Wednesday, April 29, 2020

Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary explanations

Carl Sagan famously asserted that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. That's Hume in a nutshell. Sagan wasn't a philosopher, so his criterion is vague and dubious. And the maxim targeted miracles, among other things.

But suppose we turn his criterion around. Suppose we've verified an extraordinary claim. An implication is that extraordinary claims, if true, demand extraordinary explanations. We don't demand extraordinary explanations for ordinary claims. Ordinary explanations will suffice for ordinary claims. If, however, an extraordinary claim has been verified, then that calls for a special explanation for why it is the case. Explanations that are too unnatural, too implausible, too farfetched to be reasonable explanations for ordinarily claims may be warranted or rationally necessary in the case of verified extraordinary claims. The ironic upshot of Sagan's maxim is that it points to a supernatural cause if the claim has been established. 

1 comment:

  1. Since we're on the topic of demanding extraordinary evidence for extraordinary claims (a simplistc/unnuanced criterion I do not grant), atheism/naturalism makes some extraordinarily extraordinary claims regarding the origin of the universe and all of life with its inherent complexities that one feels compelled to retort, 'Well, you first!'

    ReplyDelete