There is serious harm in believing in pseudoscientific and non-scientific claims about the world. This can be harmful because when someone ignores the aspects of the world that they do not agree with, then they ignore how the world works which can make it okay for people to exploit truths that end up hurting everybody. For example, climate change. We know that it is happening and that we need to change how we live and sustain ourselves so we do not destroy the world. However, some people put aside the facts and obvious evidence and still say that climate change is not real. As we talked about in class, an opinion does not equal theory or fact and therefore just because someone thinks something isn’t true, does not mean that it isn’t. Science is a process for understanding the world around us and uses the application of logical thought. When the scientific process is ignored, wild claims are made that are not supported by evidence or logic. This can hurt people, like when companies put whatever they fancied into their products and used pseudoscience or a lack of science altogether to promote and sell their product, not caring about who was hurt in the process as long as they were making money. Pseudoscience is also linked to pseudoarchaeology in that it ignores the process used to find answers or generate ideas about what ancient societies used to be like without looking at the context, meaning, or purpose of sites, features, and artifacts. The harm in believing pseudoarchaeology and non-scientific claims about the human past can be seriously detrimental to everybody. Generally, pseudoscientific claims about the human past and archaeology are ethnocentric, many are racist, many support nationalism and fuel radical ideas. Ethnocentrism is the belief that cultures other than one’s own are not as advanced or human as theirs. This can later lead not only to racism, but also to discrimination based on culture and cultural differences. This is detrimental to cultural relations, especially if they exist within one nation, hence nationalism can take effect and the minority culture could be put at a huge risk for violence or infringement of human rights. This could lead to radical ideas – fueled by nationalism, racism, and ethnocentrism – like the Holocaust or the Armenian Genocide. It is incredibly important that pseudoarchaeological claims and ideas are not upheld because they usually lead to the dehumanization and harm of people that do not deserve such treatment.
3 thoughts on “Blog Post #1: Why Ancient Aliens Shouldn’t be a Thing”
Comments are closed.
I agree with a lot of what you’ve said and you also brought up an interesting topic: pseudoscientists who believe something didn’t happen, rather than something that did. For example, pseudoarchaeologists are behind ideas that ancient astronauts visited the Earth and that Atlantis exists but there aren’t many whose main goal is to prove something didn’t happen or isn’t happening like climate change. The closest most pseudoscientific or pseudo archaeologists come to denying an event or phenomenon is when they try to find any loopholes in an archaeologist’s theory so they can make their claim of “what actually happened” seem more plausible. This issue is actually much more dangerous than it seems, especially when it comes to climate change because the denial of what’s happening to the Earth could end up killing the entire population. If the pseudoscientists and pseudoarchaeologists are influential enough and are able to spread their ideas it could result in events that are more dangerous than anything done by nationalist groups like the Nazis.
Another interesting topic is the use of pseudoscience or lack of science in manufactured products. I understand your point and I believe that was or could’ve been an issue in the past but how is this happening now? Manufacturing companies have teams of scientists who put the ingredients on the bottle and lawyers who’s job is to prevent any sort of scandal from happening that could be damaging to their product’s image. Also, how do they use pseudoscience to advertise their items? I believe that what you said is right I just haven’t heard anything about this.
I agree with what you said and you brought up a lot of interesting points. I also liked how you mentioned pseudoscience and how it differs from the process of actual science. This aspect of pseudoscience can also be dangerous because if people who are reading into these claims believe that this is how actual science works. Therefore, they’d be willing to believe a claim about anything if it’s presented in a professional way, completely disregarding the need for evidence (ex: climate change deniers who believe that climate change isn’t real because someone in power told them so, without presenting any evidence to support them). This can create a movement of people who are willing to accept pseudoscientific claims and ignore the evidence that is all around them, endangering the earth because of it. You also mentioned how companies can ignore the scientific process and sell products based on pseudoscience, and that make me think about the news that’s coming out about vaping products, and how the companies ignored the science and made false claims about vaping products being safer than regular tobacco products, even though they aren’t, and now young people are in danger because of the companies claims. Pseudoscience doesn’t just affect archaeological claims, but can also be dangerous in all areas of society, as you so smartly pointed out!
More thoughts I had after posting this comment:
You mentioning that pseudoarchaeology rejects the context of the site where the artifacts were found can be racist in itself, in that there is one large site filled with artifacts, but one or two artifacts that are more intricately made or rare are the ones that weren’t made by the civilization themselves, or that they were modeling them after some being that they came across and that they didn’t have the imagination to create these fantastical images themselves. These implications can also have the same othering affect that you were talking about. Good insight!