"Magic, it must be remembered, is an art which demands collaboration between the artist and his public"~ E.M. Butler
Carl said suppose he say there is a fire breathing dragon in his garage. You would tell him to show you. Let's say you proposed spreading flour on the floor to capture it's footprints...except the dragon floats in the air. Then you propose using an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire...but the invisible fire is also heat less. Then you propose to spray paint the dragon to make her visible...except she is an incorporeal dragon and the paint won't stick. What if he counters every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why that proposal will not work? What is the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heat less fire and no dragon at all? Carl states that our inability to invalidate his hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless. Unless, lets say the cards are turned, and you are able to capture it's footprints and are able to detect the invisible fire. These are pieces of visible and detectable evidence that can not be ignored...yet this is not the case. Carl states that the only thing you have learned from his insistence that there really is a dragon in his garage is that something funny is going on inside his head. This applies for alien abductions.Carl says how surprised he is that there are psychiatrists and others with some scientific training who know the imperfections of the human mind, but who dismiss the idea that these accounts might be some species of hallucination of some kind of screen memory. Keeping an open mind is a virtue but not so open that your brain falls out. We must be willing to change our minds when warranted by new evidence. And if the alien abduction accounts are mainly about brain physiology, hallucinations, distorted memories of childhood, and hoaxing, don't we have before us a matter of supreme importance. There is genuine scientific play dirt in UFOs and alien abductions but it is of a distinctly homegrown and terrestrial character.
This is very interesting. I never thought about alien abductions in this way. The dragon is example is a good one. Another good example to apply this to would be scientific experiments. The data you collected would mean nothing if it can't be proven or disproven, as well as being able to be repeated. I also agree that alien abduction could be a figure of imagination. Honestly, we just don't know.
ReplyDeleteI very much enjoyed reading this post. I found the subject matter fun for book that is based on science. It is also very much fun to see that that author takes a strange approach on the idea presented. An approach that is very much left to the imagination.
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing how our brains only accept the facts that we want to be true. If we want the dragon to exist, than our minds will make evidence for its existence, but if we don't want the dragon to exist, than we will refute any evidence brought to us.
ReplyDeleteThat chapter must have been really weird but cool. So if I don't want something to be true than my brain will accept that it's not? That's strange but interesting.
ReplyDeleteIn ethics class, we learned about how having the inability to prove something wrong doesn't mean it's right. It's good to know your author knows his fallacies. Everyone should keep an open mind when dealing with science.
ReplyDelete