After writing that last post, it occurred to me that the "social element" of ufology can't be altogether disregarded. It is only necessary for the scientific research group to ignore this element. This does not exclude the possibility of a seperate or sub-group whose efforts are specifically directed in a social direction.
There is a similar group already in existence, and that is the group involved in the Disclosure Project. However, I think that the ideal group would proceed in a very different manner than Greer's, if they want to achieve a successful social effect.
The single most important difference in my ideal hypothetical group and Greer's group is that upon joining, all members must first agree to a unified public stance: "Ufos are a reality, and beyond this we do not know."
Nothing more can be publicly discussed by any members of the group. No banning of space weapons, no alien races, no planetary exchanges, no reverse-engineered technologies. All of these things do nothing more than muddy the waters, strain credulity, and actually go against the goal of convincing the public. All members, regardless of their "pet theories", must agree that by joining the group they will adopt the group's stance in public. Privately, the members can speculate on crazy stuff till their hearts' content, but publicly they must not deviate from the initial stance.
Now certainly in a forum such as a press conference, questions will arise regarding the specifics about ufos. What do they look like? Where do they come from? etc. The temptation at this point is for individuals to propound on theories because they are ashamed to say simply, "I don't know." Perhaps they're afraid that this will make their stories less believable. Whatever the case, it must be stressed that there is no shame in answering that something is unknown.
If Greer's group had started with this sort of unified front, I think it would have made greater public headway than it has. As it presently stands, guys like Clifford Stone promoting the idea of "52 different alien races" are simply negative influences on the presumed goal. I honestly have no personal opinions on the validity of such statements, but it is absolutely worthless to publicly discuss such topics when the topic of the *reality of ufos themselves* has not been publicly acknowledged as a fact. This would be the equivalent of the Wright Brothers discussing the building of airports before they had sufficiently convinced the public of the feasibilty of an airplane.
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Saturday, July 21, 2007
Science Begins With Thought
I recently read a blogger's inquiry into people's ideas of what might further the scientific inquiry into the ufo phenomenon. I think this is an excellent question.
Thinking about the subject, I must first acknowledge that science is not just instruments and measurements, its foundation is a particular way of thinking regarding the world around us. Because of this, a religious zealot with a lab coat and microscope is not a scientist, regardless of whether his religion is Mormonism or Darwinism. I may not have a great deal of helpful advice regarding which instruments and measurements will best serve ufology, but I believe I can offer observations of what will help ufology from a psychological perspective.
One of the major obstacles that is keeping ufology from moving forward is this ubiquitous striving to acquire mainstream acceptance. As I see it, this "social factor" comprises the majority of the efforts and discussions in ufology today, and is the primary cause for all of the bickering and in-fighting. There are a few exceptions, Vallee and Keel come to mind, but they are notably absent from the field presently.
To illustrate why I believe this mind-set needs to change, we should look first at the subject itself. Those who have studied this field seriously will soon come to the realization that the truth behind ufos, whatever it may be, is something that lies far outside the spectrum of what we consider ordinary reality. It exists in our world like the idea of an airplane existed during the time when man could not fly. Consider how difficult it was for people at that time (including the prevailing scientific establishment) to accept the idea that man could fly, and then amplify that mental block ten-fold. This would approximate the psychological gulf existing between our misconceptions and reality regarding the ufo phenomenon, in my opinion.
As such, it seems only logical that progress in our understanding of the ufo phenomenon, at this point in time, cannot be some sort of grand social revolution. Real understanding is only going to take place among individuals or small groups. It is going to be a long, long time before ufology gains this "credibility" that those in the field so are so desperately grasping towards. The roads of inquiry and credibility run parallel in the beginning, but diverge further and further as one delves into a subject whose underlying reality strays far from the mainstream.
The further a person goes down one road, the further he is away from the other. Sooner or later, he must choose one and leave the other behind.
Because of this, for the scientist who sincerely wishes to learn of the reality behind the ufo phenomenon, he must firmly discard the desire for widespread social or mainstream scientific acceptance. History supports the premise that this social change will never happen unless it serves the intelligence behind the phenomenon, and that is something that we can neither predict nor rely upon.
By freeing oneself of this baggage, I believe a person will be more able to discover (and not reject) the incredibly weird reality that undoubtedly underlies the ufo phenomenon, but which we are unable to discover.
So this is my hypothetical foundation for the establishment of a group investigating the reality of the ufo phenomenon. The individuals involved must share in a common aim, which is for scientific inquiry into the mystery by any means available. Nothing is assumed known unless agreed upon by all members. No attention will be directed towards acquiring mainstream scientific or social acceptance. It makes no difference whether the investigation moves into the field of chemistry or into a field of crop circles, it is all on an even plane.
If anyone knows of such a group drop me a line.
Thinking about the subject, I must first acknowledge that science is not just instruments and measurements, its foundation is a particular way of thinking regarding the world around us. Because of this, a religious zealot with a lab coat and microscope is not a scientist, regardless of whether his religion is Mormonism or Darwinism. I may not have a great deal of helpful advice regarding which instruments and measurements will best serve ufology, but I believe I can offer observations of what will help ufology from a psychological perspective.
One of the major obstacles that is keeping ufology from moving forward is this ubiquitous striving to acquire mainstream acceptance. As I see it, this "social factor" comprises the majority of the efforts and discussions in ufology today, and is the primary cause for all of the bickering and in-fighting. There are a few exceptions, Vallee and Keel come to mind, but they are notably absent from the field presently.
To illustrate why I believe this mind-set needs to change, we should look first at the subject itself. Those who have studied this field seriously will soon come to the realization that the truth behind ufos, whatever it may be, is something that lies far outside the spectrum of what we consider ordinary reality. It exists in our world like the idea of an airplane existed during the time when man could not fly. Consider how difficult it was for people at that time (including the prevailing scientific establishment) to accept the idea that man could fly, and then amplify that mental block ten-fold. This would approximate the psychological gulf existing between our misconceptions and reality regarding the ufo phenomenon, in my opinion.
As such, it seems only logical that progress in our understanding of the ufo phenomenon, at this point in time, cannot be some sort of grand social revolution. Real understanding is only going to take place among individuals or small groups. It is going to be a long, long time before ufology gains this "credibility" that those in the field so are so desperately grasping towards. The roads of inquiry and credibility run parallel in the beginning, but diverge further and further as one delves into a subject whose underlying reality strays far from the mainstream.
The further a person goes down one road, the further he is away from the other. Sooner or later, he must choose one and leave the other behind.
Because of this, for the scientist who sincerely wishes to learn of the reality behind the ufo phenomenon, he must firmly discard the desire for widespread social or mainstream scientific acceptance. History supports the premise that this social change will never happen unless it serves the intelligence behind the phenomenon, and that is something that we can neither predict nor rely upon.
By freeing oneself of this baggage, I believe a person will be more able to discover (and not reject) the incredibly weird reality that undoubtedly underlies the ufo phenomenon, but which we are unable to discover.
So this is my hypothetical foundation for the establishment of a group investigating the reality of the ufo phenomenon. The individuals involved must share in a common aim, which is for scientific inquiry into the mystery by any means available. Nothing is assumed known unless agreed upon by all members. No attention will be directed towards acquiring mainstream scientific or social acceptance. It makes no difference whether the investigation moves into the field of chemistry or into a field of crop circles, it is all on an even plane.
If anyone knows of such a group drop me a line.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
