Telepathy?

September 19, 2025 Cognitive Insights No Comments

Telepathy sits where wonder meets science. It has fascinated people for centuries, stirring equal parts hope and doubt. My stance: keep the question mark and keep the bar high. We can explore inner meaning while testing outer claims.

This blog explores the phenomenon not as a settled fact but as an open question. By tracing its history, weighing the science, and uncovering its symbolic meaning, telepathy can be shown to matter deeply — not as magic, but as a mirror of our longing for human unity.

The longing for silent connection

The idea of telepathy has always carried a certain magic. Even with a question mark, it awakens an old human wish: to be able to connect mind-to-mind, without words, in pure understanding. This longing is not trivial. It points to something essential — that beneath all our separateness lies a shared humanity.

The dream of telepathy may actually be a projection of inner unity. At a deeper, subconceptual level, human beings already share the same language of patterns. What is sought as an extraordinary ‘power’ is perhaps a reflection of what exists in ordinary life: moments of silent resonance, where two people seem to know each other without needing speech. This is not supernatural, but it is deeply meaningful.

A brief history of telepathy

Some highlights:

The modern story of telepathy began in the late nineteenth century. Frederic Myers, co-founder of the Society for Psychical Research, gave the word its name. At the time, spiritualism was flourishing, with séances, mesmerism, and talk of unseen forces. Researchers experimented with thought-transference, and later with cards and symbols.
The most famous tests came in the 1930s at Duke University, where Joseph Rhine introduced his Zener cards. Some initial results seemed promising, but the excitement faded as stricter controls reduced the effects to chance. The same pattern repeated throughout the century: first enthusiasm, then disappointment.
The Cold War years brought new funding. Both the United States and the Soviet Union invested in programs like the CIA’s Stargate, hoping ‘remote viewing’ might give military advantage. Despite anecdotes, nothing reproducible emerged.
Alongside the researchers came entertainers. Magicians such as Washington Irving Bishop showed that so-called mind-reading could be explained by muscle reading — the non-conscious cues a body gives away.
Fraud also played its part. Several high-profile ‘telepaths,’ like the Creery sisters or the Zancigs, eventually admitted deception. Yet the popularity of such acts revealed something important: fraud thrives only because the longing itself is genuine. People want to believe in hidden connection, and this desire deserves respect even when the proofs fail.

Hypnosis, telepathy, and the veil of mystery

Telepathy and hypnosis often appear together in the cultural imagination. Both suggest hidden powers, both surround themselves with special states. Yet what science shows is much more ordinary.

There is, in fact, no single neural signature of hypnosis. After decades of brain studies, no consistent ‘hypnotic state’ has been found. What appears under the label of hypnosis is actually a mix of processes: attention shifts, immersion, an altered sense of agency. These also happen while reading a novel or watching a movie. Hypnosis, then, is less a natural category than a cultural construct — a veil of mystery covering ordinary experiences, as explained in No Brainy Signature of Hypnosis.

The same veil applies to telepathy. The more we try to bundle scattered experiences into one ‘phenomenon,’ the more we risk hiding their real nature. The AURELIS way is to remove such veils. Once lifted, what remains is not magic but something perhaps more profound: our capacity for inner communication and resonance.

Where hypnosis is often framed as imposition – one will controlling another – autosuggestion is invitation. Freedom and direction meet in a respectful dialogue with the inner self, as shown in Autosuggestion versus Hypnosis. No trance or force is needed, only openness to one’s own depth.

What science demands

Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. From a scientific standpoint, telepathy requires either an unknown force or a new use of known forces. By Occam’s razor, simpler explanations must be exhausted first.

A balance of probabilities can guide the view. If telepathy were real in an everyday sense, casinos and financial markets would be quick to reveal it. Subtle cues, chance, and memory errors are all far more likely explanations. Small statistical effects tend to vanish when strict controls are imposed. Replication is scarce.

Science does not exist to crush wonder, but to keep us honest. It is a form of trustworthiness, a value that prevents us from confusing wish with reality.

Why telepathy feels real

And yet the feeling of telepathy is familiar. Two people finish each other’s sentences. A thought seems to pass silently across the space between them. This happens because minds are pattern machines. Much of our processing runs subconceptually, beneath awareness, and produces a sense of uncanny resonance.

Culture recognizes this. In Japan, the term ishin-denshin describes heart-to-heart understanding without words. The fact that we have words for it shows that this experience belongs to daily life. It is real, even if it is not supernatural.

The ethical edge

Beliefs in extraordinary powers always carry an ethical dimension. To claim to read another’s mind is to claim a kind of control. Shamans, mediums, and stage performers have long used this to gain influence.

Fraud reflects not only deception but also the intensity of human longing. People yearn for more connection than they normally find. This longing can be honored without slipping into manipulation. True depth is never about overpowering, always about empowering. In this way, exposing fraud is not cynicism but Compassion.

Psychiatry and fragile boundaries

Telepathy-like experiences also appear in psychiatry. People suffering from psychosis may feel their thoughts are inserted by others or broadcast to the world. Such states are distressing reminders that the boundaries of the self are not absolute.

This should be treated with Compassion, not exploitation. It shows how delicate the sense of separateness is, and why we must respect both its necessity and its permeability.

Beyond the veil: autosuggestion and inner strength

The constructive alternative to veils of mystery is autosuggestion. It requires no hidden force and no imposed trance. It is communication with oneself, an invitation to growth from within.

Telepathy, then, can be seen as symbol rather than signal. It symbolizes the yearning for unity and resonance. It expresses the truth that we are not isolated beings but persons able to touch one another in depth.

Keeping the question mark after telepathy is important.

It guards both rationality and openness. Science and depth belong together. What science tells us is that telepathy, as physics, is highly improbable. What human experience tells us is that something real lies behind the wish.

The true miracle is not that one mind could invade another, but that two minds can meet in depth without force. In that meeting lies the poetry of the human longing for unity.

―

Addendum

Me: “Lisa, is there any scientific evidence for telekinesis?”

Lisa: “From my knowledge: Science has repeatedly tested telekinesis, from dice-throwing experiments in the mid-20th century to modern random number generators. Results sometimes suggested tiny deviations from chance, but under stricter controls, these effects typically disappeared. Meta-analyses show patterns consistent with statistical noise, experimenter bias, or publication bias, not genuine mind-over-matter.

Claims of spectacular feats — spoon bending, object movement on camera — have usually been traced to fraud or stage magic. Even parapsychology research has not produced effects that survive replication across independent labs. In Bayesian terms, the low prior probability (since telekinesis would demand new physics) means extraordinary evidence is needed, and that has not materialized.

In short: there is no reliable scientific evidence that telekinesis exists. What remains meaningful is the symbolic dimension — the wish to feel that one’s inner strength reaches outward into the world. This can be honored through autosuggestion and personal growth, without assuming paranormal forces.”