Intelligence agencies are an excellent source of case material for studying paranoia, as they encounter it in extreme form. They are required to be suspicious—that is their job. Those agencies are inherently deceptive, and they are also prime targets of enemies’ deceit. They must be continually alert for attempts at infiltration.
James Jesus Angleton was chief of the counterintelligence staff of the CIA. He is mentioned in many books on the agency, and authors either praise him for his penetrating insights or damn him for his destructive paranoia. Author Edward Jay Epstein spent time with him and described some labyrinthine deceits in Deception: The Invisible War Between the KGB and the CIA (1989). Epstein explained that Angleton “conceived of deception as the ‘mirror image of intelli-gence.’”11 Information may be genuine or intentionally misleading, or even both (good information being provided to build confidence in a source). A defector may be real or surreptitiously working for the enemy, or he may genuinely defect but have been fed misleading information by his original employer. Epstein notes that “Angleton found in the CIA that a ‘single mind-set’ could not deal with this contingent reality.” All possibilities must be evaluated, but those who recruit defectors have an interest in believing them to be genuine (personal bonds are established, and promotions are linked to success in recruiting). It is difficult to maintain the necessary critical balance in face of the ambiguity. (Fundamentally, this is a problem in interpretation. As was explained in the chapter on literary theory, interpretation is the realm of the trickster.) In order to address the problem, a formal division was made between intelligence and counterintelligence.
This set up an internal adversarial relationship, but even though it was institutionalized, and therefore somewhat controlled, it created tremendous tensions. The case of Soviet defector Yuri Nosenko was particularly wrenching. People within the CIA could not agree whether he was a true defector, and the controversy continued for years. It nearly paralyzed major sections of the Agency and ruined a number of careers. Former CIA director Richard Helms described the affair as an incubus.
Intelligence agencies’ inherent paranoia and deception highlight issues of boundaries and sense of self. If a spy infiltrates an agency and gains a high position (which Angleton long suspected of the CIA, not unreasonably, since it happened to the British), the question arises as to the true loyalty, and thus identity, of the agency. With such an infiltration, the enemy “participates” in the “mind” of the state. However, even if an agency has not been so infiltrated, its suspicion about itself can have severe repercussions. The distinction between self and enemy can be ambiguous to the agency’s “self.”
Spying, paranoia, and deception cluster together. I will remind the reader that in the U.S., the only government agencies, in fact the only bureaucracies of any size, that substantially supported parapsychological research, were the intelligence services. The trickster constellated here.
Anti-structure and Paranoia
Concepts of anti-structure and the trickster help explain paranoiac conditions that might otherwise seem unrelated.
Marginals, inferiors, and others who live between categories or near boundaries often have an above-average susceptibility to paranoid ideas. By necessity they must be especially sensitive to threats to their well-being. They understand that elites are unlikely to be attentive to their needs and often conceal information from them. Many examples can be cited.
Billionaire Ross Perot ran as a third-party candidate in the 1992 U.S. presidential election. He was outside the long-established Democrat-Republican two-party structure. Perot believed that conspiracies targeted him and included wiretaps and threats against his daughter’s wedding. The establishment media ridiculed him, and Time
14
magazine even titled one of its articles “Perotnoia.” Other antistructural characteristics clustered around Perot, and perhaps not surprisingly, a disproportionate share of his supporters believed in the paranormal. (This is not unique. New Age beliefs were also linked with anti-establishment political views in the December 1993 elections
in Russia.)15
Many African Americans are in marginal positions, and some of them suspect that the AIDS virus was developed to target their race. As far as I can tell, this suspicion has little to support it directly, but AIDS has had a devastating effect in Africa. Given the prejudice African Americans have endured, distrust is understandable and often completely justified.
In the 1950s, owners of small businesses (people not part of large bureaucratic organizations) were disproportionately represented among supporters of Joseph McCarthy, who claimed that a communist conspiracy had infiltrated the government.16
Most of the people in the above examples are generally not regarded as socially marginal, but they are in positions outside the establishment, and that makes them vigilant to threats.
People who have safe, secure jobs in corporations or tenured positions in academe are prone to discount conspiracy theories as excuses used by marginal or ineffectual groups for their unfortunate plight. Elite news media frequently speak disparagingly of conspiratorial beliefs, and the medical and psychological establishments do their part by denigrating the fears as infantile, narcissistic, delusional, etc. Paranoia and conspiracy theories undermine trust and destabilize social relations; thus establishment authorities have good reason to marginalize those who espouse the ideas.
Establishments too can be vulnerable to paranoia, especially when their security is threatened. They may become fearful of those not clearly part of themselves, especially those who live at the boundaries and whose status is ambiguous. In the European witchcraft persecutions, many poor, elderly women were put to death because they were feared for using magic to do evil. However, those women were actually in much greater danger from the hands of the authorities—a clear instance of projection by people in the establishment. Despite the establishments’ overwhelming physical superiority, they still feared magic.
Parapsychology
Little parapsychological literature addresses the connection between psi and paranoia. In fact the word paranoia is not even listed in any of the indexes of the eight-volume series Advances in Parapsychological Research. There is, however, discussion about the fear of psi, and that raises at least some of the pertinent issues.
Psychiatrist Jan Ehrenwald was one of the few parapsychologists to comment explicitly on paranoia. More than half a century ago he noted that “the projection hypothesis of paranoic delusions, advanced by the psychoanalysts is nothing else than the reverse of the telepathy hypothesis, its photographic negative, as it were.” This suggests an extremely close relationship between the two, and one that is unpleasant to think about.
Ehrenwald went on to speak of personality disintegration in schizophrenia after a paranoiac phase, saying: “At this stage the boundaries of the self are abolished, ‘the distinction between the ego and the environment suspended’ … the patient may himself complain that he is unable ‘to tell himself from the outer world’ … or, from ‘things of the outer world’ … Seen from the angle of the telepathy hypothesis this state marks the end of the patient’s struggle to maintain his personality against the impact of hetero-psychic influences of both sadistic-aggressive and trivial kind.” This raises the disturbing issue of personality disintegration, and the possibility that telepathy might contribute to it. This is an unsettling thought, and Ehrenwald came in for criticism. Some pointed out that ESP tests with psychotics did not produce substantially higher scores than with normal people. That gives some reassurances, but with the limited research, experimenter effects, and other possible influences in ESP tests, I am not so confident that psi is not a factor in mental illness.
Therapist Helen Palmer discussed paranoia and psi in a 1992 paper that emphasized cases with justifiable fears rather than pathology. She offered herself as an example. Palmer helped organize Vietnam War protests, and she relied upon her psychic impressions to detect informants planted by the government.
She had precognitive experiences warning her of harm to colleagues. Her anti-war activism put her at odds with the established power structure, i.e., into an antistructural position.
Other than the writings of Ehrenwald and Palmer, parapsychologists have made little comment on paranoia, but this is understandable. Drawing attention to the association could further marginalize parapsychology. Nevertheless, the problem needs study. I have witnessed a number of instances of apparently strong paranormal phenomena, after which paranoid fears soon emerged in the participants. Many worried about being followed, of phones being tapped, or “accidents” just seeming to happen. The prevalence of paranoiac beliefs in groups intentionally applying psychic abilities warrants contemplation.
Fear of Psi
Several parapsychologists have discussed the fear of psi, and the topic is sufficiently related to paranoia to merit comment. Though the literature is limited, it spans over half a century. The commentators have included Jule Eisenbud, Harvey Irwin, Lawrence LeShan, Charles Tart, and John Wren-Lewis.
Most adopted psychodynamic and psychoanalytic approaches, which are particularly concerned with events and thought processes of early childhood. Psychoanalysts suggest that, at some point, infants believe that their thoughts can influence the world. This has been dubbed magical thinking. During that stage, a child may worry that her (or his) negative thoughts have destructive power, and that can be frightening, especially when anger cannot always be controlled. A child can feel guilty if she suspects that her thoughts hurt others. Eventually children learn that their thoughts do not affect things directly (at least most of the time), and that realization is a healthy progression.
But psi actually exists. The child’s fears are not entirely based in fantasy. As such there must be psychological mechanisms to avoid the unpleasant implications. Charles Tart, a psychologist at the University of California at Davis, presented two related theories about unconscious resistance to psi: social masking theory and primal conflict repression theory.
Social masking theory says that for smooth social interaction, we must veil our hostilities and other negative feelings toward others. Likewise, we must block our own recognition of others’ negative feelings toward us. If psi operated strongly, and we were continuously aware of others’ hostile emotions, the social balance would be upset.
Primal conflict repression theory is closely related. Tart suggests that psychic bonds between mothers and young children are especially strong, but the emotions between them are not always positive. Sometimes mothers become angry, even furious, at their children. But to be good mothers, they try to maintain composure and outward calm. A child may sense the anger telepathically, while his (or her) ordinary senses tell him that his mother is unruffled. Because the child wants and needs to please his mother, it is best for him to ignore the anger he sensed psychically. The child is thereby subtly encouraged to ignore or repress telepathic information.23
There are good reasons for repressing psychic awareness. Psi can foment distrust that can destroy social relationships. In fact, some instances of paranoia may be essentially failures of repression. Many social processes work to marginalize the paranormal, and they also reinforce the repression of psychic awareness. This undoubtedly has benefits.
Summary
This chapter has been rather short and terse. Like others, it brings together some seemingly unrelated matters, but they can be linked. Briefly, paranoia is a natural part of the human condition. It is not necessarily, or even primarily, pathological. It arises in processes of separation, and it is seen with both individuals and collectives. In separation processes, fears naturally arise. Separation is required for development of the individual, for differentiated roles in society, and for formation of new groups. Becoming separate, distinguishing ourselves from others, is facilitated with liminal conditions.
Paranoia is a rich area for fundamental concepts. The blurring of binary oppositions of self-other, internal-external, fantasy-reality are all obvious examples. Thus paranoia is the province of the trickster.
Paranoia is frequently associated with occult practices, and it is found with a variety of anti-structural circumstances. Paranoia often emerges with strong psychic functioning, and it can fragment groups successfully producing psi. These facts pose special problems for psychic research. Parapsychologists’ theories and practice must take them into account.
CHAPTER 26
Conclusions
Supernatural events have been reported for millennia (e.g., miracles of Moses, Jesus, Mohammed); they have played central roles in history’s most important cultural transformations. They are frequently portrayed in the world’s greatest art and literature. The majority of the U.S. adult population believes in paranormal phenomena. Yet debates still rage about their very existence. These facts indicate a problematic situation of a very deep order. Parapsychology is engaged in something drastically different than “normal science,” and those who pretend otherwise are gravely deluded.
In times past, the supernatural was seen as all-encompassing, providing a ground for existence, but it was also recognized as irrational and dangerous. In academe now, those ideas are viewed as quaint, as artifacts of the emotions, as nonsensical, or due to neurotic or infantile thought. Earlier peoples’ understanding of the world was entirely different than that of elite culture today. It makes sense to reevaluate those older, forgotten, marginalized, and discredited ideas. They can expose the limits of “rationality.”
This book focused on the paranormal, and by now the reader probably realizes that there is no way to succinctly survey the contents. This summary excludes much. I will simply recap a few key points, review some examples, and try to bring a little coherence to the diversity of topics. Major issues include marginality, binary oppositions, rationality, and rationalization. The trickster is pertinent to them all.
I began this book with the goal of explaining why deception is so frequently encountered with the paranormal, e.g., fraudulent medium-ship, UFO hoaxes, the confusion of magic tricks with psychic phenomena. This led me to consider the trickster figure, and as I became familiar with him, I found that he shared a number of other characteristics of the paranormal. As I learned more about his qualities, I began to recall similar ones in the paranormal, properties that others had discounted as happenstance or inconsequential. For instance, paradox, ambiguity, and marginality typify them both. I also discovered that the trickster was an important figure in many “primitive” religions, but curiously, he is now rather neglected.
The Paranormal Today
The paranormal is perplexing. Its place in society, as well as laboratory research, demonstrate the peculiarities. Any comprehensive theory must accommodate, integrate, and explain the oddities. I will review several.
Today few groups make concerted attempts to elicit psi. Some that do include spiritualists trying to contact the dead, practitioners of modern-day witchcraft, and parapsychologists in laboratories. These are usually small efforts; generally, fewer than a dozen persons are involved in any given undertaking.
Spiritualist and witchcraft groups are typically short-lived and are rarely successful at establishing stable institutions with grounds, buildings, and paid staff. There are umbrella associations, but those are loose networks and confederations, which exert no control and have no ecclesiastical power over local groups.
When such organizations do institutionalize, such as spiritualist camps, they develop reputations for fraudulent mediumship and become even more marginal. The telephone psychic hot lines constitute another example. They have very unsavory reputations for preying on poor, vulnerable people in times of need.
Several organizations that began with an emphasis on paranormal phenomena did institutionalize, and were able to maintain relatively untarnished reputations. However, in their evolution they greatly reduced or eliminated attempts to elicit phenomena.
The anti-institutional nature of psi is seen in other ways. Psychics, spiritualist mediums, psych
ic detectives, and healers virtually never serve in those capacities as employees in industry, government, or academe. Typically they operate as independent agents. Many practitioners do have ordinary jobs in large organizations, but they carry on their psychic activities outside that employment.
Parapsychology shows a similar pattern. It has had only slight success at institutionalizing. It has nary one secure, permanent research laboratory in government, industry, or academe that is assured of continuing after the founder leaves. There are no university departments of parapsychology. A few college professors offer courses and conduct research, but that effort has never become part of the established, ongoing curriculum in the universities. J. B. Rhine’s lab at Duke University lasted 30 years, far longer than any other, but it was outside the usual departmental structure. When he retired, the Duke research stopped. Rhine exemplifies the general pattern, and there is no counterexample.
The term anti-structure subsumes these anti-institutional qualities. In some formulations, marginality is a type of anti-structure. It is a salient characteristic of paranormal groups, which in many eyes are seen as strange or even kooky, something avoided by reputable, rational scientists.
Academic psychologists and sociologists do study belief in the paranormal, and they conduct surveys of paranormal experiences. But as a practical matter, they are forbidden (via subtle pressures) to attempt to induce the phenomena and engage them directly (as is done in normal scientific research). It is acceptable to discuss the supernatural in universities, but in courses on literature and religion. The events are presented as long ago and far away, or as explicitly fictional. All this keeps them distant, and it is easy to dismiss them as inconsequential, metaphorical, or delusional.
The Trickster and the Paranormal Page 51