|
|
If you need help or want to contact us please email pricasemanager@yahoo.com |
|
|||||||
|
Logic First, Paranormal Last™ |
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
PRI Policy on provoking – Theory and practice Theory Provoking is typically defined as the practice of attempting to stimulate paranormal activity, during an investigation, by being verbally or physically aggressive, or even abusive. This is most commonly done by using insulting or threatening language directed towards a spirit or ghost that presumably is present at the location. This technique is usually initiated during an EVP (Electronic Voice Phenomena) session or during a call and response exercise. This is a controversial technique that some investigative groups and individual investigators engage in, due to the belief that it can “stir-up” or stimulate an escalation in activity. The thought being, that this may result in a larger volume of evidence, and, potentially, more compelling or conclusive evidence of a haunting. However, there is a downside to using this particular investigative technique. PRI believes that an interactive spirit or ghost is the disembodied personality/consciousness of a once living person. This disembodied person deserves our respect for multiple reasons – 1) We are likely intruding on their home and should behave like guests, not invaders, 2) We need to treat this person like any living person we might interact with in our daily lives (**Remember the Golden Rule**), 3) We need to act like professionals, in the eyes of the client, when representing PRI. In addition, if a malevolent ghost/spirit is present, there is a strong likelihood of angering them even further. This action could put you and other team members at risk. In addition, this will then leave the client a potentially very angry, and even vicious, entity to deal with after the PRI team leaves. Policy and Practice As a general policy, PRI prohibits “provoking” during an investigation. There is certainly a grey area between asking provocative questions and the practice of provoking. In general, one can differentiate these two by asking, “Is the prospective question or action respectful?” Respectful, yet provocative, questions are acceptable, but disrespectful questions and/or actions are forbidden. If the investigator is unsure if the line of questioning is appropriate, then they should ask one of the Lead Investigators for their opinion, and a final decision will be made. This policy is to be strictly adhered to, especially if the investigation is at a private residence or business. This policy is in place to help guarantee the high level of integrity and professionalism that PRI strives to achieve. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
