEFLY REVIEWED. (By HEREWARD CAREDJGTON in tiro " Xcir York Herald.")

experiences of this character. A diagram will help to make this clear. When wo seo' a thing what happens is somothing like this :-y. Reflected light waves coming from tho object strike tho eye (A), when they are transformed into nervous currents, and in this form travel along tho optic nerve to the '' sight centres at tho rear of the brain (B), where we have the "sensation" of sight or "seeing." But that is all! We .do not reason about tho object seen. We do not think to ourselves "This is a red apple," "I like red apples," otc. This is all done in the # higher thought or association centres in the cortex of the brain, at C. Then we think about the object seen by the sight centres through the instrumentality of the eyo.

The usual path of the nerve current is thus from A to B and from B to C. Now, no matter how these sight centres at tho rear, of the brain bo stimulated,, we still have the sensation of sight or "seeing." As I have just said, the usual way is for nerve currents to ti;avcl .along the optic nerve to this' centre. . But if the brain be poisoned by alcohol or toxins and the eye and nerves are unduly stimulated in consequence 'the sight centres may be stimulated too, ana then we have cases of hallucinations, as in delirium tremens, etc. Another way,in which "these sight centres may possibly be stimulateu is by nerve currents travelling down the nerves, from oto B. If you close your eyes and think of 'the face of a friend you will probably see it more or less clearly as a mind's eye picture. This is probably due to the fact that there is a slight downward current of nervous fluid from C to B. If this downward current were as great and powerful as an ordinary eye impulse would be we should have the sensation of seeing equally well—that is, we should have a " full blown hallucination "—of purely mental or. psychological origin. TELEPATHIC HALLUCINATION. Conceivably, one method by which these centres might thus be stimulated is by means of a telepathic impulse. This, influencing the mind and .brain of the person seeing the "ghost," has caused a tremendous downward rush of nerve energy, with tho result that tho sensation of sight is produced, and a figure seems to stand before us, _ in space, as though real. Thus wo have what wo call a " telephathic hallucination." This telepathic impulse may originate in the living, the dying, or, if they persist, in the dead. Similarly, if the impulse thus rsceived stimulates the auditory centres, instead of the visual, we liave the sensation of hearing a voico; or, if the tactile centr.es, .of being touched, etc. The origin is tho same in all such cases; but tho manner in whioh the impulse is externalised " or made real aud objective to the seer diffors with his habits and mental make-up. All this is confirmed by the so-called "experimental apparition" cases—in which one person deliberately wills to appear to another person at a distance, and succeeds in doing so—tho seer believing that 110 has seen a ghost. Hero, again, we have evidence of telepathy—causing a phantasmal appearance or figure.

OTHER OASES. So far as to the ordinary run of cases, which _ may doubtless be explained in this manner, rationally and scientifically. There are cases, . however,, which seem hard to reconcile with this hypothesis, and which seem to point very strongly to the older view that, ghosts may , sometimes be real, outstanding, objective entities. Among such facts I may mention:— 1. The fact that several people may see the figure at one time. These are the so-called '"collective cases, of which there are a number on record. Explanations have been offered, bjit they are all rather far-fetched. 2. Tlio fact that these appearances have occasionally been photographed. Apart from the . ordinary cases of fraudulent " spirit-photography " respective scientific evidence exists in favour of the view that an ethereal body of some sort has been photographed iu such cases. ■ 3. The fact that animals often behave queeriy when a ghost is seen, or even ielt. Aside froia mere legend, this has been observed at first hand on a number of occasion:;. 4. The fact that these phantasmal forms sometimes move material objeots —close the door, snuff the light, etc. -i hallucination, no matter how vivid, cannot do this! It rather points to the existence, in space, of a semisolid body. o. The fact that such' figures have often given information unknown to any person, present, but afterwards found to be correct. (This might conceivably be covered on the telepathic theory.) 0. The fact that the • person seeing the phantasmal figure may afterwards recognise the face on a photograph shown him —he never having known the person in life. In so-called "haunted houses" this has often been 'observed Many of these reasons might be urged against the view that ghosts are mental in origin, and in favour of the older view that they are material beings—having space, occupying bodies. On such a view some sort of ethereal or astral body is present, which is seen or perceived by the seer. One is here reminded of the *' spiritual body" of St Paul.

Several objections might be urged against this view, however. The mostobvious one is that of the clothes of the ghost. If the figure seen is real and outstanding, if it is a " really truly" spirit, how about its garments? Are they, too, spiritual? Are they the etliore il counterparts of the material garments as the body is the ethereal coun.erpavt of the physical body? it is possible—but, we must admit, most improbable. The mental pieturo hypothesis is far more plausible, because here the clothes of the ghost would be part of the picture—just as in our dreams the clothes which tho figures wear are part of the picture. We imagine them, and they exist. Tho clothes of ghosts have hulked large in the literature of the occult —chiefly because of the apparently good evidence oil occasion of the objective reality of the phantom forii (for when,

it moves objects, etc.). It. is liable to remain so until a more complete explanation be forthcoming and our investigations are more advanced. Seienbe may have succeeded in " explaining" ghosts—it has by no means •'exfrlauied tJiem a way."