◆ SpookStack

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000300020002-1 LN465-92 In the entire article, I could not find a single reason which could demonstrate that ESP was a counter science. However, the headline of Yu's article gave people the impression that ESP was “Counter Science". I also read Yu's book from cover to cover, his reasoning was nothing more than using counter scientific methods of “idealism” “reasoning” to deny the objective existence of ESP. Actually, does ESP objectively exist? Based on the materialist principle that “practice is the only standard for testing for truth", the only way to demonstrate whether or not it actually exists is to use scientific practical testing. The author is not about to deny that “practice is the only standard for testing for proof", so when he was in Hong Kong he came up with an “idea”: “Since there are differing views on this, and since the philosophic views cannot be resolved in a short time, we shonld agree on a scientific procedure to formally test in public." According to what I know, the author in the past has used another principle, which is that “reasoning” is “a more reliable" criterion for testing for truth. T have a basis for saying this. Once at a speech by the author, someone asked him: “Is whether or not ESP objectively exists a question of practice or a question of theory. The author stated decisively, “this is a theoretical question". This means that the determination of whether or not ESP objectively exists is not to be done by relying on the practice of experimental science, but is to rely on the “reasoning” of theoretical science. He refused to take part in the joint testing in Beijing from April to July of 1982 by organized by the China Somatic Science Research Committee (preparatory) to be conducted by scientific workers of concerned units from some of the provinces and cities. I do not oppose scientific reasoning or inference. What I do oppose is counter scientific "idealism" “reasoning” . The author has raised the example of physicists using the laws of thermodynamics to prove that there can never be a perpetual motion machine in an attempt to secure a “foundation” for his counter scientific "idealism" “reasoning”. It is true that the laws of thermodynamics deny the possibility of a perpetual motion machine. However, this cannot become the Grounds for the authors argument. This is because a Perpetual motion machine has never been successful in an experiment. Furthermore, the laws of thermodynamics can prove that a perpetual motion is impossible. ESP is not the sane. China has thousands of people with ESP and hundreds of organizations conducting research in ESP. In the past ten years they have conducted tens of thousands of scientific experiments, demonstrating the objective existence of ESP. In reading the author’s book and article in opposition to ESP, I have never seen any scientific reasoning such as the laws of thermodynamics in the author’s arguments. Therefore, his attempts will not succeed. Since he cannot present any scientific reason with a factual basis to deny the objective existence of ESP, then based on the principle that “practice is the only criterion for truth", he should admit that scientific practice is the only way to test for the objective existence of ESP. Wow the author is in Hong Kong with some new “ideas”, suggesting the organization of scientific experiment to test it. I welcome this. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000300020002-1