PSI - psychic discoveries behind the iron curtain

465 Pages·1970·5.424 MB·English

by  Ostrander, Sheila and Lynn Schroeder

About the authors
Sheila Ostrander is a graduate of the University of Manitoba,
Canada, and has also studied in Europe. She has published four
books of non-fiction in the United States and her articles have
appeared in a number of magazines. She has had plays produced in
Canada and has appeared on Canadian radio and TV shows. She
now lives in Canada.
Lynn Schroeder is a graduate of Skidmore College and studied at
New York’s New School for Social Research. She has written on
many subjects, including a book on the American Supreme Court.
She is also a poet whose work has appeared in several literary
journals. Miss Schroeder lives in New Jersey, U.S.A.
The authors have travelled extensively in Europe, the Middle East
and the Iron Curtain countries. For the last eight years their
collaborative work on the Soviet Union has appeared in journals all
over the United States. In 1968 they attended the First Annual
Parapsychology Conference in Moscow and interviewed scientists on
psychic research during their trip through the Soviet Union,
Central Europe and the Balkans.

Sheila Ostrander and Lynn Schroeder
PSI
PSYCHIC DISCOVERIES
BEHIND THE
IRON CURTAIN
Introduction by Ivan T. Sanderson
Abacus edition first published in Great Britain 1973
by Sphere Books Ltd
30/32 Gray’s Inn Road, London WC1X 8JL
Copyright © Sheila Ostrander and
Lynn Schroeder 1970
Excerpts appeared in Parapsychology Review,
National Enquirer and Omen Press.
ISBN 0 349 12667 4
This bock is sold subject to the condition that it
shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-
sold, hired out or otherwise circulated without the
publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or
cover other than that in which it is published and
without a similar condition including this condition
being imposed on the subsequent purchaser.
Set in Linotype Times
Printed in Great Britain by Cox & Wyman Ltd,
London, Reading and Fakenham
AN INTRODUCTION
Probably the most aggravating thing—to both authors and
readers—in any published work, is that an introduction should turn
out to be a review. A preface is where the authors can sound off on
any rankling questions brought on by their editors; and an epilogue
is where they can take a final pot-shot at their readers. Reviewers
should keep out of the whole mess and go publish some place else.
An introduction, especially if written by some person other than the
author or authors should, at least in my opinion, offer only some
attempt at augmentation of the book’s general theme; perhaps bring-
ing to it some corollary and pertinent observations, since a lot of
things can be said in an introduction that the authors have not been
able to say—or have not been allowed to say—in the body of their
text. So, I shall now proceed to offer some such complementary and
perhaps impertinent observations for your possible edification.
First, let it be most clearly understood that this book has nothing
whatsoever to do with any “psychic” anything. The employment of
this word in the title should, rather, be read to mean “Matters that
we have been taught to call psychic”. The choice of this title is,
nonetheless, quite legitimate, on two counts. First, it will attract a
great number of people who would otherwise not even so much as
glance at the opus; and second, because it may render a very real
service in clearing up this whole preposterous semantic confusion.
Let us start out by taking a look in the dictionaries, always the best
place to begin when there is anything involved about which there
might be semantic doubts; and, as this is an American book, we will
tackle good old Webster first. Herein we find the word psychic
defined as:
“1. Of or relating to the psyche”. (Referring back a few lines, we
find this in turn defined as “(a) A beautiful princess of classical
mythology loved by Cupid. (b) Soul, Self; also Mind”.) Webster
then goes on about psychic as follows:
“2. Lying outside the sphere of physical science or knowledge;
5
immaterial, moral, or spiritual in origin or force. 3. Sensitive to
nonphysical or supernatural forces and influences”. (Italics mine.)
The Oxford dictionary gets to the point more simply and directly,
and is much more succinct. It states simply: “Non-physical force
assumed to explain spiritualistic phenomena”.
Let us first try to unravel the semantics. You will notice that the
mind, morals, the supernatural, the spiritual and even the spiritual-
istic (which is something quite else as most dictionaries make clear)
get dragged into the business. However, nary a mention of the two
headings under which such matters are most commonly and popu-
larly classed in our language—namely, Mysticism or the Occult.* So,
okay: the “psychic” concerns itself with the mind, the soul, morals,
the supernatural (whatever that may be), matters spiritual and re-
ligious, and the spiritualistic—meaning, one must presume, spiritual-
ism. Spiritism and Animism seem to have been overlooked.
Now, if we cannot trust our dictionaries, what can we trust in this
modern, complex, technological age that is based primarily on com-
munication and which, in turn is based on semantics? The only
means of precise communication that we have is based on speech, the
written word, or the computer’s binomial interpretation of these. (By
this I mean factual communication, not such emotional means as
sex, music, the dance, and other arts.) So, above all, we must get our
facts straight, and to do this, we have just got to find out precisely
what other people are talking about. It is most interesting to note
that not even the biggest dictionary, even unto the vast multi-volume
Oxford, so much as mentions a single one of the items in this book
under any of their headings of psychic. And what are these items?
To list some of them, we find the following:— Mental Telepathy;
Hypnotism; Faith Healing; Precognition; Psychokinesis; Auras
around plants and animals; Brain Control; Mind Patrol; Astrology;
Levitation; Sightless—i.e. eyeless—Vision; Dowsing; Acupuncture;
Witchcraft; Prophecy; Alchemy; Psychotronics; and what we
naively call “ESP”.
Now please note something well. These are just the items that the
average Westerner will positively avow constitute the hard core of
what he calls “the psychic”. Moreover, while he may permit the
inclusion of other items in this category, such as spiritualism, and
* Occult in point of semantic fact means simply and only “hidden”.
6
possibly even mysticism—if he knows the difference between the
two, or has ever learned what these words actually denote—if you try
to ram religion down his throat within this bailiwick he will probably
become insulted, insulting, and somewhat out-of-control mentally.
The reason? He has been taught for centuries that existence is clearly
divided into three parts:—the Spiritual: namely, religion and such,
plus, perhaps the arts, if he has even given them a thought. The
Scientific: which to the average Westerner means primarily tech-
nology, or button-pushing and bottle-washing; and third, everything
that is left over. This last used to be called metaphysics but is today
called simply “psychic”. The result of this indoctrination is that we
of the “West”—from scientists to imbeciles—seem not to have used
our dictionaries and so have failed to realize that we are using this
word to cover two quite different and almost diametrically opposed
concepts.
By the same token, we are in a similarly confused state with regard
to both the words “science” and “scientist”. We use the first to
cover both basic science, which the dictionaries define as the search
for knowledge, and applied science or technology which concerns
itself with research. Likewise we use the word “scientist” to cover
the practitioners of both of these expertises. However, those involved
in basic science are really philosophers, and it is very cheering to
note that the term “Philosophical Scientists” is creeping into
common usage. It is equally refreshing to encounter the heading
“Science and Technology”.
“Applied Science” is a good term and says clearly what it means,
but to speak of an “applied scientist” sounds as if the poor guy was
some kind of screwdriver. As a matter of fact, this is just about what
he is, so it is much more polite to dignify him with the somewhat
grandiose-sounding title of Technologist. Besides, this links him with
technicians, to which brotherhood he frankly belongs.
The average Westerner—and I shall continue to emphasize this
qualifying term—lumps everything, other than that which he has
been taught is either spiritual or scientific, into one great basket
which he then chops up to suit his tastes. He has been told for a
couple of centuries now that anything neither science (pragmatic)
nor religion (spiritual) can explain must fall into this single en-
compassing category. And it is because of this that so many mis-
conceptions have arisen. For instance, it would seem to be extremely
7
unlikely that law will ever become wholly scientific, or art purely
spiritual, while matters like politics defy any classification. None-
theless, all these troublesome matters display technological aspects,
and they may even be granted some scientific and spiritual qualities,
so that the average person takes them in his stride. But when matters
that don’t seem to be answerable to either pragmatic or spiritual
explanation crop up, people simply deny that they exist even as
problems. These were once lumped together as metaphysics and are
those which today are called psychic.
The old metaphysics—which, incidentally, meant only things left
over from Aristotelian so-called physics—is also most clearly divided
into two quite separate parts. These are, on the one hand, the Cryp-
tophysical; and, on the other, the Cryptospiritual (“crypto” meaning
simply “hidden”); in other words those items which are not as yet
understood or explained to the satisfaction of our current logic.
While nobody should deny the existence of the second category, such
matters are not as yet the province of what we call science but rather
of religion and mysticism. All of those of the first category, on the
other hand, most definitely can not be denied and do fall into that
province.
And this is just what the book is about.
Unlike, and diametrically opposed to what the dictionaries classify
as “psychic”, all the items discussed in this book are in every way not
only susceptible to truly scientific contemplation but also to tech-
nological investigation. What is more, said items have, as this book
now relates, been so investigated in the so-called Russian zone. But
we of the West still just do not realize this fact.
Doubtless our government scientists and technologists have been
aware of this for a long time, but the public is not generally aware of
it, and the press and other publicists simply will not even believe in it
and persist in reporting on it only with snide jocularity. Whether this
is under instructions, as so many claim, or due to simple lack of
education, who is to say; but, the result has been a crystallization of
this stupid attitude and the envelopment of our whole outlook in a
sort of tortoise-like shell of protective disbelief. The worst aspect of
this mass stupidity (or deliberate mendacity) is, moreover, the brack-
eting of these matters with what the dictionaries denote as the “psy-
chic”.
Of course, the major trouble is that, as I said at the outset, we
8
don’t have any generally accepted word for these items as a class;
though, as a matter of fact, we do have a perfectly good one which
unfortunately has not yet gotten into any dictionary. The designation
is, of course, “Forteana”, but I won’t go any further into this at the
moment. Rather, we should try to straighten out another aspect of all
this business that is equally pertinent; namely, just where the
authors’ researches were prosecuted.
This is this new concept of “The West”, now so beloved of politi-
cal writers. Despite its now almost universal use, this, too, has not yet
gotten into the dictionaries; while even advanced students of inter-
national affairs appear not to have the foggiest notion as to how to
define the term—geographically, that is. The world of humanity is
today divided into eight major blocks. These are basically geo-
graphic, but the vast majority of the human inhabitants of each form
a compact ethnic majority. These blocks are: (1) Western Eurasia
plus North America, (2) Eastern Eurasia, namely the Slavic domain
plus Siberia, (3) The Near East, being the Muhammadan world,
from Morocco to West Pakistan, north to the south Slavic border,
and south to the Ethiopian block, (4) The Middle East, or the sub-
continent of India, (5) The Far East, being all that lies east of the
great Mongolian Fold, which runs northeast from the Pamirs to
Amuria; together with Indochina, Indonesia, and Micronesia, (6)
Australia, with Papua and Polynesia, (7) Latin America, south of the
Rio Grande, and (8) Ethiopian Africa. Of course, there are end-
less human minority groups in each block while the indigenous
populations of two—North America and Australia—are now almost
completely suppressed. It is interesting to note that the aboriginal
Amerinds of Latin America have had a more than profound
influence on the Europeans who went to their countries, and that the
Australians are beginning to show a very noticeable distinction that
would seem to have been in some mysterious way derived from their
dying aborigines.
Each of these eight major blocks has an overall approach to life
that is now quite distinct, and each appears to look at its world, the
world generally, and life as a whole, in a noticeably different way.
Then, there is another thing. This is that there is really a “West-
West”, a “Middle-West”, and an “East-West”, in that North America
is, apart from sharing basically the same language with a Middle-
West country (i.e. the United Kingdom or Great Britain) just as
9