Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Alex C.'s avatar

> But if you talk to religious people, they will very often tell you about extremely hard to explain experiences.

The late Philip J. Klass, an aerospace expert, wrote a book called "UFOs Explained". In it, he recounted many stories of UFO sightings that appeared, on the surface, to be hard to explain without positing extraterrestrials or supernatural phenomena. But after he started digging into those stories, he found plausible, mundane explanations.

Similarly, when I see magic tricks performed on TV, most of them seem to violate laws of nature. But then I check Reddit threads, and I see how they were done.

History is long, and weird coincidences happen. Also, events get mis-remembered, crucial details get left out, and non-obvious explanations get overlooked.

Expand full comment
In-Nate Ideas's avatar

I think it's fair to debate exactly how low our prior in supernatural explanations should be, and perhaps it should be somewhat higher for the reasons you give. But I think you also need a fairly high prior in "there's some naturalistic explanation I can't think of because I'm not smart enough or I don't have enough facts." It seems like the latter would easily come to dominate the possibility space in many instances, simply because the world is causally complex and humans have limited empirical abilities.

Expand full comment
154 more comments...

No posts