Why do people believe what they do?

[Angel of Ioren]

I've been listening to the Paracast since June 2008. I originally started listening because I had a passing interest in the paranormal and I believed that some of what was being discussed was perhaps possible, although I was skeptical. Since then, I have become even more skeptical and I am having a harder time believing anything that's being discussed. Mind you, I still enjoy the show, but I can't help shaking my head at some of the stuff that people believe. The past few episodes have been especially difficult, with discussion of alien abductions and crypto-terrestrials.
Why is it that some people choose to create bizarre explanations for phenomena? Something that bothered me during the last episode was the discussion that these "beings" that may or may not live on, in, or around our planet have been changing the way they look to fit in with the zeitgeist. Isn't it more plausible that we as humans are doing that to explain what is most likely a psychological phenomenon? When something strange happens to us, we always want to explain it.
I'm just curious as to why some people believe what they do and why others, such as myself, have a really hard time doing so.
Are there any other skeptics that are lurking on this forum wondering the same thing?
By the way, I'm not trying to knock anyone's beliefs here, I just want to try to understand why people think what they think. In my case, I've listened to both sides of it and I firmly believe in science. Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence." No one has presented any extraordinary evidence.


Thanks.

P.S. I do realize that what was discussed in the last episode were thoughts that Mac Tonnies had and he never maintained that he was right about it or had any proof that the theory was true.

 

[CapnG]

Why is it that some people choose to create bizarre explanations for phenomena? Something that bothered me during the last episode was the discussion that these "beings" that may or may not live on, in, or around our planet have been changing the way they look to fit in with the zeitgeist. Isn't it more plausible that we as humans are doing that to explain what is most likely a psychological phenomenon?

What leads you to that conclusion? In other words, why do you BELIEVE it to be psychological?

When something strange happens to us, we always want to explain it.

Not quite. When something strange happens to us, we always want to explain it AWAY.

I firmly believe in science.

There's that pesky word again... "believe". I prefer to use the word "accept", it has much less baggage.

"Extraordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence." No one has presented any extraordinary evidence.

... to your satisfaction. That doesn't mean the phenomena aren't real or that no such evidence exists, merely that you haven't seen it or that no means of recording was present during the event.

 

[Xylo]

Belief is a touchy subject. Why do people believe in a god? Why don't people believe in a god? Why do people believe in an afterlife? Or reincarnation?

Something that bothered me during the last episode was the discussion that these "beings" that may or may not live on, in, or around our planet have been changing the way they look to fit in with the zeitgeist. Isn't it more plausible that we as humans are doing that to explain what is most likely a psychological phenomenon?

So then it is your belief that sightings with multiple witnesses, multiple points of view and multiple type of video evidence are "most likely psychological?" Sorry, I can't think that is logical or plausible. But as to the origination of said phenomena, I don't know. My belief is that we don't know.

As for why I believe that we don't know...well, we just don't have any evidence to suggest the origin or source. We do have evidence that strange events have occurred in our skies, in and around our oceans for hundreds, if not thousands of years.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

So then it is your belief that sightings with multiple witnesses, multiple points of view and multiple type of video evidence are "most likely psychological?" Sorry, I can't think that is logical or plausible. But as to the origination of said phenomena, I don't know. My belief is that we don't know.

As for why I believe that we don't know...well, we just don't have any evidence to suggest the origin or source. We do have evidence that strange events have occurred in our skies, in and around our oceans for hundreds, if not thousands of years.

I'm not denying any of that, but why is the leap made from the plausible (psychological, or say illusion) to the extraordinary (aliens or some other unknown entity). That's what bothers me. Also, there's credible video evidence that allows us to determine that what people have seen in the sky is without a doubt not created by humans or some type of natural phenomenon? Certainly people have seen strange things, but nothing proves the existence of the paranormal.

 

[IndigoEyes]

Why do people believe what they believe?

You might pose that question to a psychiatrist or psychologist or perhaps a sociologist. Being none of these, I can only offer opinions.

1.A lot of our belief systems are imprinted when we are very young children by our parents and social environment. As some Jesuit cynic said one time "If you get them when they are young, you've got them for life" (meaning, that indoctrinating someone into a religious dogma works best when it begins at a very young age).
2. As adults, we believe what fits our conscious and unconscious assumptions about reality. I love when people use the words "It's only common sense" to somehow buttress their arguement against or for some political action. Common sense is drastically overrated. In reality, I think much of what we call "common sense" is our early programming and base assumptions about life. What is common sense in middle class white America is not at all common sense in a Islamic middle class family in Iran, although (as people are fond of saying about Hitler for some reason) "he loved children". So, there are basic instinctual reactions on our part that we call common sense, such as loving our children. However, we see on the news that this is not universal, and there is often some horrifying case of a mother who decides to kill her children.
3. We believe what makes us feel psychologically in control, that we know the score, the way the universe works. These are the underpinings for our behavior and goals in life. If the goal of life is to accumulate the most expensive flashy toys (mansion, trophy wives, fancy car, boat, etc), then that will give you a very different life than a goal of serving others. What do you think the Wall Street people believe, when they express outrage that anyone could even suggest denying them their 30 million dollar bonuses?

So, what do you believe? From what you've written, your belief is that there is nothing paranormal and/or alien. Everything has a logical psychological explanation. This gives you a sense of control in your life.

However, if you are going to wet your feet in the dank frigid pool of ufology, you will find very little logic to what people report they have experienced. Could it all be psychological? Perhaps, but I personally do not NEED it to be all psychological. I can live with the concept that there are things happening that are beyond our little puny human intellect. When we observe such events, we try to fill the gap by making up theories about it. I am not sure what gives a particular individual a propensity to "think outside the box" and come up with theories that seem quite complex and wild. But none of us is objective. We are each the product of so many conscious and unconscious influences over the course of life, that we wouldn't know truth if it french kissed us on the first date! But we do our best, toddling along like infants, trying out new theories that seem plausible.

To say that everything paranormal is merely psychological doesn't really get us anywhere, because there are no known psychological syndromes (as John Mack used to point out) that account for some of the wild experiences people relate to us. I suppose they could just be untracked pathologies, but it does get a bit thin as a theory when you consider the evidence of trained pilots encountering disks while transporting people from New York to Atlanta! If all pilots who see ufo's are having psychological hallucinations, then we have a big problem! Why is it only disks or triangles or cigar shaped objects? If it was purely psychological, why couldn't a pilot (or even a person on the ground) see Fred MacMurray in his Model T car (Son of Flubber movie reference from when I was a kid)? Why don't people see objects that resemble the MACY'S Thanksgiving Day parade balloons, e.g., giant Snoopy Dogs pacing 747's, or perhaps a shuttle craft from Star Trek - Next Generation? I suppose Jung would say that the saucer shape is archetypal. Ah! But what does that really mean? We throw around the word "archetypal" as if we know what we are talking about, but has anyone really proven that archetypes exist?

Geez - you could go on and on. This is the sort of thing my roommate and I used to discuss over BLT sandwiches and fries in college until it was late enough to hit the bars.

Anyway, instead of trying to psyche out the entire rest of the human race, ask yourself "Why do I believe what I believe?" If your answer is "It's only common sense!" then you've been punked just like the rest of us.

 

[Xylo]

I'm not denying any of that, but why is the leap made from the plausible (psychological, or say illusion) to the extraordinary (aliens or some other unknown entity). That's what bothers me. Also, there's credible video evidence that allows us to determine that what people have seen in the sky is without a doubt not created by humans or some type of natural phenomenon? Certainly people have seen strange things, but nothing proves the existence of the paranormal.

I think that really depends upon your definition of "prove." It also depends upon your definition of "paranormal."

I don't think it's normal that there are mile long craft seen in the sky. or basketball sized self illuminated spheres, or disc shaped objects. Even if they are holograms, it still doesn't fit my definition of "normal." As for proof of these "craft" there exists eyewitness testimony, radar reports, and in some cases photographic evidence. Again, I'd like to point out that I'm not sourcing these craft as "alien" or interdimensional or cryptoterrestrial. I'm just saying that they don't fit into my definition of normalcy.

And if you can demonstrate an illusion that places dozens of flying objects into the sky to be witnessed by thousands of people from great distances and different cardinal points, I'll then believe that it could be illusion. I won't speak for anyone else but myself when I say that I try to rule out all possible known causes. Out of two sightings which I have had, I believe that one of the sightings was most likely man-made craft, though I've never seen any man made craft perform such high speed, high G maneuvers.

 

[IndigoEyes]

P.S. You really need to find a good interview with Robert Hastings. I think that is his name. He has accumulated testimony about anamalous lights hovering over nuclear silo installations, causing terror among the soldiers on the surface guarding the facilities. Much more bizarre, with the presence of these objects, the nuclear warheads have been tinkered with, e.g., their destination settings changed or the warheads even mysteriously broken. In Russia, one report claims that an object hovered over a nuclear silo installation and started the countdown to launch, which was hastilly cancelled by the terrified humans stationed there.

Psychological? I don't think so.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

I used "psychological" as an example, but it can be any other mundane, more ordinary explanation. Maybe it was a mistake for me to let my feelings about this be known, as I will be forever be labeled as a closed minded skeptic. However, I'm not closed to the idea that there are things going on that we don't fully understand or that we haven't discovered.
If you described how we were having this discussion one hundred years ago to someone you would have been thought of as mad. The thing is that we can't just believe that there are non-human beings messing with us without absolute proof. People are extremely unreliable sources when it comes to describing they see.
Whose to say that all the UFOs that are seen are not advanced human technology? Why does it have to be alien? That's all I'm getting at here. I guess we can't all agree on this stuff right?
It's a lot like discussing religion, everyone has different beliefs, or non-beliefs.

---------- Post added at 09:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:28 PM ----------

P.S. You really need to find a good interview with Robert Hastings. I think that is his name. He has accumulated testimony about anamalous lights hovering over nuclear silo installations, causing terror among the soldiers on the surface guarding the facilities. Much more bizarre, with the presence of these objects, the nuclear warheads have been tinkered with, e.g., their destination settings changed or the warheads even mysteriously broken. In Russia, one report claims that an object hovered over a nuclear silo installation and started the countdown to launch, which was hastilly cancelled by the terrified humans stationed there.

Psychological? I don't think so.

The thing is, these are claims. There's no real proof, is there, otherwise scientists would take these claims a little more seriously.
It's a lot like all those psychics that claim to have powers, every time they're put to the test they fall flat on their face.

 

[Xylo]

I used "psychological" as an example, but it can be any other mundane, more ordinary explanation. Maybe it was a mistake for me to let my feelings about this be known, as I will be forever be labeled as a closed minded skeptic. However, I'm not closed to the idea that there are things going on that we don't fully understand or that we haven't discovered.
If you described how we were having this discussion one hundred years ago to someone you would have been thought of as mad. The thing is that we can't just believe that there are non-human beings messing with us without absolute proof. People are extremely unreliable sources when it comes to describing they see.
Whose to say that all the UFOs that are seen are not advanced human technology? Why does it have to be alien? That's all I'm getting at here. I guess we can't all agree on this stuff right?
It's a lot like discussing religion, everyone has different beliefs, or non-beliefs.

.

Angel, we should have this discussion. And you should let your feelings be known. I'm not going to label you close-minded. I think you and I basically think alike, but go about describing it differently. I listen to a great number of "paranormal" and "UFO" related podcasts and the majority of them I have to turn off when guests start talking about "annunaki" and "space brothers." I think it's pathetic and just plain silly.

I'm an open-minded skeptic, and I like to believe that I'm a critical thinker. I don't believe every UFO is an alien piloted spacecraft, nor do I believe that every UFO is a ball of swamp gas. I believe that humans are fallible, gullible and subject to fantasy. I don't think that multiple independent data points can be easily dismissed, however.

As far as 100 years ago, we can only speculate as to what people would say or think. The fact is, we have a certain amount of space exploration under our collective human belts now, and considerably more knowledge as well. 100 years ago they may have thought us crazy if we were talking about the ice crystals of which comets are comprised. Or if we were talking about the latest video game even.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

As far as 100 years ago, we can only speculate as to what people would say or think. The fact is, we have a certain amount of space exploration under our collective human belts now, and considerably more knowledge as well. 100 years ago they may have thought us crazy if we were talking about the ice crystals of which comets are comprised. Or if we were talking about the latest video game even.

If someone would have shown me Mass Effect 2 or Uncharted 2 when I was busy playing A Boy and his Blob on my NES, my head would have exploded.