The need for recognition?
Copyright 2019, InterAmerica, Inc.
My buddy Bryan Sentes, in response to my posting about
ufiology’s “dim bulbs,” has provided a nice take on the cultural relevance of UFOs
and ufology at his https://skunkworksblog.com.
I find the cultural halo around the UFO phenomenon
interesting, but I insist, which Bryan and others don’t seem to accept, that
the cultural aspects of UFOs and ufology have little or nothing to do with what
UFOs may be.
All the gobbledygook about how people and society are impacted
by UFOs may be sociologically intriguing but has nothing to do with a UFO
explanation, which is what UFO enthusiasts should be zeroing in on.
I get the impression that Bryan, MJ Banias, and a few other
people in my UFO circle, want to be name-recognized as ufologists. They want a
modicum of “fame” more than wanting to know what the UFO phenomenon is all
about.
My erstwhile pal Tony Bragalia got sidetracked by his desire
to be known, losing his cachet as a UFO researcher, which he is now trying to
recapture.
Then there is French researcher Gilles Fernandez who is
adept at scholarly UFO skepticism, but who also would like more notice, often
irritated that José Caravaca is more popular in Europe than he is.
Me? I, like my pal Tim Hebert, want our blogs to be read but
neither of us cares a whit about ufological fame. There are others of that ilk:
Micah Hanks, Curt Collins, Lance Moody, et al. These are guys who like
being read, and have lots of followers and some notoriety as ufologists. But
UFO fame is not their main goal for being active in ufology. They want to know what UFOs are or are not.
Yes, promoting the cultural aspects of UFOs and ufology is
kind of fascinating but is hardly the vehicle to mainstream celebrity, yet a
few think that being known widely in the UFO community might come their way if
they push the matter.
They are wrong. Determining what UFOs are will glorify a
determined Ufologist, and enthusiastic research will get noticed as has been
the case and is the case for the past notables and current Big Shots in
Ufology: Jacques Vallee, Kevin Randle, and Nick Redfern for example.
So, read Bryan’s latest academic take on the cultural
relevance of UFOs, enjoy it, and give him a slap on the back. That should hold
him awhile.
RR
posted by RRRGroup at
Wednesday, July 31, 2019
16 Comments:
“What we’ve got here [still] is a failure to communicate…”
You seem unwilling or unable to distinguish what I term Scientific Ufology (what we might call, too, Ontological Ufology) whose concern (yours) is the truth of the nature and reality (being) of the UFO (“what UFOs may be”), to, as I put it elsewhere, _identify_ the _unidentified_ flying object, from what I call variously Cultural or Philosophical Ufology, concerned _not with the question of the nature and reality of the UFO-as-such_ but with its cultural effects or with the concepts assumed or implied by those effects (what you call “the cultural halo”).
Those concerned with Scientific Ufology have no warrant to dismiss Cultural Ufology for not being Scientfic Ufology, anymore than the Cultural ufologist passes judgment on the Scientific Ufologist. Indeed, the legitimacy of the Scientific Ufologist is assumed by the Cultural Ufologist in the same way that any answer, positive or negative, concerning UFO reality is held in abeyance. I can’t fail at something I don’t set out to do, not am I required to pursue a line of inquiry that I’m clearly not. That being said, the cultural effect _is_ an aspect of the UFO; indeed, the Psychosocial Hypothesis (a branch of Scientific or Ontological Ufology) would have it that the “cultural halo” _is_ the being of the UFO.
But to add an extra spin: sciences make headway when they examine their fundamental suppositions and assumptions (a philosophical exercise), as happened in everything from physics to geometry to mathematics and logic at the end of the 19th Century; the turn away from the question of the object of knowledge to the subject who knows the object, likewise, revolutionised philosophy, from Kant to Husserl. And you’re not gonna slag the phenomenological movement for not being relativistic physics. What such a recursive movement might hold for ufology can only be discovered by carrying it through.
Your “impression that Bryan, MJ Banias, and a few other people in [your] UFO circle, want to be name-recognized as ufologists[;] [t]hey want a modicum of ‘fame’ more than wanting to know what the UFO phenomenon is all about” is the reddest of herrings. I can only speak for myself, but I’m interested in what I’m interested in for reasons I have always been upfront about: read my post. If I wanted “fame” (aye yai yai) I would have given up the poetic vocation long ago, let alone sought it in of all things ufology!
There’s Copernicus and there’s Kuhn, and you can’t slag the latter for not being the former.
Yes, promoting the cultural aspects of UFOs and ufology is kind of fascinating, if sometimes mystifyingly brow-furrowing…
By
Bryan Sentes, at Wednesday, July 31, 2019
Here it is, the gobbledygook.
I may be fascinated by the noise but it won't take us to a UFO explanation. It won't.
We shall continue the colloquy, despite others yawning all the way to more pertinent blogs.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 31, 2019
RRRGroup said:
My erstwhile pal Tony Bragalia got sidetracked by his desire to be known, losing his cachet as a UFO researcher, which he is now trying to recapture.
I was wondering what happened to him...He kinda faded after the Roswell Slides debacle in Mexico in 2015.
By
Anonymous, at Wednesday, July 31, 2019
?!
Gobbledygook? Please quote a passage and articulate its incoherence, grammatical or conceptual.
Why this insistence on the the need for a UFO explanation? Is Foucault's _Madness and Civilization_, a book you've praised, to be ditched because it is not psychology but a kind of cultural history (or theory, or philosophy...) or psychology?
I've clarified myself thrice--twice at two posts at Skunkworks and once here--on the difference between Scientific and Cultural Ufology. At my post, I list no fewer than sixteen volumes, most from academic presses, engaged with what I call the UFO Effect, whose value is distinct from any position the respective authors might have on UFO Reality.
You're being either perverse or obtuse.
By
Bryan Sentes, at Wednesday, July 31, 2019
There is Poetry and there is poetry-- The same is true of Science and Philosophy... just as there is UFOlogy and UFoolery. Some people find value in their chosen beliefs.
As one of the verses of a song I wrote some 25 years ago said:
Well Nero fiddles for the band
And Gabriel blows the horn
While Jellyroll slaps the ivory
And sings of love forlorn
All the while I sat there
In the Belly of the Beast, My friend
I laughed and cried for all of us,
All our hubris and our sin
When I finally stumbled outta there
It must a been about the Crack of Doom
I took with me only these memories
And the words to this tuneless tune.
Chorus:
At a bar set in Dream time
I pull’d myself up a chair
To fill myself with memories
Of which I was unaware
To paraphrase Robert Heinlein: "One man's 'Science' is another man's belly laugh". The same is true for Philosophy or UFOlogy. The measure of their worth is the results they produce. Real science can produce real results. Sadly, Philosophy and UFOlogy, unlike Science, have not resulted in any thing of tangible value.
By
Joel Crook, at Wednesday, July 31, 2019
You keep touting the UFO effect.
That has nothing to do with what UFOs are. It's as simple as that.
You are forcing an issue that is peripheral to the essence of a UFO.
I've been maintaining long here and elsewhere that ufologists (UFO enthusiasts) should concentrate on the UFO phenomenon, not its effects on witnesses. While witness stress, beliefs, and physical or social aftermath -- like that of Calvin Parker for instance -- is interesting to a number of disciplines, psychology being one, it's the UFO itself that should be the center of inquiry, its substance, or essence.
You would encumber the phenomenon with everything but what it is. That's all I'm pointing to.
Your sixteen volumes have value, but not for determining what UFOs are. That's it, in a nutshell.
That you can't see that is worrisome.
And, by the way, there is no scientific ufology....everyone knows that. Just as they know there is no scientific astrology. Quit trotting out the spurious term. It just beclouds the issue, which is my point with you fellows who want to bestir the UFO masses with the idea that they matter more than the phenomenon.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 31, 2019
Xristus.
I've stated ad nauseum that the study of the UFO Effect was unconcerned with, as you so loosely put it, "what UFOs are". Nowhere have I ever claimed otherwise, but have been at pains to be clear on the matter.
Nevertheless, as I observed: proponents of the Psychosocial Hypothesis would vehemently disagree...
There is no scientific ufology? Tell it to astronomers (e.g., Hynek), physicists (e.g., James E. McDonald, Harley D. Rutledge, and Peter A. Sturrock), polymaths (e.g., Jacques Vallée), and others.
By
Bryan Sentes, at Wednesday, July 31, 2019
Rich was right there is no scientific ufology only scientists in ufology...Don't take a degree to claim to be a ufologists that's the reason every numb nut with an idea is in it.
By
Anonymous, at Wednesday, July 31, 2019
But you keep bringing in, Bryan, how UFOs affect the cultural milieu, pushing aside the question of what UFOs are; that's my point.
You force us (and me here) to talk about the "UFO Effect" when I don't want to talk about that.
I want we UFO enthusiasts to deal with the phenomenon only. That's it.
You keep going into the weeds to make your "cultural" points. Dragging me and others with you.
And because your scientist list is legit, that doesn't mean that any engaged in scientific study of the phenomenon. They didn't. They like you talked a big talk but didn't really do anything scientific.
You like words but I am asking for action. You don't want to do that. You want to talk, to be pedantic, to be academic. Phooey is my response.
I still think you're tops. just a bit verbose.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 31, 2019
Thank you Joel...
Glad to see a comment from you (above), confirming you are well and astute as always.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Wednesday, July 31, 2019
What more do people need, to convince them, that UFOs are real? I mean, people round the world are seeing these things..Hence the reports world wide!!
Pilots are seeing these things in their air-space, and are concerned. Radar is registering these things, with air-speed. What more does one need, to be convinced?
Ufology says these things are real. Well they ARE being seen, aren't they?...round the world, with Radar. It's not so much the Cultural aspects, oneway or the other, in Ufology, but the "FACT" that this phenomenon, is REAL!!!....Radar shows this!!!
More than once, more than twice, many time, so it's not just a glitch in the system.
It's Radar round the world, everywhere!!!..
Aircraft have transponders that register with Radar, and show Control-towers, round the world, data or factual information on a particular aircraft..
[UFO, do not have transponders, thus, are in air-space, illegally] It's no wonder Pilots are concerned.............
By
Daniel, at Thursday, August 01, 2019
Phil (and RR):
I agree re "scientific ufology", as saying "there are scientists who do ufology" describes nicely the example (Hynek, et al.) I provide above.
I only ever used the expression "scientific ufology" not to designate an existing discipline, but to try to distinguish those concerned with UFO Reality (such as Rich) from those concerned with the UFO Effect (the UFOs cultural meaning, such as Jung)....
By
Bryan Sentes, at Thursday, August 01, 2019
I thought it was more obvious how (popular) culture has affected the UFO sightings or experiences and not vice versa. Like, the abduction by aliens was already such a cliché in 50´s and 60´s that tv shows like Twilight Zone and Outer Limits had many episodes featuring abductions. And before the flying saucers we had a lot of saucer-shaped space ships in the covers of SF-magazines. And of course, it´s interesting that (as I´m sure everyone here knows) what Arnold saw wasn´t saucer-shaped but more like a boomerang, but still people went to see flying saucers...
@Daniel: I don´t think anybody (at least here, I mean) is saying that UFOs aren´t real, but rather wondering what they really are, as the ET hypothesis doesn´t really explain them (unless the aliens are really playing with humankind and laughing their hearts out). (I wish the UFOs were alien ships, that would be so wonderful, but...)
By
Jerry Cornelius, at Thursday, August 01, 2019
It does not matter to me, Jerry, but "Zoam & his ilk" don't help with their comments of;[No such thing as UFOs it's all Ufoology & stories] To that affect.
While Pilots, Radar, and People with credible credentials in society, know allot different, in their claims, that only some pay attention to..........
By
Daniel, at Thursday, August 01, 2019
Oh boy...I can't believe that I'm writing a comment, but...
The UFO culture is now purely entertainment value. The public is bombarded by cable faux docudramas going on tirelessly rehashing old cases with the same spokespersons providing commentary. It's simply unadulterated crap. But for the slim percentage of UFO junkies, it provides a fix...I'll begrudgingly give them that...but as most drug abusers the effects soon wear off and it's on to the next cable show.
Closing questions: How has the UFO phenomena changed ones everyday existence? The answer is not one iota. If it has then I suggest therapy and I'm not a big fan of therapy as that in itself tends to be another cash cow for some.
I agree with Rich, culture does not answer what UFOs are, if anything. It merely provides an insight into the human psyche and our ability to quantify something that is purely subjective.
I've said in jest in recent comments that the pragmatic view is a good guide...I jest no more.
By
Tim Hebert, at Thursday, August 01, 2019
Hi Tim:
-> The UFO culture is now purely entertainment value.<-
Yes, but if it IS, seen in that way Tim, it's only because it's not presented in a serious or important way, so people will not give it that much attention, and just laugh it off....BUT,in a way Tim, the community is getting the news, and being "prepared" for Disclosure of the UFO presents here on earth, IF & when, Disclosure should take place...It's a big (IF:)though! and for the time being, a wee boring, perhaps, but you're lucky. I get nothing of UFO on TV. nothing at all, just local news. Most of what we discover is from the net, reading, videos, & ones own experience, which was an eye opener for us,and REAL............
By
Daniel, at Friday, August 02, 2019
Post a Comment
<< Home