48 replies to this topic

[trublvr]

Fellow Skeptical Folk,

        I don't think that the whole distinction between skeptics and believers is as simple as some people needing more or less proof for things than others.  If this were true, then there wouldn't have been so many "true believers" in God who were such great scientists and inventors!  Skepticism and belief are more intimate than we may be assuming.   As I've stated before (and others as well), skepticism and belief feed off of eachother, and that's a good thing.

         Also, two things about all this proof we're clamouring for.  First, the assumption in our time seems to be that, given enough proof, human beings will bring their lives accordance with the proven fact or reality.  This is not true.  There are all kinds of things on all kinds of levels that people have sufficient proof for, and yet they adamantly refuse to live in accordance with reality (ever been in a jacked-up relationship?????).  The assumption that human beings will automatically align their thinking and living with proven reality fails in two ways: 1) an overly-positive view of human behavior which is not "proven" through our experience; 2) the reduction of the human being to an organism that only operates on the cerebral level.  Emotions, commitments, perceptions can cloud our judgments concerning proof and reason.  As Pascal said, "The heart wants what the heart wants."  And on a more positive tip, we shouldn't strive to be cold, hard processors of data!  It is great, sometimes, that emotions and commitments get in the way of living according to strict proofs!  We can't "prove" things like love, but we wouldn't (I HOPE) disgard love just because it doesn't show up beneath a microscope!

        Second, we are assuming that our world and our experimentation always provide the best environment for the establishment of proof.  This is not always true.  A person setting up an experiment to prove this thing or the other is an imperfect, subjective being.  Their biases and imperfections inform the experiment and therefore the result (the proof).  Taking all these things into account, we should seek out community, instead of the mythical, Western lone-soldier mentality of experimentation and proof-seeking.  Two, three, and four heads are better than one because sometimes one head is wrong.  REALLY WRONG!!!  It'll take humility to subject oneself to this kind of scrutiny.  In a scientifically arrogant and technologically hopeful age humility will continue to be a much-needed virtue for us.  

[MisterBlueSkies]

Having been a victim of Hey! Look over there's and other bluffs & tricks pretty much all my life, I've had to become a skeptic to survive.

Sometimes people posting on this board have very convincing stories that seem very credible.  Though I do admit they have to write in a way that doesn't seem to far out to even consider.  

For example, if a person even mentions being able to see ghosts because they're "just a little bit psychic", I immediately discredit them, and seldom read the rest of their post.  It seems harsh, but I don't think you need to be psychic or special just to witness stuff like that.  The same goes for tobaccy-chewin' farmers who claim that a flyin' saucer dun sucked up their prized milkin' cow.  I just don't buy it.

I've seen ghosts; therefore, I believe in them.

I've never seen an alien (unless you count the illegal variety), but I do believe they exist. I just don't believe they enjoy kidnapping people and prodding them or inpregnating them via sweet sweet alien luvin'. They're probably still on their own planet and wondering if there's other life out there, just like us.

I also saw a strange bird that wasn't a bird when I was younger, so i believe in the unknown or undocumented.

As for everything else...

MAKE ME BELIEVE.

Edited by MisterBlueSkies, 25 April 2004 - 09:53 PM.

[trublvr]

   Mister Blue Skies,

        I'm with you on expressing some level of skepticism towards any Joe Blow coming out with a UFO story.  However, I think that there are good standards to discern truth from falsehood that don't necessarily involve me experiencing things for myself to figure out if they are true.  

         Some eyewitness testimony for alien encoutners--for example--is very good.  Like the Betty and Barney Hill case from the 60's:  Here you've got a black man married to a white woman, and they report that they've experienced missing time while on a trip somewhere.  Subsequently, they have weird memories and experiences that compel them to seek out psychiatric help.  They get hypnotized, and suddenly, they've got a UFO abduction on their hands (the abridged version of the Hill incident)!

         Is the story fantastic?  Yep.  Beyond belief?  Maybe.  But here's what gives this story more than a little credibility:  An inter-racial couple in 1960's America makes this up?  I'm not saying that this means we've got to swallow whatever the Hills feed us.  But the inter-racial factor, given the time period, should lend the Hills some sort of credibility.  Now that's not all the evidence, nor is it the entirety of the Hill story, but I think you get my point.  There can be very compelling things about witness testimony.  It's a given that we can't know anything with absolute certainty and that we merely try to approximate truth as best we can.   However, there are things that ring true b/c of witness testimony and the character of the witnesses, and this can and should be quite persuasive.  

[DarkAngelh22eh]

Please remember i am new so easy on the chewout.
I wonder if you all believe in god, i mean if you can believe that there is an old man sitting in the heavens judgeing everyone. How can you not say there is all these other things? Some dude wrote a book and then everyone believes? Someone says i think there are aliens, and oh well that person is a story teller. I am sure that like the bible there are some bs storys, but really there seems to be more proof of ghosts then a god. But it is total exceptable to go to church and read about some dude and worship that? I mean if the bible was rewriten to hide things then why wouldn't other things be with held for people who really can't handle the truth?
As you may notice i am not a sceptic and will always be open minded. Are we really in 2004 and thinking that we are alone in spirit or in the universe. We are finding new things everyday. So everyone open up or we will never know the truths hiding in the world. Even if it seems as if someone story is shady, remember that that is one story and there are many other storys out there that are true and have proof. Maybe instead of everyone being sceptic, we should except the fact that there are alot of things we don't know about and shooting it down only shows why the goverment or people won't share there info. Ok i am so done, please no hard feelings, this is just how i feel on this topic.