Donald Hebb and the explicit pseudoskeptical prejudice against parapsychology.

Donald Hebb

For most part, professional pseudo-skeptics are smart enough to appearing themselves in public as open minded, objective scientific evaluators of the evidence for parapsychology, impartial inquirers without an axe to grind against the evidence for psi phenomena. However, whoever is familiar with the pseudoskeptical literature or history will know that it's false (the mere fact that these individuals belong to debunking organizations with the explicit purposes for defending materialism and naturalism, which are incompatible with psi evidence as explained in this post, suffices to prove it).

But sometimes, we found some pseudo-skeptic who makes public and explicit his prejudices and bias, in a open and free manner. Note that these individuals can be very competent in their own field of expertise, but when it comes to debating about the paranormal, they become irrational and sometimes admittedly so (this suggests that their extreme hostility to psi research, spirituality and a fortiori to the possible existence of God or a trascendent realm has emotional, spiritual and psychological roots, as I've discussed in this post)

And clarifying example of this is psychologist and neuropsychologist Donald Hebb, a first-rate scientitic researcher in psychology. Back in 1951, Hebb wrote:

Why do we not accept ESP as a psychological fact? Rhine has offered enough evidence to have convinced us on almost any other issue... Personally, I do not accept ESP for a moment, because it does not make sense. My external criteria, both of physics and of physiology, say that ESP is not a fact despite the behavioral evidence that has been reported. I cannot see what other basis my colleagues have for rejecting it... Rhine may still turn out to be right, improbable as I think that is, and my own rejection of his view is - in the literal sense - prejudice (Quoted in Chris Carter's book Parapsychology and the Skeptics. Emphasis in blue added)

Note Hebb's concession that his own personal rejection of psi evidence (which he considered Rhine has offered sufficient evidence to have convinced us in almost any other issue) is, in the literal sense, a PREJUDICE.

At least, we should congratulate Hebb by his honesty in explicitly accepting that his pseudskeptical position is not based on science or evidence, but in pure personal prejudice.

You won't see this level of intellectual honesty in most professional pseudo-skeptics, because their job consists precisely in creating the public illusion that they're talking in the name of science and reason, and not in defense of their personal prejudices rooted in psychological and ideological (i.e. materialistic, atheistic and naturalistic) motives.

If a first-rate, highly competent professional scientist like Hebb cannot escape from the materialistic prejudice against psi evidence (and he had the courage to concedes it explicitly), what would you expect from the normal, common, ordinary, intellectually mediocre materialistic pseudo-skeptic?