Why the “rabble” sees (and studies?) UFOs
Copyright 2017. InterAmerica, Inc.
The Times Literary Supplement for March 17, 2017 has a
review, by Brad Inwood, of Peter T. Struck’s book, Divination and Human Nature:
A cognitive history of intuition in classical antiquity [Princeton University
Press, $45].
Reviewer Inwood notes that “both psychology and epistemology
[were once] sharply distinguished [but] are now being reunited in some of the
most exciting empirical work in philosophy and cognitive science.” [Page 16]
And book author Struck, in his book, presents “a compelling
account of the great Stoic Posidonius, who … in the context of a physical theory …
emphasized the interconnectedness of the cosmos and all its parts, including
the human mind.” [ibid]
“And … Struck offers a highly perceptive analysis of the
Neoplatonic philosopher Iamblichus who took divination in a wholly new
direction, tying it not to knowledge about the natural world we live in, but
instead casting intuition as a special line of communication to the Divine, a
transcendent world from which special truth can be funnelled [sic] down to
specially gifted humans. [ibid. italics mine]
“Early theorists, even Plato, limited divination and related
phenomena to knowledge about the mundane world, and even the sober Aristotle
recognized that gifted dream-diviners had a way of getting at facts about
the natural world that most people of normal mental talents could not access.
It is reassuring, in an odd way, that on Aristotle’s theory such insight is
made possible by the limited intelligence of the diviner: too much
conscious rational analysis swamps the frail channels that open the diviner up
to subtle causal influences from the world. Being able to sense truths in
dreams is not a mark of god’s favour or a special kind of intelligence, but is
in part a matter of lacking the normal mental strengths that the rest of us
rely on.” [ibid, italics mine]
What this means, to me, is that those who have mental
limitations, the uneducated and lower classes of human society, see and have
access to things that those who are better educated (and in the higher classes
of society) do not – because the “educated” have cluttered their minds with the
complex and “irrelevant aspects” of their lives, while simple folk cut to the
chase, as it were, seeing and accessing visions that lie outside the “normal
world of economic or worldly pursuits.”
The peasantry, or proletariat, as I once called some UFO
buffs, are simpletons, in a way, and, thus, have or get access to (or study)
other realities that the rest of society doesn’t contend with.
This “gift” to the poor and impoverished elements in society
produce UFO encounters or visions of divinity (Mary, the mother of Christ, or
even God, itself, in a burning bush).
RR


2 Comments:
Have you considered that one of the differences in the social economical classes maybe diet.
What one consumes on a daily basis may impact us cognitively.
By
Tim Hebert, at Thursday, March 30, 2017
I think that what one ingests is important for researchers to consider when they interview a UFO witness, something rarely done if at all.
As for the diet of the lower classes, that is often as good as or better than that of the so-called upper classes, Tim; the uppers taking in a variety of foods, much of which is processed or mind-altering (wine, pate, octopus, et cetera).
But your point about what one eats daily would surely impact cognition. Yet that isn't taken into account when Ufologists quiz a UFO witness.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Thursday, March 30, 2017
Post a Comment
<< Home