The relation of psi to ideality: an explanation of three explanations (2015)

The hubris of scientists who are now rejoicing over their telepathic contraptions has prompted me to speak about the real thing -- psi in general, whatever it is -- which I have experienced both while awake & asleep often enough to know that it has nothing less than a particular sensation. It happens when the mind is as though daydreaming, accessing a memory, doing intricate work or reading a narrative: anything whatever which blanks out the external scene. 

This is not just some kind of personal thing by any means. I believe that most people experience psi but do not acknowledge it; I am acknowledging it. One does not want only an eye to see, but also the processing of the image that that eye sees; and this processing is modelling, which leaves a litter of models in its wake. If, on the other hand, no modelling and no models offer a ready home for the impression, then it is likely lost amongst the sea of uncategorized impressions.

This faculty -- psi -- must have some explanation, even if it turns out to be more sophisticated than the direct communication which parapsychologists like J.B. Rhine assume as a working model; since this model has, among other things, allowed them to establish the existence of quarter decline arranged in a u-shaped curve, I am not knocking it so much as putting it aside to consider four models other than direct communication, among them:

1. that apparent cases of telepathy are artifacts of Immanuel Kant’s time and space as forms of human sense-perception. This is Arthur Schopenhauer’s contribution to the subject. In fuller terms, the fact that time and space are not reality itself but artifacts of the human mediation of reality makes apparent instances of telepathy and the like logical consequences of mismatch between the perceived and the real. It is, in this view, a matter of fact alignment with and proof of Kant’s ideas. 
2. that apparent cases of telepathy are the parallel effects of an underlying phenomenon, their relation being one of synchronicity. This is Carl Jung’s contribution, and one which I initially encountered in the writings of J.B. Rhine, who indicated thereby his cognizance of the possibility of a superseding reason for apparent communication. I am as yet unsure whether Rhine was also aware of option a), but the fact that he is aware of the category at all -- and was open to the possibility that clairvoyance or even an overarching effect produces the apparent operation of telepathy -- is sufficient. 
3. that apparent cases of telepathy are a single mind’s communication with itself in direct contradistinction to visual appearances of separate existence. This is the contribution of “Christian Science”, which thought the matter important enough to treat in their instructional material. (I will consider any material whatever in search of insight.)
4. that God certainly perceives everyone's thoughts. He certainly did during His bewildering visit to our planet. "Simon, I have somewhat to tell thee" "chambers of the imagination" "knew all men" "perceived in His heart" etc.

I would suggest that the treatment of ideality raised by these various options, and the association of psi or ideality with proto-religiosity -- that age of healing touches, second sights -- is of supreme importance to a civilisation as materialistic in its poverty as in its wealth, in its egalitarianism as in its stratification. 

Rich or poor, equal or stratified, they do not realize there are backdoors in the mind.