Chapter 7
SEPTEMBER, 1971
FEEDBACK AND SUBLIMINAL PERCEPTION
Before Cleve and I could really get to work trying to zap metals and gasses,
I had a serious bout with the flu. At the time I attributed this to the
shock of the "new reality" I had experienced -- that plants, of
all things could intellectually distinguish between real and pretended intentions.
But more likely the flu came about because of the junk food we ate. Backster
was a junkfood junkie, and the Times Square area had an adequate supply
of this.
Cleve spent the time recording base line charts of the electric potential
shifts of the targets we were going to use. He did not tell me what these
were to be, since I was not supposed to know ahead of time.
I took advantage of the flu time spent in bed to consume two new books.
As it turned out, the information contained in both of those books was
to have tremendous importance in the years to come.
I remind that the concept of remote viewing did not yet exist in anyone’s
mind. I also remind that the real story of remote viewing must contain
mention and reviews of the technical factors which contributed to its discovery
and development.
As you will see ahead, the better part of the contributing technical factors
which ENHANCED remote viewing were drawn from scientific papers and sources
ALREADY published -- not, however, with remote viewing in mind.
The elements which aided in developing remote viewing were NOT pulled out
of thin air, but from published documents of sufficient merit to be accepted
by the many oversight committees of the sponsors soon to collect around
the remote viewing project.
When this book is finished, it will contain a bibliography of all of those
authoritative sources -- and which will greatly aid any other nation wishing
to understand and develop some of the superpowers.
The first of those two books was the paperback version of Charles Hampden-Turner’s
RADICAL MAN: THE PROCESS OF PSYCHO-SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT [New York: Anchor
Books, Doubleday, 1971].
At the time, Hampden-Turner was described as an expatriate Englishman who
had graduated from Trinity College, Cambridge University. Thereafter, he
attended the Harvard Business School’s MBA Program, experiencing thereby
a culture shock which had "radicalized" him.
At the time, although I was interested in sociology formats, I was not
yet very interested in psycho-social development or in radical formats largely
because most of them were focused in political formats. But when I had
leafed through the book I saw it contained lots of diagrams and organized
lists of phenomena associated with creative processes.
Indeed, the blurb on the back cover indicated that Hampden-Turner "brilliantly
analyzes the psycho-social development of the creative minority who stand
against the dominant modes of their society. He supports his study with
a fascinating and impressive array of evidence . . .".
As I’ve established earlier, diagrams and organized lists, especially regarding
creative processes, really turn me on -- and Hampden-Turner’s book proved
to be a paradise in this regard.
The concept of "Integration of Feedback" is one of the creative
process phenomena which plays a very important role in Hampden-Turner’s
thinking. And, in the future, THAT concept was to become one of the fundamental
structures which enabled the development and enhancement of remote viewing.
It is frustrating not to be able anywhere to find a clear-cut definition
of FEEDBACK, or the FEEDBACK LOOP, even in Hampden-Turner’s book. That
everyone possesses knowledge of what feedback consists of seems to be taken
for granted.
Basically it means that if you do something, then you will experience a
reaction or a response because of it.
For example, if, not knowing any better, you touch a hot stove you will
get burned.
Thereafter, the knowledge that you will get burned by touching a hot stove
is the integrated feedback loop now installed in your awareness and thinking
processes. In other words, by experiencing something and by being certain
what the result is, we have integrated the feedback into what is also referred
to as a "learned AND accurate response."
Basically, we all learn by experiencing feedback. We learn what’s right
or wrong by the responses of phenomena we experience as feedback.
In all probability, we learn nothing if no feedback is experienced or available.
I now invite you to remember this feedback thing throughout the rest of
this book.
In Backster’s lab, whether I was indeed influencing the plant was indicated
by the output of the polygraph. This is called "hard" feedback,
and does not depend on my own personal convictions or imaginings.
Such feedback creates certainty that my harmful thought was being received
or registered by the plant -- with the result that its electro-chemical
response systems got disturbed (i.e., worried).
In his book, Hampden-Turner indicates that feedback results in much higher
memory of the significant experiences. No feedback results in less or no
memory being stored within the bio-mind systems.
If the feedback loop is examined and dissected, such results in increased
intellectual and emotional understanding. The understanding permits integration
of whatever is involved.
The feedback loop also permits the organizing of experiences along three
distinct lines -- intellectually, aesthetically and functionally -- and
thereby enlarges the capacity for further growth and development.
If there is one information point you should remember in this book more
than any other, you have just read it -- for the FEEDBACK LOOP was to become
THE central issue regarding the development of remote viewing in the years
to come.
The second book I consumed while down with the flu was to become on of
my many bibles.
I had discovered it one day while browsing in Weiser’s occult book store
which had two copies of it. I had postponed reading it, even though it
contained very many diagrams mostly in the form of box-and-flow layouts.
This was
SUBLIMINAL PERCEPTION: THE NATURE OF A CONTROVERSY, by
Dr. Norman
Dixon [New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971]. At the time, Dixon was a Fellow of
the British Psychological Society and Reader in psychology at University
College, London.
In my opinion, however, the book’s title was a little misleading. It might
more aptly have been entitled INFORMATION-TRANSFER PROCESSES WITHIN THE
BIO-MIND SYSTEMS.
The definition of SUBLIMINAL: "Inadequate to produce a sensation
or a perception in conscious awareness; existing or functioning outside
of conscious awareness."
The idea here is that there is a THRESHOLD which demarks between what we
can be consciously aware of and what we are not. This threshold is referred
to as the LIMEN.
In a diagram, the limen would be pictured as a line (threshold) with the
consciousness awareness above it and the subconscious beneath it.
CONSCIOUS PERCEPTION AND AWARENESS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .LIMEN . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
SUBLIMINAL ACTIVITY CONSISTING
OF PERCEPTIONS AND PROCESSES
NOT PERCEIVED BY CONSCIOUS PROCESSES
- ALTHOUGH CONSCIOUS ACTIVITY OFTEN EXPERIENCES
THE RESULTS OF SUBCONSCIOUS ACTIVITY -
Under other nomenclature, the existence of the subconscious had long been
accepted before it was named that in modern times and then somewhat unfairly
postured as a new discovery.
But Freud was one of the first to dissect, so to speak, the subconscious
and divide it into different areas of activity -- such as the Ego, Id, Anima,
Animus, Shadow, etc. -- all functioning beneath conscious awareness of them.
It was proposed, and correctly so, that the elements within the subconscious
WERE active ones in their own right, and that they therefore must be incorporated
into explaining the sum of human psychological behavior.
This concept was controversial at first, but subsequently accepted.
A new controversy began erupting after World War II, and consisted of two
major factors. The first has had very wide exposure; the second very little.
The first factor arose when certain subliminal researchers opined that
the subconscious could be influenced by means too subtle to register directly
on consciousness awareness -- and that the influences will modify not only
subconscious but conscious responses and mental behavior.
Historically speaking, there really should not have been a "controversy"
here, because the evidence for this is monumental, and this concept was
easily accepted by psychologists.
But the second factor, the one which produced the controversy, had emerged
not from conventional psychologists, but from those studying the topics
of mind-control, behavior modification, and, above all, the elements of
brain-washing.
Those topics WERE controversial, largely because they moved the subconscious
too close to -- well, too close to psychological mind-control possibilities
and societal management via methods the general public were not aware of.
It can quite easily be shown that public knowledge of this kind of research
was suppressed largely by common and unspoken consent among the conventional
sciences, and which suppression has been documented by other researchers.
This particular controversy raged mostly behind the scenes until 1973 when
a particular book attempted to blow the lid off of it. This was the famous
book by Wilson Bryan Key unambiguously entitled
SUBLIMINAL SEDUCTION: AD
MEDIA’S MANIPULATION OF A NOT SO INNOCENT AMERICA [New York: New American
Library, 1973.]
This book gave copious evidence that subliminal "seduction" was
indeed being utilized by money-makers to sell products.
The book’s information was produced to little avail, however, since Americans
don’t really care about such complicated topics, and anyway deeply believe
that their minds can’t be influenced in such obviously unfair and nefarious
ways.
There exists another important factor regarding the subliminal, the one
which IS COMPLETELY avoided like the plague even by those wishing to expose
subliminal tactics and agendas.
That factor involves the distinct probability that "psychic signals"
are received via the subconscious.
This can be explained as probably true. Psychic signals, so called, do
consist of very subtle factors too weak to register directly into the crudities
of conscious awareness.
The few researchers who have dared to work with this situation, usually
Japanese ones, have established that psi, or "psions," are received
by subconscious receptors -- and that if the psion-information is to reach
conscious perceptions and awareness, then it must somehow penetrate the
liminal barrier in order to do so.
In other words, such signals, received by the hypersensitive subconsciousness,
must cross the subliminal threshold in order to be detected by conscious
awareness.
Since such signals are usually too weak to do this, they can be available
only to those with very highly sensitized and refined senses or receptors.
But THIS topic moves dangerously close to the concept that minds CAN be
influenced by invasive psychic signals emanating from others -- and as such
clearly touches upon the fear the superpowers of the bio-mind engender.
This particular fear was what mostly caused the initial interests of the
American intelligence community regarding the mysterious work going on in
the Soviet Union -- the possibility of "psychic" mind-control
at a distance. And it was in this regard that a "threat analysis"
had to be undertaken.
However, so feared is this factor regarding subliminal perception that
it is almost completely obliterated.
For example, IF psychic signals are perceived by the subliminal subconscious,
then it would seem that the subliminal processes would be of extraordinary
interest to, say, parapsychologists.
However, and to my direct knowledge, subliminal perceptions do not figure
very importantly anywhere in parapsychology research.
Inclusive of these factors, the controversy regarding subliminal perception
had raged since about the early 1950s. In my omnivorous reading I had more
or less been keeping track of it since then -- largely because I felt that
subliminal information and processes had something to do with creative processes.
Indeed, this aspect had not gone unnoticed by subliminal researchers.
[See, for example, SUBLIMINAL PERCEPTION AND THE CREATIVE PRE-CONSCIOUS
by K. Katz, October 1965, in DISSERTATION ON ABSTRACTS INTERNATIONAL, 34
(4-B), 1751.]
"Pre-conscious" is but another name for sub-conscious, but with
the inference that there exists systems of information processing which
are "pre" regarding "post" conscious awareness of the
information.
Back in the 1950s, along with the revelation of doors of perception, it
had already dawned on me that "psychic" signals were seldom consciously
perceived because they were too weak or too subtle to register directly
in the conscious mind. I believed, during the 1960s, that this connection
was surely to be made in the future.
And indeed, as of the 1970s, many subliminal researchers began giving at
least brief mention of the relationship of the subliminal subconscious to
"extrasensory perception." And such was referred to in Dixon’s
book.
To my knowledge, Dixon’s book was the first to really examine the concept
and, most importantly, the FACULTIES, of subliminal perception. Many diagrams
in his book give names to a large number of subconscious and conscious faculties
which are involved in the processes of subliminal-to-conscious perception.
As he stated, "the hypothesis that stimuli which are too weak or brief
to enter conscious experience may, nevertheless, affect a person’s NERVOUS
SYSTEM (emphasis added) and therefore influence aspects of his behavior"
by being processed through a number of information transfer entities.
Here I will direct your attention back to the content of Chapter 2, in
which affects on a person’s NERVOUS SYSTEM played the seminal role in Kazhinski’s
original research, followed on by other early Soviet researchers.
If actual living human beings are considered, there can be little doubt
that Dixon’s hypothesis is true. We live in an ocean of stimuli we don’t
perceive or recognize -- and our moods, physical and mental activity, and
our behavior can very easily be modified or changed temporarily or permanently
by those stimuli.
But what was most electrifying to me about Dixon’s book were the many box-and-flow
layouts which showed how the human bio-mind PROCESSES INFORMATION of all
kinds -- for example, from input of subliminal stimuli to output of cognitive
awareness. I’ll not dwell on those processes here because some of them
will be illustrated later on in this book.
The concepts in both of the books briefly reviewed above were to play significant
roles in the years ahead -- even though at the time I didn’t at all conceive
of years ahead.
I thought my participation in Cleve’s lab would be over when he got tired
of me -- and then I could concentrate on my art and efforts to become a
writer.
Go Back