Investigator
without Investigators:
The Automated Design
Dave Wood takes a brief look at the
current debate in the paranormal community about whether people should
be directly involved in paranormal investigations at all.
The field of paranormal investigations is
filled with a myriad range of individual and group motivations. There
are those who investigate for the thrill and experience, with a booming
tourism market rising to their expectations. There are those who seek
personal subjective proof who place themselves in ‘haunted’ environments
as often as possible to seek that proof. Finally, there are those who
seek some level of objective answer about the question of the existence
of paranormal phenomena.
The ‘automated investigation’ design is a perfectly logical idea. It
begins with the idea of human fallibility. Paranormal investigators
spend a lot of time trying to overcome the essential fallibility of
human memory, performance and perception. If an individual person is
involved one can never be sure if an equipment reading was accurate, if
memory has distorted an alleged paranormal event or if the person really
perceived what they thought they did. The role of ambiguous stimuli in
an environment where paranormal activity is expected is a strong
compounding variable in any paranormal research.
The automated design proponent, then, argues that the role of paranormal
investigator should be remote. Video monitoring equipment should be set
up in a location whilst data loggers are placed in situ to record any
environmental fluctuations. A team of investigators should be based in a
remote location and should constantly monitor CCTV and environmental
fluctuations. One takes the fallible people out of the equation and
concentrates purely on the objective and verifiable data captured in an
uninterrupted scene.
What the design fails to consider is the actual subject under study. The
thinking paranormal researcher is not studying an empty room, they are
studying the responses of individuals. The investigator is drawn to a
‘haunted’ location because people have had paranormal experiences. The
role of investigators is to experience in the same environment, to
establish without prior knowledge if they experience the same phenomena.
The role of equipment is to measure environmental triggers to establish
an impact on experiencers. The role of sound knowledge of the human
condition and of a location is to establish whether the phenomena is
unexplainable, or whether fallible people have misinterpreted the
environment, or been affected by natural environmental fluctuations.
The automated design may provide more objective evidence, but it sheds
no light on why paranormal phenomena are experienced by people in a
certain place.
Back to Top
|