WEIT, oct 11: links to article on ESP: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-carpenter-phd/first-sight_b_1940728.html?utm_hp_ref=weird-news&ir=Weird%20News: Not Second Sight, But First Sight
Subjective reports of ESP are not science, but the scientific methodology fails also. You can’t conduct experiments on ESP> They will never work, and never falsify the subjective lore. It is simply a hard luck case. One problem is the term, ESP, which is an artificial term. ‘Telepathy’ may be no better. Meta-spatial channel communication? Maybe worse. To what phenomenon are we referring? Noone knows.
Many yogis have hinted that indirection is the best, only, approach here: meditation in the name of advancing consciousness can trigger occult powers, which then can become a fixation, very detrimentally.
There is a tradition of Buddhism among others of their ‘being nothing to achieve’. People already have a psychic reality, but they fail to understand it.
In general most real accounts of ‘telepathy’ refer to subjects receiving communications, rarely to those sending them. In general the ‘spectrum of consciousness’ in man is very narrow, and a broader spectrum will clarify the non-paradoxes here. But nothing is likely to ever resolve the issues. Has it never struck commentators that those who know of the subject never speak of it. (and vice versa). Experts on telepathy are innuberable. But they never speak of it.