TAPS Vs PRS

T.A.P.S. vs PRS

First things first. This is not a valuation/devaluation, or a rant about either of these teams; only a comparison between their methods. It is purely comparison between the Pennsylvania State Paranormal Research Society and The Atlantic Paranormal Society's methodology and approach to an investigation. The real comparison at stake is the more spiritualistic approach to the client, or the more scientific approach. I will tend to both methodologies with their pros and their cons.

PRS Approach

Penn State PRS embraces the spiritual aspect and envelopes it into their research projects, seemingly whenever possible. Many researchers in the field abhor this type of thing, especially given light to their first season with episodes such as "The Name." If you were to read Ryan Buells' blog, you would find that he accepts this type of criticism. Even embraces it.

He does bring several points to bear when working with clients. One being; how does one walk into a place, find things of a paranormal nature, and then do nothing about it? If the client is terrified (Not to mention the investigators), why would one just leave after finding this without offering the client a method of removal of said phenomena.

Another is lack of scientific methodology when working with a client. This can relate to the previous point. If your primary goal is to help a person/family, then why take issue with a group that does not charge a cent for services, but the family/person feels better when they leave.

Another is the fact that their team enjoins their physical research of evidence gathering and the like with demonologists, exorcists, channelers, etc. Again, Ryan does make a very good point in regards to this. How can one believe in the existence of a ghost, but not even consider the possibility of a god? They would seem like they go hand in hand.

So, the best summation of their methodology is to say it is the more "humanistic" approach. They approach each case with more of a focus on making their client be at ease, rather than the collection of evidence. Which, if the client were to not care about proving anything, but rather not be scared when they go to sleep at night; this could in fact be the best approach of the two.[1]

T.A.P.S. Methodology: AKA Pseudo Scientific Method

The Atlantic Paranormal Society uses what I will call the "Pseudo Scientific Method." I only refer to it as such do to the inability to formulate an experiment that is repeatable, disprovable, as well as in line with our current scientific thought at this time. Just with the two items, we can eliminate the tag of "Scientific."

However, they do approach it with an emulation of the scientific method. It is as close of an emulation you can get, when dealing with something that can occur at will. Something that is sentient (or not in some cases). Imagine me trying to tell you the reader, that since I saw you in front of Mall A, that I can make you do that every time I try to prove it to another. It's not possible, unless you and I were to coordinate, and at this time, we can't (to the best of our knowledge) coordinate with any spirit or paranormal phenomena.

They attempt to help their clients as well, but in a different way. They want to collect evidence. Evidence to either prove the client's claim, thus allaying the fear that they are insane; or they disprove whatever claims, which in turns causes the client to not be afraid anymore.[2]

This is beneficial, and has its place. It helps to get the paranormal research out of the "pseudoscience" arena, and into the "science" arena. One area where it doesn't help is here: What happens if there is an evil entity there? Do you leave it and say, "Yep, it's here. Sorry, we can't do anything about it." Not so much. But, as it can be dangerous to put oneself in the aim of an "evil" entity, it could be the best to refer to an expert in the area, i.e. the client’s clergy.

Now, not to ding the work of T.A.P.S., they are a great research team. One of the best out there. But in some areas, just as the "humanistic" approach, it can fall short, and this must be recognized.

Conclusion

So, I've presented the cases for both methods of performing an investigation. "Which one is best?" you may be asking. You may be disappointed in the answer I give. Both. Neither of the methods are wrong, but neither of them can fit all situations. The best route in any rate would be to find a nice balance to start. And then depending on the flow of the case, would be either:

Refer them to another team that specializes in that area
Start to use the method that fits (i.e. Humanistic to Scientific, or Scientific to Humanistic).

This may mean you don't take the "cheese" from the case, but in the end, the best interest of the client is maintained. Above all, remain skeptical. Don't immediately assume "It's an evil entity" or "It's a haunting" or even "It's a poltergeist." And don't immediately assume it's just something to be debunked. Go in with no assumption, and what's right should come out in the end.

References

External Links

Contributors

Author: Corey Reichle
Other Contributors: None