Griffin, David Ray.  “Parapsychology, Psychokinesis, Survival, and Whitehead: A Reply to Frederick  Ferre.” The Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research 88 (July1994): 255-74.

Abstract

Griffin responds to Ferre’s criticism of his characterization of parapsychology and also to Ferre’s claim that Whitehead’s philosophy does not allow for either psychokinesis or survival. With regard to parapsychology: Ferre has provided no good reason to reject Griffin’s contention that causal influence at a distance is central to the phenomena it studies; and Ferre’s own redefinition neither fits what parapsychologists study nor accounts for the modern mind’s hostility to it. With regard to psychokinesis: Ferre’s argument against Griffin’s view that Whitehead’s philosophy allows for its possibility proceeds by simply ignoring Griffin’s main points and by distorting a crucial passage in Whitehead. Also, accepting psychokinesis would not, contra Ferre, necessarily undermine a Whiteheadian Theodicy. With regard to survival: Ferre’s claim that good evidence for survival would falsify Whitehead’s philosophy contradicts whitehead’s own opinion and ignores the crucial features of Griffin’s argument; and Ferre’s charge about un-Whiteheadian “partial dualism” is confused.