culture

Cryptid Epistemology

The Portly Politico9 Comments

Ever since The Age of The Virus and the 2020 usurpation, there has been an increased focus in academia on supposed “mis- and disinformation.”  Anytime a small guild of academics champions a cause that runs cover for government and corporate propaganda, we should all activate our skeptical antennae, regardless of our political leanings; there is a good chance someone is lying to us.

The mis/disinformation racket is a lucrative one.  The federal government is shelling out big money to experts in this field to speak at conferences.  Without violating anyone’s privacy, I have direct knowledge of some of the amounts involved for academics giving presentations on the topic.  If I could pull in a cool six grand (and change) for talking about how everyone who disagrees with my positions is suffering from an advanced case of disinformation, I might do it, too.

William Briggs at his Substack Science is Not the Answer hosts a very good guest post by Jaap Hanekamp entitled “The Misinformation Dis(mis)course Revisited: The Losing Battle of The Academic Expertocracy“; it offers a very good treatment of the danger of this mis/disinformation regime.  In essence, it is simply a form of censorship.

Thanks to the corrosive effects of postmodernism in the academy and Western civilization at large, we’re living in a post-Truth age.  Indeed, we’re experiencing a quasi-pagan-New-Age identity politics, in which individuals are encouraged to “speak your truth,” as if one person’s subjective experience is as equally Truth-affirming as anyone else’s.  This claim breaks down under the lightest of scrutiny:  the moment two people disagree in a mutually-exclusive way about their respective “truths,” we have to ask, “which ‘truth’ is true?”  The reality is that neither of them could be correct, but we can know for certain that both cannot be true.

One reason I host Bigfoot and other cryptid content here is because, even though I am a skeptic—and I think that many Bigfoot enthusiast often interpret information about the big ape in ways that confirm their desire for Bigfoot to exist—is because the topic recognizes a certain limit to human understanding.  There is a great deal of bad Bigfoot information out there, but it’s all there for anyone to mull over and analyze.  Scrutinizing this evidence is part of learning to scrutinize any claim, and learning how to parse out what is potentially viable evidence versus what some guy with a blurry trail cam claims is Bigfoot.

I also think we should view the world with a certain intellectual humility.  The strongest argument I’ve heard for the existence of Bigfoot or other cryptids is that the world is so vast, and there is still so much of it that is functionally unexplored, the possibility of some highly intelligent, previously unencountered bipedal simian species is out there.  To be clear, I don’t think that’s evidence—it’s the opposite of it, really—but the claim encourages us to search for evidence.

Personally, I think most cryptozoological “research” is an attention-grabbing farce.  I keep hoping a whimsical Elon Musk-esque billionaire will blanket the primeval forests of Canada with high-quality, unobstructed cameras that are maintained regularly and monitored by a team of video analysts constantly, but even someone as lovable madcap as the Musk isn’t likely to drop potentially billions just to get a lot of deer footage.  That being the case, we’re left at the mercy of amateurs running around in the woods and taking grainy cellphone footage.

All of that aside, I think a healthy approach to cryptozoology is the same as it should be for any field professing to offer up some facet of Truth:  we should check it against rigorous scientific research (which, to be clear, can itself be flawed) and, for Christians, Scripture (again, to be clear, I don’t think the Bible addresses Bigfoot, but I mean here that we should confirm any claim in any field against the Truth of the Scripture).  We should also check it against the vast wealth of human experience preserved for us through the study of history, which is often the only “laboratory” we can reference reliably.

Ultimately, Truth is a very narrow thing.  We can only hope to arrive at it—ultimately—through Christ.  Otherwise, we can only move closer to it in this life, but we’ll never attain it fully until the next life.

Unfortunately, it seems that we’re running away from it as quickly as possible, and a small guild of self-proclaimed experts are going to limit our ability to run back to it even further.

9 thoughts on “Cryptid Epistemology”

  1. This fascinating article prompted me to respond but not here in the comments; I have just emailed to you a piece you may – or may not – want to run tomorrow so there is back to back discussion. Entirely up to you and I won’t be offended should you decide not to post it.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  2. Interesting piece. I’d have linked it to TCW but I’m not on the computer. They’d have enjoyed this over there.

    First off, cryptozoology? Didn’t they have one or two of those in Disco Elysium?

    Secondly, my very first article on TCW was about entering the post truth age. It was nowhere near as detailed as this though – it was my first published article full stop and I was still a bit shy, in terms of posting my thoughts for an audience.

    Mis/Disinformation, for me, falls into a similar category to labelling. It’s the establishment’s way of ensuring they remain the only source of information and truth. As long as they continue to level these charges against their enemies – essentially, anyone who disagrees with their narrative – they continue to set the agenda. And they’ll repeat their labels ad nauseum until the population swallows it hook, line and sinker.

    In a pub last week, one of the owners mentioned the rise in cancers and heart attacks, saying ‘conspiracy theorists believe it’s jab related,’ before rolling her eyes. I responded it’s only conspiracy or a theory until it’s proven, which seemed to give her pause for thought. Wander to bars, pubs, community events and listen to enough people in conversation and you’ll hear the establishment lines dripping from their lips as easily as air. The propaganda is off the charts. From their perspective, they’ve done their job and they’ve done it well.

    With each passing year, they make alterations, mainly to the language, but their intentions are always clear; that their information is the only information. Everything else is mis/disinformation or ‘ist’ in nature.

    As for our search for truth, my advice would be to look at as many sources as possible, including the establishment line, cross reference and come to your own conclusions. Some things are too important to leave to our bumbling governments and media.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • Haha, they did! Very fun side quest. Also, we have a resident cryptozoologist here—Audre!

      I’ll have to dig up that article. I’m glad that you’ve grown more confident as a writer; you’re a good one!

      I agree re: mis/disinfo: it’s a label the government, via the academy, can slap onto ideas they don’t like, when they are the very ones pushing disinformation.

      We’re in an interesting moment in which people are either totally bought into the official party line, or they’re wide awake—sometimes, perhaps, too much so, to the point that they’re seeing shadows and conspiracies everywhere. Regardless, the government’s repeated lies have become more and more apparent, to the point that the propaganda seems to be losing its effectiveness among those who have realized the true nature of the game. That group seems to be growing, but as you noted, there are still a shocking number of people who still fail to see beyond the veil.

      Amen: seek out sources, especially those that challenge you, and be willing to dig into how the facts are presented—and the alleged “facts” themselves.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      • That’s an interesting point you make, regarding seeing conspiracies everywhere. I blame politicians and media for that. They lie and obfuscate so much that you end up questioning everything that comes out of their mouths/pens. I’d like to think I’m not one of them. The establishment can’t be wrong all the time – a broken clock is right twice a day.

        When you spoke of censorship, you were right to a point but I believe it goes beyond that. It’s not enough to shut you up. They need to ensure that those who listened to you, followed you, read your comments and articles are put back onto the right path. Their path.

        It’s about correcting attitudes and ensuring that every person follows the only message.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        • Yes, I think it’s all part of the smokescreen of getting people to the point where they can’t trust anyone, so they default to the government’s position. “Well, that guy is just crazy, and, sure the government does some secretive stuff, but ultimately, they just want what’s best for me… right? They’re the experts, after all.” And, of course, you get a lot of trashy conspiracy theories alongside the ones that are plausible.

          That speaks to your point—yes, so much of it is demonizing the messenger. That’s why it’s not enough for the Left to say, for example, “I dislike President Trump’s policies”; instead it has to be, “anyone who likes President Trump is a N*zi!” It has all the moral certitude and brunt of a witch hunt (which, given all the self-proclaimed witches putting hexes on conservative political figures, we may need to revive!).

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

  3. Very true. 👍

    As you and Audre have both said, this is a topic you could spend a lot of time on. It’s a good pub afternoon conversation.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a comment