The scales are tipped in the favor of
skeptics, simply because it is a lot easier to accept the unexplainable as a
fraud or fake, rather than expending the effort to prove the veracity of a
particular event, object or entity. With
the aid of archetypes, like those hypothesized by Carl Jung (see Wikipedia article),
people are more apt to explain the causes of potential phenomena by chalking
such results up to the images or concepts that already reside in their minds,
as though the seeds have already been planted in their brains and the ensuing
confirmation in reality is therefore deemed less-than-reliable. It’s like the housewife who finds an image of
the Virgin Mary burnt into her toast; it’s much less a sign, than it is an
example of wish fulfillment of this particular person’s need to validate her
faith. I doubt, if she was say, Muslim,
or Hindu, that she would see that same image in that same piece of burnt
toast. This is an extreme example, but
nonetheless an example that skeptics of the “unknown” use often.
The mind attempts to settle the
unexplainable before it has a chance to use its mechanisms of logic to deduce a
definitive root cause.
However,
efforts to prove the unexplainable as fraudulent should be met equally with
efforts to prove the veracity of the unexplainable. Pursuits of either result should be equally
weighed. What is outside the realm of
human comprehension is something that one cannot dismiss as not existing. This
is basically a more complex version of that age-old question: “If a tree falls
in the woods, and you are not present to see or hear it, does it make a sound?” If you fall into the camp that believes this
means the tree doesn’t make a sound, then you are most likely a skeptic, and
perhaps also an individual who is likely to disregard claims of the existence
of the supernatural or paranormal. If
you fall into the camp that believes the tree has most likely made a sound,
even though you were not witness to the event, well, you are most likely a
person who subscribes to logic, to deductive reasoning, and someone who is more
likely to investigate claims of the supernatural and allow your mind to be open
to the possibility of “something else” – something that exists beyond the scope
of our comprehension, something that we are not readily aware of, or might never
understand in our lifetimes, but it’s something for which you cannot deny the possibility
of existing.
No comments:
Post a Comment