From: boyken@herky.cs.uiowa.edu (Karl Boyken)
Subject: Re: PSI - summary of book review
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 21:02:18 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., U. of Iowa

In article <4643@daily-planet.concordia.ca>, gpkatch@alcor.concordia.ca
(Gary Katch) writes:

> 
> Karl Boyken writes [*]: 
> >This is the point of view of a skeptic--that the theory with the most votes 
> >wins? ...  
> > ...  If the entire population of the world were to 
> >vote on what's real and what isn't, I'm pretty sure you'd be in the
> >minority on quite a few issues.
> 
> That's exactly right.  What science attempts to do is describe
> the world with theories that work for everyone's common
> experience.  It provides you with a method to test your own
> theories, and then have other people try them out too.  What
> we percieve to be "reality" is that which is generally agreed
> upon.  If someone claims that little green devils fly about
> his head, will you assume their existence and then try to
> figure out why the rest of humanity is unaware of them?  Or
> will you assume that it's all in his head?  After all, it is
> "real" to him!

No, you misunderstood my post.  The person I responded to implied that the
scientific model of the world had the most adherents of any belief system,
and I claimed that that is probably not true.  I'm sure that vastly more
people subscribe to some other model of the world that includes belief in
supernatural or paranormal events.  Even many scientists also hold such
beliefs--you can find them in mosques, churches, and temples from time to
time, practicing them.

This is because scientific theories do _not_ work for _all_ of everyone's
common experience, despite what you claim.  For example, science has no
applicability to a person's emotional life.  Science is of little help in
dealing with interpersonal relationships.  In fact, for the majority of the
population of the planet, science is largely _outside_ the common, everyday
experiences of their lives.

> 
> If you claim the existence of any paranormal ("outside the
> common experience") phenomenon, naturally you find yourself
> in the minority.  Why?  Because you have not found any way to
> demonstrate the existence of the phenomenon to the rest of
> the world.

No, those who hold a purely scientific outlook on the world are in the
minority, because they have not found a way to convince the rest of the
world to ignore the vast majority of their everyday experience and focus
solely on an abstract, narrow view of the world.

> 
> I have no doubt that people who experience OBEs and such
> consider them "real".  But that is a personal reality.  Then,
> if they find out that other people experience the same things,
> they start to postulate such explanations as "higher
> frequencies", "thought forces", other "dimensions".  In other
> words, they look for some connection, some explanation which
> would explain the _common experience_, i.e. what we call,
> ironically enough, a "scientific theory".

I don't think there is any type of reality other than personal reality.
Anything else is just an abstraction, a tacit agreement among people that
serves as a basis for discussion.  Some people do seem to feel the need to
translate their paranormal experiences into another belief system; not all
choose the scientific belief system.  Some try to view their experiences in
religious terms.

> 
> None of us wants to be alone in this world.  We are desperate
> to find others who share our own views, beliefs and experiences.
> Personally, I like the scientific method because I have a way
> to test my own reality, to compare it with the common reality.
> How else do you know you're not crazy?  

What this means to me is that the scientific view of the world is the lowest
common denominator, what's left after you throw out everything someone else
blackballs.  Conformity that reaches into your life and stamps out anything
that makes you unique.  No room for intuition or inspiration or anything else
that might be considered "crazy".  A nice, safe, gray world to hide in.

> 
> I too have had several interesting, seemingly inexplicable
> events in my life, but I have never had reason to think there
> was anything more to them than my own mind, coincidence or
> simply some manifestation of the "real" world which I didn't
> understand.  That others may have similar experiences doesn't
> suprise me -- after all, we live in the same world, we are
> made of the same stuff, and our bodies and minds are strikingly
> similar in function.  Is it any mystery that we both in similar
> ways think, forget, remember, imagine, and dream?
> 
> -- gk

And now you don't have to think about those interesting, seemingly inexplicable
events ever again, because your model of the world has safely tucked them away.
How sad.

*****        _My_ views, no one else's--except those I plagiarize         *****
Karl Boyken, system programmer | Although you wonder me, with your majestic and
Department of Computer Science | superior cackling hen, your people I do not
The University of Iowa         | understand, so to you I shall put an end, and
boyken@herky.cs.uiowa.edu      | you'll never hear surf music again.-J. Hendrix

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic