Reading Your Mind

by DUNNINGER

1

NEARLY everyone can become a mind reader. This may be regarded as a conservative statement, inasmuch as a prominent scientist was recently quoted as making a similar pronouncement, without the modification of the word “nearly.” However, from my own observations while conducting experiments as a mind reader, I am not convinced that the ability is universal; but it appears to exist in the vast majority of persons.

Mind reading depends upon telepathy, which was formerly termed “thought transference” or “mental telegraphy,” While the physical causes of telepathy have not been determined, the faculty has itself been demonstrated; and therefore we have some knowledge of how it functions, even though we do not know exactly why it does so.

Basically, telepathy is a matter of impressions. These are elusive, and are lost if one tries to force them. When telepathic impressions are experienced, they are at first vague, lacking shape and perspective. Their development, if noted, is gradual. But it is not always noted; for this reason persons are sometimes surprised by what may be termed a telepathic “flash,” which gives them the erroneous idea that completed thoughts are obtained rapidly.

Therefore, in beginning experiments in telepathy it is important to seek impressions only. These will demonstrate whether or not the individual possesses telepathic ability; and they accomplish that aim better than more advanced experiments.

Certain experimenters have concluded that telepathic ability is comparatively rare, possessed by only about one person in five. Others consider it so very rare that they regard persons with telepathic ability as mental prodigies.

What proportion of people are specially suited subjects—that is, persons who are naturally telepathic? I should say one in ten, though the rest could be classified in varying degrees. It should not be difficult to rate persons according to a “telepathic quotient,” and simple experiments designed to such an end should be made a part of all laboratory work.

Assuming that we have picked the one of ten typical subjects, it is simply a case of using the right methods with the others in order to bring out their latent telepathic ability. A high-average subject might balk at a single test, but respond to all others. Those of lower averages might respond to only one or two types of test. I am not sure that any would fail utterly, if tested exhaustively from all angles.

By picking the best subjects and concentrating upon them, high results can be obtained, and I think this is the right way to go at it. Too many experimenters approach telepathy as though they were trying to find the percentage of salt in sea water — namely, by simply dipping out a bucketful and analyzing it.

But what they should be going after is pay dirt, and nobody would go around scooping earth from any back yard to see if he could find gold in it. There are certain places where gold is likely to be found, and those are the places where you go to hunt for it. Occasionally a strike is made in some unexpected location; and similarly, persons with remarkable telepathic ability are sometimes discovered through sheer accident. But it is no accident that I find good subjects, because I am constantly giving mental demonstrations for large audiences representing men and women from many walks of life, and — as I shall discuss later — telepathic ability is often related to environment, experience, occupation, and other factors that go toward maturing the mind.

Contrast this with telepathic tests that have been made at colleges, where practically all of the subjects are members of the student body. In such instances the limitations are plain. All the subjects arc from the same age group, have the same immediate environment and the same amount of education, and, with comparatively few exceptions, are of approximately the same intelligence.

Under such conditions it is hard to get results, particularly with tests that are not geared to the mode of thought found in such a group. Yet results have been obtained in college laboratories devoted to para-psychology, and occasionally subjects showing a high telepathic quotient have been tested further with sustained results.

My demonstrations strike a high because I have been giving them for years, all the while seeking more and more to tune in my thoughts with those of my volunteer subjects. I have learned to classify people automatically according to their mental reactions and I gauge my own mood accordingly. This is something that is almost entirely overlooked in laboratory experiments.

2

AT ONE of my radio broadcasts, Edwin C. Hill, the noted commentator, was present. Observing him from the platform, I introduced him to the audience and proceeded with my usual demonstration in which I read the thoughts of strangers. But I found myself thinking of Mr. Hill and recognized immediately that he had formed some mental impression that concerned me.

Now it is my rule to perform all public tests with strangers in order to avoid any charges of collusion. In this case, I departed from that rule for two reasons: first, because I knew that everyone would accept the word of Mr. Hill that he was not my confederate; secondly, because his mental impression was so persistent that I found it interfering with those of other persons.

The impression that I received was very curious. I seemed to see Mr. Hill seeing me. That is, the whole situation was like a scene inside a scene. Along with this, I caught certain recollections that enabled me to place the picture, so I turned to Mr. Hill and asked if he happened to be concentrating upon a definite thought.

When he said yes, I told him he was thinking of a demonstration that I had given several years before where I had been before a private audience in a large room, performing the very tests that l was doing now. Mr. Hill was picturing that occasion to learn if I could gain his thought.

I was correct as to the occasion and therefore the general thought impression. He stated, however, that he was not thinking of that part of the performance, but was picturing the events following my mental demonstration when, on the same platform, I had duplicated certain so-called spirit manifestations as performed by mediums.

In brief, Mr. Hill’s thoughts eit her had progressed ahead of mine, or, in picking up his thought impression, I had stopped after identifying the preliminary situation which led to the one he had in mind.

In either case, the test was definitely successful, since the mere naming of the occasion was satisfactory evidence that I had read the thought. But it also indicated the ability of Mr. Hill to draw a single instance from a vast field of recollection and conceal rate upon it to the exclusion of other ideas, something which would be impossible for a person lacking in long experience.

The fact that this thought impression literally shouted itself above those of a large audience illustrates my point that the rest rict ions of a college laboratory, with students as the only subjects, are not conducive to the results that can be obtained in a broader setting.

At another of my demonstrations I recognized a well-known bookdealer in the audience and introduced him by name. Naturally I associated him with books, and while I was introducing him, a curious impression struck me. It was one of the “incomplete type,” which always registers well, for the very reason that it is bothering a person’s mind and is, therefore, likely to be conveyed.

I turned to the bookdealer and said: “I know what’s on your mind now. You are thinking of a set of books from which Volume Two is missing. You are eager to replace that missing volume, but you haven’t been able to do so.”

My impression was correct. It was the very thought the man had in mind, as would be the case with almost any bookdealer who wanted to fill a valuable set. As for my ability to obtain that impression, there was nothing uncanny about it. First, I felt that something was on the gentleman’s mind; next, I recognized that it had to do with books; finally, I identified the books along with the problem relating to them. This process was almost instantaneous, though I have often had to probe such cases and solve them by degrees.

Perhaps his face told me he was troubled. Again, it may have been chiefly intuition that made me attribute that worry to books, which were the things that most concerned him. But the final stage, the identification of the books and their missing volume, was distinctly telepathic. That being the case, the whole process can be defined as thought reading, for it is impossible to tell precisely where observation blends into intuition and finally into telepathy.

3

IN all my broadcasts I project a thought to the radio audience with a request for replies. In every instance, the figures have run far above the law of averages. Here are some of the results: —

For one of my projections I took the titles of the Four Freedoms. These were read aloud to the radio audience, after which I chose one mentally and projected my impression. I wrote the name on a slip of paper which was placed in an envelope to be kept until the next broadcast.

Members of the studio audience wrote the name of the Freedom they had received mentally and left their notations on the way out. During the following week members of the radio audience sent in their impressions and these were tabulated by the time of the next broadcast. The returns were announced before the envelope was opened.

My choice was “Freedom from Want.” By the law of chance, it should have polled about 25 per cent of the total and the other Freedoms should have run the same. Instead, “Freedom from Want” ran about 60 per cent better than its nearest competitor. That fact was phenomenal in itself: that it should have occurred with the particular Freedom which I selected was a remarkable coincidence — if it can be termed a coincidence at all.

I attribute it to the telepathic quotient for the simple reason that the same rule has held true in my other thought projections, the figures varying only in relation to the number of potential choices in any given projection, which is why results have been tabulated in comparative percentages.

Here in brief form are the tabulations of other projections, which in each case involved the choice of one name from five that were read aloud to the listeners before I projected my own choice. I am citing these not only because they represented a uniform type of projection test, but because in these cases separate figures arc available covering the studio audience and the listening audience.

Choosing from the names of islands in the Pacific Ocean, all taken from those which had come into prominence during the campaigns of the present war, I projected the name “Tarawa.” Results showed that with the studio audience “Tarawa” ran 70 per cent above the next choice; with the listening audience, 65 per cent.

From five well-known songs, all old-time favorites, I chose and projected “Carry Me Back to Old Virginny.” This song topped all others in results, the studio audience giving it a margin of 45 per cent, the listening audience a margin of 35 per cent.

Another which struck a theme of popular interest was my projection of one of Walt Disney’s famous cartoon characters chosen from a list of five, including his perennial favorites, Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck. I chose Bambi, less well known. Not only did Bambi top the list, but it came through with a high margin: 55 per cent from the studio audience, 50 per cent from the listening audience.

Among the figures at hand, the only case where the listening audience showed a higher percentage than the studio audience was when I tried a “one in seven” projection which I purposely used because it involved names so familiar that there could be no hesitation on the part of any listeners.

The names I chose were those of the days of the week. The one that I projected was Wednesday. This test brought an unusually large number of responses, and since the studio returns, already tabulated, showed only a 15 per cent majority in favor of Wednesday, there was much speculation regarding how the listening audience would come through, if at all. With days of the week, any personal matter such as an appointment or a theater party might throw off the projection.

I felt no doubt myself, because the studio returns proved that the projection had registered. When the final returns were in, it was found that the listeners not only picked Wednesday as the top choice but gave it a 25 per cent margin as opposed to the studio audience’s 15 per cent.

It will be noted that in these tests I have repeatedly demonstrated the positive factor which experience lias shown to be constant in all telepathic experiments. I feel that my projections prove conclusively that the potential based on the telepathic quotient is much higher than anyone has rated it.

Previously recognized as a probability only when viewed in relation to many series of tests, this factor asserts itself as an actuality in the single series which I have conducted. It raises only one question, and a new one: Why should my series of projections show such a high percentage of consistent success?

The reason for this is simple. My thought projections always follow my demonstration of answering questions that arc in the minds of the studio audience. Therefore, I command the attention of all persons who have receptive ability, thus building up more than a 10 per cent potential. Or putting it from another standpoint, I encourage the latent ability of many persons who would not be reached if they were not keyed to the situation, thus raising their telepathic quotient where the thought projection experiment is concerned.

The fact that the studio audience runs higher in correct results than do listeners at large is not an indication that distance interferes with thought projection. It is due, in my opinion, to the fact that the studio audience does not have the distractions during the broadcast that many home listeners have, and should naturally rate higher.

4

I HAVE frequently gained impressions of facts that a person has forgotten, but which were checked later and found to be correct. At one of my demonstrations Betty Smith, author of A Tree Grows in Brooklyn, was present as member of a committee that was to give me a special test.

Very appropriately, the committee had buried a sealed box under a tree somewhere in Brooklyn, and I was to name the address of the house and t he owner of the property. Since Betty Smith knew her Brooklyn, I concentrated upon her thoughts and gave the location, only to find that she couldn’t recall it. We checked by another committee member and found that I had given the correct location.

It could have been a crossed thought, since the other members of the committee were concentrating on the location, but I still am certain that I gained the impression from the Brooklyn writer. Telepathy consists in receiving subconscious impressions, and a memory lapse does not interfere, since memory itself resides in the subconscious. Even ii Miss Smith could not consciously recall the location, I was able to get the thought from her subconscious.

The reason for my certainty dates back to another committee test which took place in Philadelphia. There I gained an impression of a name that was in the mind of the curator of a museum. He had noted the name some time previously, but had partly forgotten it and concentrated upon a name that was similar.

The name that I gave was correct and therefore did not fit with the one that he had concentrated upon. When we checked the name itself, it proved that I was right. Unquestionably, even while concentrating on the wrong name, this gentleman transmitted to me the name that had actually registered in his subconscious mind.

In the use of all of our senses, we frequently call upon some outside manifestations to verify them. We catch a glimpse of a flash of light, and then an ensuing peal of thunder tells us that what we saw was lightning, and a shower is approaching. Similarly, we often hear sounds that are difficult to identify, particularly as to the direction of their source, until we see something that gives us the needed clue.

The backfire of an automobile might be identified as a pistol shot without the aid of sight. The hissing of a steam radiator might be regarded as a snake’s warning without visual assistance in interpreting it. Behind these actual identifications lies man’s ability to reason, and the same ability is needed in sorting telepathic impressions. Sometimes one impression blends with another, producing confusion that leads to a wrong interpretation.

The ability of the mind reader depends upon the correct interpretation of telepathic impressions, as well as the instinctive knowledge of when to reject confusing ideas. Frequently, however, when a completed thought is gained, the rejected impressions can be separately identified. In that case, reason figures most prominently, and often it is needed in completing a basic telepathic picture. Two cases from my own experience will illustrate both points.

In one instance a young lady had written a word which she wanted me to discover. She concentrated upon the word as she had written it and I eventually named the word. During that process I experienced a color impression which I identified as red, although it had nothing to do with the word itself. Upon naming the word I asked the young lady to close her eyes and visualize the word in large letters, precisely as she had written it. My own concentration naturally produced a written word, since our thoughts were identical by mutual consent.

My visualization of the word brought what I expected. The letters appeared boldly and they looked red. Through process of reasoning I began to grasp the answer. Confident of it, I told the young lady that the word, as she visualized it, was in red letters. She replied that the statement was correct. Whereupon I told her exactly why. Lacking a pencil, she had written the word in lipstick, thus producing bold red letters that had come through with the other thought impressions.

The second instance shows the use of reason in act ually obtaining the object itself. On this occasion my impression was that of a seashore — sand, waves, and birds flying above. Though the sand and waves were regular, the thought of birds swept in and out, sometimes obliterating the rest of the scene. Taking that as the strongest impression, I stated that the person was thinking of a bird, which proved to be correct. Upon further concentration, I could obtain no image of any species of bird, but the previous scene repeated itself.

The sand and waves became valuable impressions when applied upon a basis of reasoning, rather than strict telepathy. Since the impression was definitely telepathic, I stated that the bird was a sea gull, and that proved correct.