C. W. K. Mundle
We cannot profitably discuss the concept of precognition in isolation from the evidence, so I shall start by saying something about this, but not very much, for I have elsewhere 1 tried to evaluate the evidence, and the purpose of this paper is to focus attention on the problem of rendering the relevant facts intelligible. I shall not discuss spontaneous 3cases, where the information comes in the form of dreams, hallucinations or a compulsion to act in an apparently irrational manner. A collection of such cases is available in Foreknowledge by H. F. Saltmarsh. 2 Despite the interest of such cases, I should never be convinced by anecdotal evidence unless it were supported by experimental evidence. I shall describe briefly some experiments done in England which provide evidence for precognition.
Shortly before the last war, Whately Carington carried out a series of experiments at Cambridge. 3 What he was looking for was evidence for telepathy, not precognition. On each of ten successive evenings he hung up in his study in Cambridge an outline drawing of a familiar object which remained there from 7 P.M. till 9:30 A.M. next morning, a different drawing on each evening. Meanwhile a number of subjects, scattered throughout England, Scotland, America and Holland attempted to re-
Reprinted from the International Journal of Parapsychology, volume 6 ( 1964), pp. 179- 194, by permission of the author and the Parapsychology Foundation, Inc.