Earlier, I wrote a three-part series on Carl Sagan’s famous dictum, “Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence.” My point was that this principle, though sound in itself, is used to label claims “extraordinary” simply because they cannot be explained in terms of current scientific knowledge. I want to write about this once more because I have [...]
I’ll now finally finish this series. In part I, I explained Carl Sagan’s famous dictum, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,” saying that it meant that to establish something extremely improbable, you need evidence that is incredibly strong. How could anyone dispute that?
In part I of this post, I explained the basic idea behind Carl Sagan’s famous skeptical dictum, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” That idea was that to establish something extremely improbable, we need evidence that is incredibly strong. What could possibly be wrong with that?
I want to write a two-part post that addresses what is perhaps the core principle that allows skeptics to dismiss nonphysical realities that you who are reading this blog probably believe in (apologies if I am assuming too much about what you believe).
I mentioned yesterday that I did have a response to the signs book from one skeptic, a local man I have met who had not yet read the book. He said, “Are you aware of the vast literature, from many humanities and social science disciplines, on the human tendency to make sense of perceived phenomena by [...]
I haven’t had any skeptical responses to the signs book yet. (Actually, I had one skeptical response, but the man hadn’t read the book yet.) I do share a certain amount in common with the skeptics, as I think that most believers tend to be pretty soft-headed and credulous when it comes to things like coincidence, [...]
