Mr Flyingblind said "Either Extra Terrestrials or, for that matter, God exist or they don't. If they don't then no amount of belief, faith, wishfull thinking or unsubstantiated encounters or miracles will conjour them up. But if they do exist then no amount of scientific reasoning and logic will make them go away."
Yes but this is just saying, (If A, then A), which is not especially interesting.
He also said "I can't help thinking that aliens, UFOs, faeries, angels and the like are all rather related phenomenon whether they are a product of the way human brains work or whether there is something more external behind them."
Now this is interesting: the thing that they have in common is that they are all manifestations of agents: ie thinking beings that have beliefs, desires and intentions (albeit not necessarily the same as the human variety).
When we look at observed phenomena we try to explain them: the two most common methods of explanation are that of agency and that of physical causation. eg;
"Mummy, mummy, why did A do X?"
1) Because your sister wanted some more pocket money, or
2) Because the VCR is broken.
So odd objects are observed in the sky: 1) Some person (or person-like being) is responsible, or 2) Some combination of inanimate matter or energy has caused the phenomenon.
Note that explanations relying on agency are not necessarily supernatural: the Blue Tit pecks at the birdseed because he is hungry: an entirely natural explanation.
Both types of explanation can be valid, and everyone uses them both at times, but most people seem to prefer a single type of "ultimate" explanation.
Scientists tend to prefer physical explanations (possibly because they are semi-autistic and have trouble making sense of social situations that require agency explanations). By contrast, nearly everyone else tends to prefer an agency explanation, (possibly because they need the reassurance that a "big daddy" or a "big mummy" will make everything allright, and they find the science too difficult).
Both sides feel the need to reduce the alternate explanation into terms that can be used by their preferred explanation. So scientists believe that, if only we had enough data and modelling power we could explain all agency interactions in terms of the physical laws at atomic level, while the others believe that ultimately there must be some sort of mind that stands behind all these little particles and waves and somehow makes them do it according to her grand plan.
Seen in this light religious belief is just as much a form of reductionism as is science.
|