Posted on 21 October 2024, 8:30

Thanks to Professor James Hyslop for being a guest columnist this fortnight.  This is an abridgement of the concluding chapter of his 1905 book, “Science and a Future Life.” Hyslop was professor of logic and ethics at Columbia University before becoming a full-time psychical researcher in 1902. — MET

OVERCOMING THE FOLLIES OF A FUTURE LIFE

by James H. Hyslop, Ph.D., LL.D.

Secularism is the rationalist’s protest against an absurd “other worldliness,” and it seems forced by the very law of human progress to gain its own end by a neglect of the spiritual, similar to that which characterized the religious mind’s attitude toward the earthly. But there is no reason, save the lack of intelligence and high moral development, why both tendencies should not act together. There is no reason why a belief in a future life should be a necessary evil and there is no reason why a reference to present duties alone should be the world’s only virtue. Both ought to be articulated in the highest character, if there is any reason to accept a future life at all.

Of course, a reference to a future life in our daily conduct will get its rationality from the conviction that it is a fact, while ignorance of such a destiny is certainly an excuse for the neglect of it. No duties can have any force or motive power if they are based upon a mere possibility of another life when they are confronted with an equal possibility that it is not a fact. Morality, to be effective, must have some certainties in the causal series of events or it will be largely inoperative. Hence, if we are to use a future life as a motive power in conduct at all, we must assure ourselves that it is a fact and that it represents some degree of progress as the result of effort in the present life.

The ideals of a democracy will live or die with the belief in immortality. Christianity boasted of its freight of hope to the poor and of its placing men on an equality before the world. It taught us that man shall not live by bread alone, and that riches were not the pathway into the kingdom of God.

It is all very well for the rich and cultured to tell us we should have no personal interest in a future life and thus appear to be very disinterested in their views of that life, when the fact is that this is only a subterfuge to escape the duty to share with labor and suffering the fruits of a selfish exploration of them. The truth is that men never became stoical and pretentiously virtuous about immortality until they came convinced that it was not to be had; and then to placate the poor they begin teaching them the duty of sacrifice in this respect while they make none themselves in the field of wealth until they have satisfied all their Epicurean desires. But they will learn in the dangers of a social revolution that the poor will not sacrifice both wealth and immortality. They will insist on sharing one or the other.

I am well aware of the follies which might easily be aroused by the reinstatement of a belief in a future life, as if that belief should become as badly abused as it has been in the past. But the dangers of abuse are no reason for trying to suppress facts. We cannot shy at the truth because some unwise people lose their heads about it. On the contrary our supreme duty is to appropriate that truth and to prevent its abuse. We only double our task when we ridicule facts until they get beyond our control. Our business is not to follow in the wake of movements we cannot control, but to give their truths sobriety and sanity. If a future life is a fact, we cannot disprove it by laughing at phenomena that we do not like. Our esthetics have no more to do with the fact than they have with the eclipse of the sun or with the existence of disease. Emotional contempt of the facts is no more legitimate than the condemned emotional interest in a future life, and if it be a fact we shall not escape it by cultivating indifference to its truth. It is the business of the intelligent and scientific man to command the subject, not to despise it because it is not respectable.

If nature has thrown in our way indubitable evidence of a future life, no matter what its character, if there is no escape from the admission of the significance of the facts for some large theory of the world, it is not only the scandal of science that the facts are not incorporated in its work, but it is also a reproach to our morals that we do not appropriate the facts in some rational and useful way. If we cannot deny them we must articulate them with our rational life and see that they get sober instead of insane appreciation.

If we can infect life with the belief that consciousness survives and that we cannot form an intelligent idea of that survival without many centuries of scientific study we may get the combined advantages of the Greco-Roman devotion to science and art while we sustain Christian hopes and ideals. The mediation between the material and spiritual life may be effected in this union. We do not need assurance of anything but the fact of a future life if we can accept and trust the lesson of evolution, namely, that progress is the law of the cosmos.

Michael Tymn is the author of The Afterlife Revealed: What Happens After We Die, Resurrecting Leonora Piper: How Science Discovered the Afterlife, and Dead Men Talking: Afterlife Communication from World War I.
His latest book, No One Really Dies: 25 Reasons to Believe in an Afterlife is published by White Crow books.

Dear Bruce,

I’ve forwarded Robert Crookall’s ‘Life, A Cheat or a Sacred Burden’ to Michael and Jon for forwarding to you. Three other books of Crookall’s worth mentioning in similar vien to ‘The Supreme Adventure’ if less magisterial are ‘Intimations of Immortality’, ‘The Next World – and the Next’ and ‘What Happens When You Die’.  He, of course, also has a number of books on out-of-body experiences that are more tangential in this regard.

Thank you very much for sending to Michael for forwarding to me the document you mention that you have been assembling of Myers’ appearances and references in the posthumous literature, which is really a valuable project to have undertaken!  I very much look forward to reading it.  There is much I might say regarding the many appearances of Myers and the Myers group.  One thing I have not done in this regard that perhaps you have taken on is to review not only the book and manuscript literature but also the periodical literature, particularly the journal and proceedings of the (British) SPR.There is no doubt a tremendous amount regarding the Cross Correspondences to be found there but there may be other gems as well.

I would be curious to know your opinion of Juliet S. Goodenow’s ‘Vanishing Night: A Series of Letters Given Through Telepathic Correspondence by the late Frederic William Henry Myers’ (1923) [https://archive.org/details/vanishingnightse00good].  It has been some time since I read this, but I concluded upon doing so that I wasn’t convinced that what had been conveyed was actually the person and communication of the discarnate Myers.  I would have to reread it to give exact reasons but that was my distinct impression.

Best,

Paul

Michael,

I was unaware of this book. I wrote to you to “correct” your reference. I was confused by Science and a Future Life with other essays by Frederick Myers and Science and a Future Life by James H.Hyslop I started to look at Hyslop’s book and found various interesting chapters. I expected a William James approach of sitting on the fence and I was delighted by the following:.

“The first thing which I wish to say in taking up the spiritistic hypothesis and in stating my preference for it, at present at least, is that I wish to emphasize the conditions upon which I accept it. I take it to be the best working hypothesis in the field to explain the phenomena concerned.

“Our primary duty is to accept the hypothesis that best explains the fact and then to abandon it when facts are discovered that disprove or discredit it. I shall certainly not cling to the spiritistic theory any longer than the facts justify, but I shall not eschew it because it is not respectable when it is the most rational conception in the field.

“We must remember that in most mediums there is what is called a ‘control,‘and this ‘control’ purports to be a discarnate spirit. Whether it is this or not is immaterial to the issue now concerned. The superficial character of the phenomena is the same on any theory. In the Piper case the ‘controls’ are a group of alleged discarnate spirits, most of whom have never even attempted to prove their personal identity. One of them, Dr. Phinuit Scliville, tried it and failed. George Pelham, who had died only a short time before, succeeded in proving his identity.

“There are two types of phenomena connected with the dramatic play of personality. They are what may be called the evidential and the non-evidential matters of such interferences. The evidential instances consist of matter, such as names and incidents which may be given by other personalities than the usual ‘control.‘The non-evidential instances consist of statements representing conversation of the ” control ” either with the alleged discarnate spirit and not intended as a part of the regular ‘communications,’ or with the sitter in explanation of conditions and difficulties on the ‘other side.’”
Page 267 -275 SCIENCE AND A FUTURE LIFE BY JAMES H.HYSLOP

“This is the mind of a very, very logical thinker.
Many of the early SPR founders did the sealed envelope to see if any medium could reveal what was written, hidden in a safe and later checked.
James writes I shall give an instance of my own. I wrote out several posthumous letters containing very frequently recalled incidents of my childhood with the intention of having them as tests after my death. I enclosed them in several envelopes so that the giving of one would not involve any knowledge by the living of other records before attempts were made to deliver the rest. Put this aside as unimportant. A year and a half after putting them on record I had forgotten absolutely every one of the incidents that I had recorded. They were incidents purposely chosen because I so often recalled them in thinking of my childhood, as I well knew the dangers of amnesia or failure of memory. Consequently I had to put on record the fact that I had forgotten them.” Page 298.

I do like David’s suggestion of training and support for mediums (ethical might preclude me). I have recently contacted the Division of Perceptual Studies at UVA about their previous research in telepathy. May be that I could suggest their funding of mediums? I better check that with the spiritual ethics committee.  Sorry it didn’t pass.
Thanks for the article,

Bruce

Paul,

I would be very interested in the pdf written by Robert which you mentioned. I have two of Robert Crookall’s books Supreme Adventure and the Interpretation of Cosmic and Mystical Experiences. I have long been amazed by his ability to assimilate and connect the various threads of discussion into a very impressive work.

I enjoyed your analogy of Myers to Where Wally and I have been assembling a document recording his appearances and references to returns by his SPR spirit group. I have sent this to Michael to forward to you.

When Myers passed every medium in the UK was trying to link with him.
I am interstate for a few weeks with limited access to my library but would appreciate your thoughts on the Myers Groups long history of returns.

Thanks
Bruce

Thanks Peter for your excellent comment on the “woo woo taboo” and the link to Radin’s wonderful video clips. It’s a classic lecture. I believe that the afterlife is in a somewhat different category from ESP, precognition, remote viewing, telekinesis, etc., in that the belief runs across many cultures and is widely held, however vague and varied the conceptions may be. Because of its association with religion and so-called primitive superstition, the afterlife taboo is amplified by the rationalist rejection of religious dogma.

Coincidentally, many people of a religious background equally hold piercing the veil of the afterlife as taboo. “Heaven can wait”, seems to be the motto of many who would rather not think about the post mortem state.

Most readers of this blog likely do not require the imprimatur of science to secure their conviction in the continuity of existence beyond the border of death. This conviction, is equally a matter of the heart, as much as it is of the head. Science deals with the “head” aspect of spiritual and psychic matters, while spiritual practice and religion embrace the heart side.

In a previous post, I gave an inadequate sketch of the implications of how the universal acceptance of “The Life Eternal” would transform human society. In the book “The Life Eternal” (published by White Crow”) there is a marvelous chapter on “The New Knowledge”, which lays out in some detail the implications of a wide acceptance of surviving death as a fact of life. Below is a summary of the above referenced chapter:

Societal Implications of Accepting the Certainty of Survival

If the certainty of human survival after death were to become common knowledge, it would have profound implications for human societies and their values.

Elimination of War: The knowledge that war does not truly destroy life, but only hastens the transition to another existence, would likely contribute to the elimination of war. This is because the realization that those who have passed on can still influence the living would encourage greater harmony and discourage destructive conflicts.

Transformation of Criminal Justice: The understanding that actions in this life have consequences in the next would lead to a shift in how criminal justice is approached. Instead of punishment-focused approaches like solitary confinement or execution, criminals would be treated with a focus on rehabilitation and addressing the underlying “flaws” in their “psychic body” that led to their criminal behavior.

Focus on Personal Development: Accepting the continuity of life would emphasize the importance of personal development and growth. People would understand that “crime retards development” and that the goal of existence is continued development, both on Earth and in the afterlife. This would likely lead individuals to prioritize cultivating their “psychic forces” and exploring their inner potential.

Shift in Business and Materialism: The understanding that material wealth holds no significance beyond the Earthly sphere would likely lessen the obsession with business and material acquisition. Individuals would be encouraged to cultivate other aspects of their being and recognize the limitations of a life solely focused on financial gain.

Revolution in Science and Art: With the acceptance of survival, scientists would be motivated to explore ways to communicate with those in the afterlife, seeking their guidance and insights. Artists would experience a newfound joy in their work, understanding that their creative development continues beyond physical limitations.

Unity of Religions: The realization that all religions ultimately lead to the same truth and that dogmatic differences are inconsequential would likely end religious conflicts. The focus would shift towards a shared pursuit of truth and goodness, recognizing the interconnectedness of all spiritual paths.

Transformation of Education: Education would incorporate the study of the afterlife and the cultivation of mediumship. This would involve practical experimentation and learning from experienced teachers, fostering a deeper understanding of psychic phenomena and the continuity of life.

Elimination of Grief and Fear of Death: The certainty of reunion with loved ones after death would significantly reduce grief and the fear of death. Death would be perceived as a transition to a new life, not an end. The symbols of death, such as graveyards, would disappear, replaced by a focus on the continuity of existence.

Reframing of Injustice and Suffering: The awareness of multiple lives and the possibility of karmic reparation would provide solace to those experiencing injustice and suffering. It would offer a framework for understanding the seeming randomness of life’s challenges, fostering a sense of purpose and hope.

Newfound Appreciation for Life: With the understanding that life extends beyond the physical realm, individuals would develop a deeper appreciation for life and its experiences. They would be motivated to “make the best of life,” recognizing that every moment, whether spent in work or rest, contributes to their ongoing journey of growth and development.

The acceptance of the certainty of survival after death would represent a paradigm shift in human consciousness, leading to a more compassionate, enlightened, and purpose-driven society.

Dear David,

There is a more fundamental issue at play than a mere lack of funding – limitative as that is – one that parapsychology experimental researcher Dean Radin has aptly labeled the ‘Woo Woo Taboo’.  Radin has a four-part YouTube series on this topic that is quite short and worth your time [see the first four in the playlist here: ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXTLFfcOoTg&list=PLD6iMnod6rUwfDz7YlQ4E-eq6Xs-vSeFm].

Parapsychology research, which is eminently more scientifically respectable for all of its fringe status, is just as starved as posthumous survival research for funding, being almost entirely funded at a pittance out of private grants.

Nevertheless, there is a fairly large scientific literature in parapsychology at this point that consistently demonstrates the reality of various parapsychological phenomena (ESP, precognition, remote viewing, telekinesis, …) as highly statistically significant weak effects.  Experimental protocols have been tightened, critiqued and tightened further over the years to eliminate alternative explanations.

Has, then, this radical new insight into the nature of our world been absorbed by the mainstream and overturned the common view of things?  Of course not.  In an analogous mode – setting aside for the moment the careful, thorough work of earlier generations of researchers – the Windbridge Institute (aka Windbridge Research Center) has conducted numerous careful multiple-blinded studies of mediums that demonstrate the ability to communicate significant and meaningful information.  But of course, such work falls under Radin’s aforementioned Taboo even more thoroughly than that of parapsychological research.

The Taboo even affects areas of conventional scientific research.  Thus, many a young physicist – fascinated by questions regarding the foundations of quantum mechanics – will be shepherded away from such by his advisor or mentor, explaining that such would likely damage his future career prospects.  Far better to choose some ‘safe’ topic of research and focus on that.  As for Carl Sagan and his line about the suppression of uncomfortable ideas in science that you quote, did the man never read Thomas Kuhn’s ‘Structure of Scientific Revolutions’?  That is exactly how science functions.

In closing, and as a means of nodding to another remarkable author in this literature, your comparison of our present state and situation to that of ‘the larval stage of insects’ might equally (and perhaps less off-puttingly) be described in terms of the title of one of Raynor Johnson’s best books, that we are ‘nurslings of immortality’.

Best,

Peter

Dear Bruce,

Thank you for your reply. All of Robert Crookall’s books are extremely valuable, but none more so than ‘The Supreme Adventure’.  I was dipping into Ptolemy Tompkins’ ‘The Modern Book of the Dead’ recently.  Not a profound book, but an honest one and popular as well.  Much of Ch.7 of that work is taken up with Tompkins’ discovery of and appreciation for Crookall’s achievement.  The praise is entirely deserved, but of course his achievement is almost entirely unknown and unrecognized outside of a small number of dedicated individuals who have researched deeply into the topic.  Tompkins’ concluding para runs as follows:

“Why is Crookall’s work so little known, even by people who like this kind of thing? The short answer would seem to be his dryness. Crookall was, first and foremost, a details man, and his books, while full of documentation of what is arguably the single most consequential human experience there is, read very much like the plant taxonomy books that he cut his teeth on. But dry or not, in his books a new master narrative of life beyond the body can be seen assembling itself, a narrative that we do not need to see as just another story among stories, but as the story: the single spiritual narrative for our time.”

Dry as dust, precious as gold.  I, for one, find it a gripping read.  I should also note here a small volume of Crookall’s, published in India in 1976, some 15 years after the publication of his ‘The Supreme Adventure’.  Titled, ‘Life, A Cheat or a Sacred Burden’, it might be considered a kind of brief addendum to his earlier work.  It’s impossible to find. I had to ILL a copy and scan it into a pdf by hand.  If interested, I can send to Jon for passing on to you.

As a final note here on Crookall, Stafford Betty has a short review of ‘The Supreme Adventure’ on Amazon.  He notes, after praising the work, “About the only serious omission, and it’s an important one, is its failure to discuss, or even mention, reincarnation.” Dr. Betty is right that Crookall doesn’t cover it, although one may well wonder if that is for the reasons that Betty appears to assume.  As it turns out, in the very brief two-page Ch.4 of ‘Life, A Cheat or a Sacred Burden’, Crookall does address the subject of reincarnation, much of which is taken up with a brief precis of the work of Ian Stevenson, concluding “This important work goes on.  Reincarnation may well occur: it is too early satisfactorily to assess the probabilities, though they may be fairly high.  But if convincing evidence of reincarnation were to be found in scores or even hundreds of cases, it would not follow (as some have supposed) that the process is universal, or even general.  That proposition also would have to be settled, if at all, on the basis of evidence.”

My own view, for what it is worth, is entirely in line with that of Crookall.  Stevenson provides compelling evidence highly suggestive that reincarnation is possible and occurs in certain circumstances.  But that tells us nothing as to its broader commonality and significance.  As an extreme possibility, it might well be true, yet a largely marginal phenomenon.

As for Myers, I cannot say enough about the man.  Your comments regarding his eagerness to communicate back remind me of a favorite pastime of mine when reading in the posthumous literature, which might – in the spirit of the ‘Where’s Waldo?’ children’s books – be termed ‘Where’s Myers?’  He is forever popping up unexpectedly in discarnate discourses, either in direct communication or indirect reference.  By way of example, not long ago I was reading in W. Usborne Moore’s ‘Glimpses of the Next State’ when in pops Myers for an extended chat.  I really would like to compile a complete list of all his appearances or references in the literature.  Another example of more recent vintage that will be well known to others here are the quite bald references to Myers’s indirect involvement in the Scole Experiment.

Best,

Paul

My point about extraterrestrial life, and the investigation thereof, is that if contact with that life is what you are seeking, then science is looking in the wrong direction. Thus far, Psychical Research and its descendants has been funded on a shoestring. What progress has been made thus far is largely the result of private grants and self funded efforts. There’s a lot of bang for the buck to be had in employing the scientific method in what previously has been a matter of personal faith. I certainly don’t agree that anything remotely like “vast sums” have been spent on “consciousness surviving death”, and your own well deserved Bigelow prize is further evidence of research in this area being largely dependent on the generosity of private donors.

Carl Sagan said: “The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or in politics, but it is not the path to knowledge, and there’s no place for it in the endeavor of science.” He also said that he would give most anything to spend five minutes a year with his deceased parents. Anything, that is, except his time, effort, and the openness to embrace what, to him, was apparently the “uncomfortable idea” of the survival of human personality at death.

If survival is accepted as a live option for research and practical living, new avenues would be opened up such as:

* connecting the bereaved with deceased loved ones (Julia’s Bureau resurrected),
* training and support for those with mediumistic talent to develop their gifts and practice ethically,
* embracing past life trauma in psychology,
* revolutionizing the business of death as a celebration of the passage into greater life, etc.

Spiritually speaking, viewing one’s present terrestrial existence as being analogous to the larval stage of insects, puts the trials and triumphs of Earth life in their proper perspective. Yes, what we do here matters. Yes we should be the bestest little caterpillars we can be. But this is just the beginning of what Robert Crookall called “The Supreme Adventure”.

A mentor in my youth said “Cast your bread upon the waters and it will come back to you with jelly on it.” Having not just faith, but the certainty of factual evidence in the existence of discarnate beings, opens the door a little wider to receive the assistance that are friends in spirit are eager to offer. We are never alone in our joys and sorrows. Help is ever at hand.

Paul,

I do enjoy the quotations from various leading figures in ADC (After Death Communications - seems to be the new buzz words)

I am indebted to you for your inclusion of an old favourite, Robert Crookall. I looked up Hyslop in his book The Supreme Adventure, where Robert has two references to Professor Hyslop.  One of these quotations was one that I had not previously noted and was very interesting to me.

Another statement with which No. 27 accords is No. 1b- namely, that the thoughts and feelings of mortals are retarded by the immersion of the Soul Body in the sluggish Physical Body, which, it is said, gives mortals a chance to control their thoughts and emotions. The latter statement has support in the records of psychical research. For example, Professor Hyslop observed that when the discarnate Dr. Hodgson communicated he often exhibited emotion that the incarnate Hodgson would have been able to control. Similarly, communicators who are of an impulsive and impatient temperament often ‘speak’ (telepathically) too rapidly for the medium or the recorder or both.

(I suspect that they perfected this speed)

‘Myers’, who was impulsive and most eager to tell us about the conditions and methods of communication, had often to be asked to retard his speed, but found it almost impossible. ‘Gurney’, another communicator, commented that ‘Myers’ “lets the whole blaze come out in his impatience”. At one sitting, in his great eagerness, ‘Myers’ “brushed ‘Gurney’ aside”. At another, ‘Myers’ was said to be in such a state of “passionate eagerness” that he aroused a similar condition in the sensitive and prevented communication. Proc SPR XLIII 1935 pp. 130, 131). At a later sitting (op. cit., p. 254) ‘Gurney’  prevented communication. (Proc. S.P.R., XLIII, 1935, observed: “Myers is here and, once he is ‘in’, so to speak, may not be able to break in.’

Thanks
Bruce

Since the conversation has been turning to finances to support study of psychic phenomena, I think it might be appropriate to hear James Hyslop’s thoughts on the subject. The following is what he had to say about financial support of endeavors to prove life in other realms. Really not too different than thoughts voiced here more than a hundred years later.  -AOD

“Men cannot expect us to give scientific character to newspaper stories.  Very thorough investigation is necessary to make experiences of this kind worthy of any but a humorous interest, and the sooner that the public learns the need of endowment in this field equal to that for polar expeditions and deep-sea dredging, the sooner it will have some intelligent knowledge of the subject.  It is certainly as deserving as football and yacht races.  The matter has been left too long to the private resources of a few individuals and expectations which are entertained of these are a satire on human judgment.  It is no light task to collect a census of coincidental experiences having scientific value for proving the supernormal and it should have the financial support commensurate with its importance on any theory whatsoever of the facts.  The great religious forces of the past civilizations are dissolving into polite forms and rituals and the passionate interest of men is turning either to science or to illusion and folly for guidance.  Science has obtained the mantle and heritage of religion for the education and direction of human belief and the sooner it takes up its duties in that field the more important its message to man.”

David,

I also don’t comprehend the vast sums spent for research to identify alien life….or consciousness surviving death. I maintain, as I said in my Bigelow essay, that we had “overwhelming” evidence by 1920, even by 1900.  We can keep adding frosting or icing to the cake and that might help those who have neither the time or patience to study the earlier research, but it will never be “definitive” as AI requires.  AI also says no “empirical” evidence for it, but then we must debate what is and is not empirical.  The same goes for alien life. The new research can be interesting and even entertaining.  I guess the question is what the money would be used for otherwise.

Thanks, Amos, for pointing out that Hyslop did meet Pearl in New York…..  I assume that your book “Reluctant Medium” has not yet been released.  At least, I couldn’t find it at Amazon….Absolutely no tattoos for me.

Good to see Paul back.

NASA recently launched the $5.2 billion Europa Clipper mission, to the moon most favored to harbor life in our solar system. The mission, if successful, will determine whether Europa has a liquid ocean beneath its icy crust that may, potentially, support life as we know it.

Meanwhile, the Division of Perceptual Studies at UVA recently received a “whopping” $1 million grant to further its research in “evaluating empirical evidence that suggests consciousness survives death and the mind is distinct/separable from the brain.”

I confess to be unable to comprehend the vast sums squandered in the fruitless quest for proof of biological life in the solar system, all the while ignoring a vast treasure trove of evidence that supports the existence of an extraterrestrial realm teeming with intelligent life that we can contact and communicate with.

Amos quoted Hyslop saying: “Any man who does not accept the existence of discarnate spirits and the proof of it is either ignorant or a moral coward.” Yes, it’s harsh and perhaps doctrinaire, but the appalling ignorance of the abundant signs of life beyond the material realm displays a stunning lack of scientific curiosity. It’s a scandal, and a sign of the petty provincialism that hinders scientific progress beyond the material realm.

Michael,
I got to thinking when Patience Worth said:

“I tell ye, I be seein’ the pigs in mine ain pigsty.  Aye and I be shellin’ the grain for the feedin’ wi’ mine ain hands, and the sow who hath bringed them forth wert me!”

I think that that was more accurate and appropriate for Pearl Curran to say since she was the one “seein” panoramas in her mind’s eye, sorting out or “shellin’” the material, and with her own hands on the Ouija board was bringing them forth as poems or stories. That may reveal that it “wert” Pearl Curran who did the writing.  But, Pearl at one time suggested that herself with the caveat that the question was “the source” of the information she was receiving. - AOD

Yes Michael,
James Hyslop did meet with Pearl Curran (and Patience Worth) when Pearl visited her friend in New York, Herman Behr in November of 1919.  Irving Litvag in his book “Singer in the Shadows,” wrote that Hyslop may have been “openly admitting that he may have been wrong about her [Pearl Curran].” Hyslop actually sat at the Ouija board with Mrs. Curran and Patience. When Pearl Curran asked Hyslop if he still believed that she was a fake, the record documents that ”[H]e denied having ever made such a claim.” (which technically is true!)

Patience Worth was cordial toward Hyslop and wrote him a poem which was titled “Is Thy Quest Honest?” The last line ending “In benediction do I bow before thee!” Hyslop requested a second meeting with Patience Worth during which he said that he could easily explain the situation: There were two spirits writing the stories.” Patience of course objected to that idea and said “I tell ye, I be seein’ the pigs in mine ain pigsty.  Aye and I be shellin’ the grain for the feedin’ wi’ mine ain hands, and the sow who hath bringed them forth wert me!”

Hyslop wasn’t buying that but Patience responded “Aye, but I say me, why need I a one to chew the feed which I take?  When thou dost eat thou dost chew and swallow the stuff thyself.  Nay, nay, this be one path that be not trod by hosts.”

Well, I don’t know if I agree with her on that exactly, but as all things related to the afterlife there are a lot of details that are not known, particularly involving reincarnation and Soul Consciousness.  I have expounded upon this in my book,” Reluctant Medium” as concepts related to a “Group Soul” and “Soul Consciousness.”  Patience Worth was not omniscient and basically spoke from her beliefs and culture as a Puritan in the 1600s.- AOD

Maybe so, Michael,
But I think you are going to be far too busy to conjure up Hyslop. You will be jaw-boning with your friends and relatives and looking-up Leonora Piper, Hodgson, Myers, Lodge, Doyle, James and maybe Eusapia and all the others you have written about. Of course you will be running a few marathon races and watching baseball games.  After you complete a life review you will have to decide on your next foray into physicality.  Maybe a university professor or perhaps a mountain climber or a politician!  One thing that is for sure, in your next life you will be required to have tattoos! - AOD

With respect to Hyslop’s comments regarding morality and immortality, one of the secular points of resistance with regard to the traditional religious notions of Heaven and Hell (what Michael would call ‘humdrum Heaven and Horrific hell’) is that of Divine Judgment, of the weighing up and consequent separation of the sheep from the goats, the wheat from the tares. The secular response is to reject this understanding and declare that there is no Judgment, no immortality and - whether explicitly or implicitly - no ultimate consequences for morality or immorality. Dead is dead and that is that. One of the most remarkable - and potentially decisive - consistent themes of testimony from the discarnate literature is to present a ‘third way’ between these two understandings, that the judgment, such as it is, and the sorting that is its consequence flow from the nature of things rather than from the ruling of some external Judge.  What Robert Crookall referred to as the ‘sorting’ of the discarnate individual is based upon the the ‘affinity’, the ‘affiliation’ or the ‘resonance’ of one’s character or quality of being with the character and quality of a given discarnate ‘state’, ‘level’, ‘plane’, ‘realm’ or ‘vibration’.  Thus does one sow as one reaps, out of one’s own nature and in consequence of the nature of things.  Such an understanding restores the urgent need for one to ‘set one’s house in order’ while living precisely so that one’s ‘sorting’ may be discarnately felicitous, both in the sense of avoiding suffering but also in the sense of shaping one’s soul in a manner that is in keeping and in harmony with the nature of things, which tend and ultimately lead to the Good, the True and the Beautiful - as Hyslop concludes, “progress is the law of the cosmos.”

Amos, I agree.  It is difficult to reconcile Hyslop’s convictions relative to survival with his comments about Patience/Pearl.  I gather that he never observed Pearl. It may be that his arrogance has held him back in his spiritual evolution and that he is at a realm low enough for me to contact him after I transition.  If so, I will attempt to question him on this matter

Thanks to everyone for your patience on the problems with the comments section.  Jon Beecher tells me that the new system should be operational around Christmas.  It is an expensive and time-consuming project, including moving the archives to the new system.

Mike,

I greatly enjoyed this. It’s the kind of article I can send to a materialist with some hope they will read it. His denunciation of Christianity’s view of the future life gives credibility to his thesis.

Stafford

Michael,
Thanks for letting Professor Hyslop speak on your blog.  He was an esteemed academician among his peers. I have several books by Hyslop but I found them difficult to get through due to his language usage, and his academic writing style probably representative of his time at the end of the Victorian era and the beginning of the 20th century.  He was a deep thinker and wrote many papers and books. His academic presentation and his personal style however were very different.
I have spent some time considering Hyslop’s involvement in the Pearl Curran /Emily Hutchings case in which both women wrote novels using a Ouija board.  Pearl Curran was a poorly-educated reluctant medium transmitting dictation from an entity called “Patience Worth” while Emily Hutchings enthusiastically transmitted dictation from the spirit of Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain) also using the Ouija board and through medium Lola V. Hays.

Hyslop, based on gossip from Hutchings and Hays, denigrated the first book about Patience Worth written by newspaper man and editor, Casper S. Yost as having absolutely no interest to the “intelligent” “scientific” man. And based on gossip provided by Emily Hutchings he severely criticized Mr. Yost and John Curran, Pearl Curran’s husband and their publisher as having mercenary interests in promoting Patience Worth, saying that Yost did not investigate Pearl Curran’s background related to her knowledge of history, literature and her previous writing ability and therefore Yost’s book, “Patience Worth: A Psychic Mystery” was a “fools’ venture.” And that a Ouija board was “worthy of children and savages.”

On the other hand, he praised Emily Hutchings’s book “Jap Herron”, dictated by the spirit of Samuel Clemens also using a Ouija board saying it was an authentic spirit communication from Mark Twain. (Emily said that Mark wanted to give 25% of the proceeds from “Jap Herron” to the scientific study of parapsychology, taken to mean to James Hyslop.)  Hyslop failed to acknowledge that both Emily and Lola (especially Emily) had extensive writing careers.  Emily wrote at least three novels and contributed to many, primarily women’s magazines, and was an editor for the St. Louis Globe Democrat newspaper. She grew up in Hannibal, Missouri the same town that Clemens grew up in and obviously as a writer, editor and a reader, she had read most of his books, learning his style of writing and had met him and written to him on a couple of occasions.  She was the reporter for the 1904 World’s Fair in St. Louis being the first on the scene sending reports in several languages all over the world, she was the last reporter to leave. Emily spent months writing “Jap Herron,” re-writing it, moving sentences and paragraphs around until it pleased her something Pearl Curran never did with the Patience Worth writing.

Hyslop praised Emily’s book as an authentic communication from Samuel Clemens, ignoring the history of Emily’s College Education, previous extensive writing abilities and use of the Ouija Board—- “worthy of children and savages.”  Clemens daughter, Clara, did not agree that the book, “Jap Herron” was dictated by her father and sued to have it taken off of the market. Clara Clemens is quoted as characterizing Professor Hyslop’s assertations as “silly, foolish, stupid and crazy.”

I can’t help but think that due to his vituperous and false declarations about Pearl Curran and her husband, John Curran, Casper Yost and The Henry Holt publishing company, based solely on rumor and gossip, I cannot regard him, at times, other than an arrogant shrew of a man.

Here is an oft-quoted comment by Hyslop giving some insight into his personality:

“I regard the existence of discarnate spirits as scientifically proved, and I no longer refer to the skeptic as having any right to speak on the subject. Any man who does not accept the existence of discarnate spirits and the proof of it is either ignorant or a moral coward.  I give him short shrift, and do not propose any longer to argue with him on the supposition that he knows anything about the subject.”
                            – AOD