See his latest post:
EDH vs. ETH
To me, the people who seem to gravitate to the EDH are motivated by an inability to comprehend why an ET race would behave in the manner that some seem to, according to reports. Assuming those reports are true (a big assumption, but...), all I can say is "so, what makes it unlikely that they are ET?" After all, we know nothing about how an ET civilization would be structured - their social order, their behaviour, their concept of morality (if they even have one), their beliefs, etc. To assume that they would behave anything like us is the height of cultural hubris.
(By the way, readers of Paul's blog may be wondering just what the hell I have in common with Gillian Anderson, Scarlett Johansson, Natalie Portman, and Jeri Ryan. For that matter, so am I. The mystery uravels, appropriately, on April Fools Day.)
5 comments:
What you have in common?
Hmm... is that what it's all about, Alfie?
:-)
Paul
Interesting. To me, latching so strongly onto the ETH is an artifact of cultural hubris.
I don't gravitate to the EDH because I can't imagine why ETs would behave in the way they do at all. In fact, the dramatic similarity between ETs and humans makes me suspicious of the ETH.
The reason that I don't place the ETH at the top of my list is simple: I have seen little or no good evidence to support it that doesn't also support other, simpler, explanations -- and sometimes supports them better. I have, however, personally seen strong (albeit subjective) evidence that supports the EDH.
Actually, I misspoke: I don't buy the EDH any more than the ETH -- I lean toward the notion that "aliens" are real, physical beings that have been around for a very, very long time, living among and around humans.
The anthropic principle is the height of cultural hubris.
Mac:
When it comes to UFOS/ETs, why does One Answer Fits All? It's like that stupid concept they tried to foist on consumers years ago with clothing: One Size Fits All. Like one wag observed, One Size Fits No One.
Why not overlapping explanations? Isn't it possible that there's more than one cause for events that appear to be the same? For example, maybe there are extraterrestrial objects in our skies and sometimes the government allows the stories of such sightings to cover up test flights of experimental aircraft. So a weird nocturnal light could be an ET probe or a new top-secret aircraft. Maybe it's a natural phenomenon like the northern lights, but more isolated and rare. (Nocturnal ball lightning.) Or just an advertising blimp seen at a deceptive angle. Why pigeonhole every event into one tidy explanation?
I think the word "unidentified" in UFO should be stressed.
Ray X
Post a Comment