What The Thinker Thinks…
In his book Prometheus Rising, Robert Anton Wilson coined an aphorism that those interested in the paranormal should keep in mind. He wrote “What the thinker thinks, the prover proves.” He explained that many people will form an idea of their opinions based on simple guessing and belief systems, and go about “proving” a hypothesis based on the original belief, rather than a reasonable and logical examination of the available data that may negate their original position. He also pointed out that scientists and other supposedly logical thinkers are just as prone to this malady as the rest of us.
Dean Radin has just pointed me to a site that deals with “skepticism of skeptics,” or as I have called them (I think more properly) “fundamentalist skeptics.” Skeptical Investigations is an information source for those who are critical of scientific dogmatists like Martin Gardner, Richard Dawkins and James Randi.
It seems as if these personalities get the lion’s share of media coverage, just as those in the UFO and paranormal fields who make extraordinary claims always seem to do. This is because people who tend to reserve judgment and equivocate their statements are not usually considered worthy of attention. We get what we ask for (at least for the great majority of the population who may not have any interest in inquiry and/ or are interested only in conclusions) in the sense that features and programs about the paranormal seem to be either “for” or “against” the issue. Open-ended examinations are so rare as to be almost nonexistent.
Of course, if we had no opinion of an issue we wouldn’t go about looking for data to support it, but the problem arises when people are faced with multiple examples of apparently reliable data that seem to negate their original position. Many will ignore the contrary information in blind pursuit of something they “know” to be true. That is the “thinker”s blind belief which stops the evolution of knowledge. When faced with issues like UFOs, psychic phenomena, and unproven animals, there appears to be a significant backlog of anecdotal information that deserves more inquiry. More information comes in every day that either proves we are hopelessly delusional or mistaken, or that there is a core of unknowns that call for disciplined research, or research into new disciplines that advance understanding.
Anecdotal reporting on the paranormal does deserve serious study by serious minds. People are seeing things in the sky, popping out of lakes and floating through old houses as well as performing feats that defy current understanding. Some of these accounts appear to defy current conventional explanations.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, May 12th, 2009 at 1:16 am and is filed under Beliefs, Fundamentalist Skeptics, Science, UFOlogy, UFOmystic Exclusive, Wake Up Down There. You can follow responses via RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response or trackback from your site.
del.icio.us Digg Reddit BlinkList Google Ma.gnolia StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Help
- Related News Stories:
- Mac & UFO Crashes »
- Yet More Prophecies »
- “The Truth” About UFOs »
- UFO Footage? »
- Interview Tomorrow »
- Dumb Debunkers, Dumb UFO Believers »
- Flying Saucer Music #9 »
- UFOs & Metaphysics »
- Remembering Mac »
- Friedman & UFOs »
|
May 12 2009 
May 12th, 2009 at 5:49 am
I was just searching bioelectromagnetics yahoo group a few days ago to check out on Guy Playfair.
May 12th, 2009 at 10:40 am
“This is because people who tend to reserve judgment and equivocate their statements are not usually considered worthy of attention”
The News doesn’t inform us or educate us, it’s only purpose is to sell a product. So what sells on the News? Fear and sensationalism. That is all the News is ever about nowadays.
May 12th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
If you don’t mind me asking drew, why are you interested in Guy Playfair? Did you find some info about him on a Yahoo group? I’m interested in him, primarily because of his book on Enfield and the time he spent in Brazil.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
The news media sells products by engaging in sensationalism and fear because that’s what’s popular. Therefore, the public bears part of the blame.
May 13th, 2009 at 3:56 am
“Advertising” uses fear and promise not because it’s popular but because it is basic manipulation, and it works.
May 13th, 2009 at 4:18 am
I was referring to the ratings of programs, which dictate the shows that will receive the most revenue from ads.
May 13th, 2009 at 5:44 am
? I take it nobody here reads The
Economist…not particularly
sesationalistic, and usuaully leaves
better informed. Likewise, there are
any number of sources for any given
“major news story”. A little effort,
a little reflection, and again, you’re
better informed.
Greg, I agree with your closing paragraph, with the caveat that it
may be that anecdotal evidence is
all we will be able to gather,
at least for awhile. Sticking strictly to Ufology for the moment, while I don’t
subscribe to any one interpretation
(ETH, UTH, etc. ) we have yet to see
evidence for say, the ETH thats much
more substantial than photographs.
But people will keep seeing things in the sky, and as long as we continue
to catlogue, it may be that someday,
we’ll be able to come to some kind of
provable, repeatable, conclusion.
May 13th, 2009 at 6:27 am
I meant Scott Hill actually — cross-wires sorry. Anyway thanks for reminding me of having read about his Brazil research in Colin Wilson’s books. My fav remains D. Scott Rogo’s book on miracles. It’s a rare combination of left-brain meditation of the priestly monastery sort and right-brain shamanic transformations. To actually practice this stuff it’s nice to combine the two although there’s no turning back, in which case John Tanner’s unknown classic THE FALCON is a must-read — he was kidnapped by Ojibwe in the early 1800s.