As a chronic skeptic of flimsy unsubstantiated claims ranging from ghosts, "lost" continents, and UFOs to wild-eyed conspiracy theories, I take a lot of flack. (P.S. Yes, Roswell was a cover-up, but a really really boring one and one without Marvin the Martian)(Drat!). Most people easily and readily see the lack of credibility in most paranormal and whacky claims, except for when you hit upon their cherished misguided belief; human rationality hardly consistently lives up to its namesake. In terms of "noise," the one misbelief which seems to be gaining the most momentum in publicity, for now, is that the world will end in December 2012. The idea is false enough but what's curious is the methodology which in a slippery slope leads these people to the patently wrong conclusion. (Oh yes, how smug am I in my "arrogance".)
First, there is argument from antiquity. In the bizarre world of paranormal claims, the longevity of a belief is credited to the veracity of the claim. I suppose there is some truth to the saying that the more times you repeat a certain lie then the more convinced people will be it's true (an irony lost upon conspiracy theorists).
Secondly and in tangent with arguing from antiquity, there comes the notion humanity has somehow "lost its way" in terms of placement of values; e.g. emphasis on materialism, being "slaves" to employers and credit card companies, the rise of social isolation in large cities, etcetera. This sentiment is extremely commonplace and arguably has some merit, but the notion is twisted and perverted to where past and ancient, cultures and civilizations, somehow knew more in actual scientific knowledge in particular domains. This method of focusing on the past when the lesser was known, consequently arguing from increasing ignorance, is a perennial theme not only among the paranormal but conspiracy theorism. While the Mayans may have had their moments of brilliance, as did other ancient civilizations, we know more about the universe than they could ever imagine. While knowledge was lost during the Dark Ages, we have more than gained it all back, undoubtedly.
There is a fine balance to be maintained between belief and skepticism. After all, pure skepticism is a myth; advanced far enough, one must be skeptical of their own skepticism. We all must believe in something and skepticism is a method, not a position. (Hence, the misnomer of "Oh, you're a skeptic".) But this next method is the suspension of disbelief. The suspension of disbelief is a fantastic element of film and literature, but, for reality sake, all ideas are not equally valid. (Or else it would be equally valid an idea ideas are not equally valid). I love open-mindedness and praise it as virtuous, but ideas can be said to have different weights and one should not be so open-minded as to consider all ideas. There is that wealth of existing knowledge and experience which guides us which ideas are potentially viable and which can be dismissed out of hand. Interestingly, the few people whom I have come across, in real life, who espouse the 2012 nonsense have been surprisingly bright individuals but with an "anything goes" mentality. They know more about eastern philosophy than I ever will. In matters of fairness, people may be free to believe whatever they want, but the same does not hold in matters of correctness.
In closing,
(P.S. I won't entertain any replies about whether the world will end in 2012. This mini-essay concerns the thought processes of believers and will consider any "...But the world will end!" replies as baiting.)
First, there is argument from antiquity. In the bizarre world of paranormal claims, the longevity of a belief is credited to the veracity of the claim. I suppose there is some truth to the saying that the more times you repeat a certain lie then the more convinced people will be it's true (an irony lost upon conspiracy theorists).
Secondly and in tangent with arguing from antiquity, there comes the notion humanity has somehow "lost its way" in terms of placement of values; e.g. emphasis on materialism, being "slaves" to employers and credit card companies, the rise of social isolation in large cities, etcetera. This sentiment is extremely commonplace and arguably has some merit, but the notion is twisted and perverted to where past and ancient, cultures and civilizations, somehow knew more in actual scientific knowledge in particular domains. This method of focusing on the past when the lesser was known, consequently arguing from increasing ignorance, is a perennial theme not only among the paranormal but conspiracy theorism. While the Mayans may have had their moments of brilliance, as did other ancient civilizations, we know more about the universe than they could ever imagine. While knowledge was lost during the Dark Ages, we have more than gained it all back, undoubtedly.
There is a fine balance to be maintained between belief and skepticism. After all, pure skepticism is a myth; advanced far enough, one must be skeptical of their own skepticism. We all must believe in something and skepticism is a method, not a position. (Hence, the misnomer of "Oh, you're a skeptic".) But this next method is the suspension of disbelief. The suspension of disbelief is a fantastic element of film and literature, but, for reality sake, all ideas are not equally valid. (Or else it would be equally valid an idea ideas are not equally valid). I love open-mindedness and praise it as virtuous, but ideas can be said to have different weights and one should not be so open-minded as to consider all ideas. There is that wealth of existing knowledge and experience which guides us which ideas are potentially viable and which can be dismissed out of hand. Interestingly, the few people whom I have come across, in real life, who espouse the 2012 nonsense have been surprisingly bright individuals but with an "anything goes" mentality. They know more about eastern philosophy than I ever will. In matters of fairness, people may be free to believe whatever they want, but the same does not hold in matters of correctness.
In closing,
On a similar notion, in 1999 the planets all aligned in a straight line and "ancient prophecies" pegged catastrophic gloom and doom, that the magnetic fields would combine into a caldron of disaster. Um, no. We're still here.
(P.S. I won't entertain any replies about whether the world will end in 2012. This mini-essay concerns the thought processes of believers and will consider any "...But the world will end!" replies as baiting.)
