NOBODY SHOULD EDIT MY ARGUMENT BECAUSE THEY DONT REPRESENT IT CORRECTLY Reconsidering Unusual Creature Sightings: A Rational Perspective

It is important to reconsider the phenomenon of reported sightings of unusual creatures, as there exists a tendency to dismiss these accounts outright as either fabrications or the result of mental distortions. However, a more nuanced examination reveals that the prevalent explanations, such as pareidolia and misinterpretations, may not comprehensively account for the entirety of such instances.

The premise that most individuals asserting these sightings are neither irrational nor deceitful is foundational. Casting doubt on the sanity or credibility of all such witnesses overlooks the possibility that genuine experiences are being conveyed. This acknowledgment underscores the need to examine these accounts in a more open-minded light.

Historical records provide evidence that humans have consistently reported encounters with unusual creatures over time. While this alone cannot definitively substantiate their existence, it indicates that these experiences are a recurring facet of human perception and consciousness. Consequently, attributing all such accounts to mere delusion becomes a simplistic approach that disregards the complexity of this phenomenon. On top of this, these things that people claim to see, can't be considered extraordinary in a way that requires doubt to exist, its extraordinariness in its unusualness, but technically the chances of them existing are high as we know shapes exist, we know beings have shapes, we know the ones that people have reported can do the things other beings have done

The contention that reported sightings align with tangible reality is another crucial facet. It is undeniable that humans generally perceive genuine objects in their surroundings. Trees, animals, and various forms of life are regularly seen and validated. This suggests that while instances of misinterpretation and misperception exist, they do not account for the entirety of these encounters.

Addressing the explanations provided for such sightings is equally important. While factors like pareidolia and misinterpretation are valid cognitive processes, they are not universally applicable to all cases. In many instances, these explanations do not satisfactorily explain the depth and consistency of the described encounters. This is due to the fact that most people who have experienced things which skew your perception don't ususally experience them in most cases when it comes to sigthings, meaning most things people see aren't skewed by their perception in a way that produces an image that radically deviates from what is actually there. An argument solely grounded in these explanations overlooks the broader context of human sensory experience and perceptual accuracy.

Categorizing these observed beings as exclusively fictitious due to their divergence from the known is a shortsighted perspective. Such beings belong to a category of the unfamiliar, which does not inherently negate their existence. Being different in appearance does not intrinsically signify non-existence; rather, it challenges us to explore the boundaries of what we understand as possible.

It is rational to consider that the descriptions provided by individuals might not be entirely unfounded. While these creatures may not conform to conventional understanding, dismissing them outright without comprehensive investigation limits our understanding of the diverse nature of existence.

In conclusion, a more rational approach requires that we resist hastily rejecting the accounts of those who claim to have witnessed unusual creatures. Recognizing the limitations of conventional explanations and acknowledging the complexity of human perception paves the way for a more inclusive examination of these encounters. By doing so, we embark on a journey to unveil the truths hidden within the uncharted territories of our shared experiences.

  • Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on Philosophy Meta, or in Philosophy Chat. Comments continuing discussion may be removed.
    – Philip Klöcking
    Aug 11 at 19:23
  • 2
    I have voted to close the question because it is worded in a way that is too hard to follow. Aug 11 at 20:03
  • @MarcoOcram, I did try!
    – Paul Ross
    Aug 11 at 20:11
  • Could you give a link to the videos of these "unusual beings" so many non-liars see? Then we'll easier understand what you actually mean. It looks these beings are not so rare and people now have smartphones. So I guess it's not a problem to find lots of videos, right? :) Please, provide some links.
    – user66933
    Aug 11 at 20:40
  • @Whysoserious, an unusual being, is any being that, its apperance, deviates from any being thats in a subgrouop of species, and is thus considered a cryptid, or extraordinary
    – loopit
    Aug 11 at 20:42

3 Answers 3


All experience is interpreted. Normally when we have an experience our minds quickly interpret it in terms of familiar, ordinary actions and things: tables, chairs, animals, people, walking, typing... Sometimes our minds have difficulty and reach for more outré interpretations. That's adaptive: in low-information environments it's often safer to organize experiences along imaginary lines than to ignore experiences that might signal a hidden threat. So sometimes when people claim to see UFOs, bigfoot, or fairy lights their minds are merely misinterpreting the experience of some more commonplace event.

Religious/spiritual experiences are different in nature. I mean, when Moses came down the mountain he didn't just say: "Dudes! I saw this weird burning bush and I think it was God!", like he was talking about bigfoot. He came down the mountain (a bunch of times, actually), with religious laws that ostensibly came from God, and the whole thing about seeing a burning bush was supportive evidence, not the main point of the story. we are inclined to judge the merits of the law, irregardless of the merits of the experience.

The thing people tend to discount is that internal events are also experienced. Moments of passion or ecstasy, of insight or understanding, of awakening, etc, are themselves experiences that need interpretation. Moments of transport like this can be interpreted exogenously but what becomes important is not the experience itself, but the fruits of the experience. So if an angel appears and tells someone how to heal the world (or alternately a demon appears and tells someone to murder their neighbors), one can interpret it religiously or psychiatrically as one chooses, but what matters is what that someone does. Seeing an angel/demon isn't mere cryptozoology; it has a moral component, and the moral aspect is what people use to validate the interpretation.

  • When people see demons and angels they also misinterpret the experience especially if they are before seriously brainswashed into believing that these imaginary creatures are real. That's actually much more damaging than seeing a "fairy lights" cause it's gladly used as an argument to brainwash more people. Also pretty often these religious experiences are connected with schizophrenia, it's pretty common actually.
    – user66933
    Aug 11 at 20:07
  • 1
    @Whysoserious: When people do something extraordinary (be it good or evil), I am more willing to believe that they experienced something extraordinary. While I doubt I'd jump to the angel/demon labels myself, I'm not going to dismiss the idea that something outré happened. I mean, if a guy told me he'd been abducted by ETs, and then proceeded to shoot laser beams out of his nostrils, I'd think there was something substantive to his story. I wouldn't know if it was ETs, and I'd frankly question the logic of nostril lasers, but it's not the kind of thing I expect to 'just happen'. Aug 11 at 21:10
  • Around 1% of Earth population have schizophrenia that is often followed by different audio and visual hallucinations. There is nothing extraordinary here. When the right medicines the "extraordinary" pretty quickly disappears. So far there was no evidence whatsoever that someone was "abducted my aliens". As for talking - a person can talk whatever he wants.
    – user66933
    Aug 12 at 13:09
  • @Whysoserious: Well, that's interesting, but it completely misses the point I made. Since I've made that point now twice — and even italicized it in comments — It's pretty clear that you are deliberately avoiding it. That's your right, as it is your right to be deeply cynical about religion. And likewise it's my right to end what is apparently going to be a fruitless and frustrating discussion. You've made your point, I reject it. Have a nice day. Aug 12 at 14:40
  • It has nothing to do with religion or NOT religion. The things we experience are described by neuroscience. Regardless whether you eat ice-cream or pray, your brain releases special chemicals. And being religious doesn't mean you don't need evidence cause you "felt" something. You may believe your feelings are somehow special, but it;s just a matter of your faith. :) I see how you failed to recognize it cause you wanted it to be somehow special. But it's only special for your club of believers in ancient tales, that's the problem. :)
    – user66933
    Aug 12 at 14:51

the claim that they CAN’T possibly exist

Few are saying a centaur can't possibly exist. They are saying the person didn't see a centaur which exists. Not because centaurs can't possibly exist, but because the explanation that there was a centaur is seen as weak and/or a better explanation can be given.

We have more history than a few thousand sightings over just as many millennia to more fully weigh the centaur issue. Categorically, explanations which appeal to supernatural existence have declined. The shift in explanations away from supernatural gods is seen in Ancient Greece for example. The two tunnels forming the Tunnel of Eupalinos met at the middle because of geometry, not a god.

Specific questions like does a centaur exist are like the meeting of the two tunnels. You say every day, we sight other similar beings, and that centaurs aren't extraordinary. Great, exactly the reason to turn away from the supernatural and toward "science" to seek explanations.

I suspect you do this because you know the same overarching history of supernatural explanations not being sought in many cases. So then rely on "science" here too because it has otherwise answered similar questions. And science says centaurs probably have never existed, not they can't ever exist.

  • "the claim that they CAN’T possibly exist " i mean that, only bringing up explanations like misinterpretation, drugs, etc when a non crazy non liar claims to see it , is acting like it can't exis t, butt hats acting like it cant exist if you sya its likely all or most of them had these factors present
    – loopit
    Aug 11 at 17:37
  • science says centaurs can't exist, but the centaur doesnt need to be something physical in the sense a physical thing restricted by physical laws, I think that if horses and people riding horses wasn't common in the area where they were first sighted , then perhaps its a misinterpretation, a human on a horse, if humans with horses were near that area and generally traveled as well, once proof has been established, theres no need to assume the being even operates naturally
    – loopit
    Aug 11 at 17:42
  • science can maybe explain a lot of things once thought to be supernatural accurately, but even for things that go agaisn't physical laws, if enough people see it, then, it doesnt matter, look for an alternative explanations, another dimension, beings who can transform, maybe even aliens
    – loopit
    Aug 11 at 17:45
  • @loopit Can't exist and don't exist do not mean the same thing. Science says of centaurs "they can't have existed" or "they can't have been sighted", "there can't have been a centaur there", or "they don't exist". Science is not a replacement for metaphysics or all explanations. Centaurs don't exist by science. Maybe they exist yet still.
    – J Kusin
    Aug 11 at 17:52
  • We also don't have nearly as good of an explanation "engine" outside of science. You say look for alternative explanations, another dimension, etc. If science can't find these dimensions, then what. If we need to rely on something other than science that can answer these questions, then go build it. It doesn't exist currently
    – J Kusin
    Aug 11 at 17:54

You claim that most people aren't crazy or liars. But human perception and memory are flawed. Mistaken observations throughout history show we often see things inaccurately. Also saying "I saw something" is NOT a proof regardless ho sane or honest you are. In evidence based thinking we are first interested in a solid evidence. Not with a psychological assessment. So your premise "he is not a liar" isn't worth anything.

Next you assert some fantastical reports are later explained as real, but mundane things. That may be true on occasion. But you can't conclude all such reports are therefore credible without examining the quality of evidence.

You then suggest these reports should be assumed valid observations because they are frequent. Frequency alone does not warrant credulity! Dramatic claims require rigorous verification.

Finally, you argue it's rational to interpret supernatural reports as mundane observations until disproven. But the default should be skepticism of anecdotal claims lacking solid supporting evidence and theories. You have the burden of proof backwards.

So basically you commit multiple logical fallacies. You wrongly equate frequency with veracity, ignore the flawed nature of human perception, try to base your "proof" that people are not all liars, fail to consider quality of evidence, and place the burden of disproof on skeptics rather than those making dubious claims.

  • So I’ll take ownership of some of this for my paraphrasing. I don’t think the question presumed that the reports were credible reports for the creatures they proported to be about - just that the witnessing of something doesn’t seem to be a reasonable casualty of the dismissal of the fantastical quality of the description. I think your first and third points are good responses though.
    – Paul Ross
    Aug 11 at 18:32
  • If a person observes something - let him take his smartphone and make a video. The burden of proof on the guy who "saw something". I would also closely watch at his religious identity and what he "saw". You know lots of people in churches and mosques take the dopamine release as a holy spirit or allah's blessing. :) And the neurotrasmitter's release IS real. :)
    – user66933
    Aug 11 at 18:40
  • Also a guy completely misses that a statements "people said they saw something" and "people saw something" are two different statements. And when a guy says - "I saw something" all you have strictly speaking - he thinks he saw something (or even worse - he lies).
    – user66933
    Aug 11 at 18:49
  • shapes arent extraordinary simply because they are different, or can fly, its a shape, it doesnt actually have to be a nice fairy or a huge big god, it just , simply, has a certain apperance, and the person ususally doesnt have comprehensive knowledge of what it really is
    – loopit
    Aug 11 at 19:12
  • @Whysoserious NOBODY SHOULD EDIT MY ARGUMENT BECAUSE THEY DONT REPRESENT IT CORRECTLY : My argument is being misunderstood so lets try again: Most people aren't crazy, or liars, any explanation brought forth for as to why non crazy non liars claimed to see a creature that they gave an actual description of in a way that implies that they saw it in that form, these explanations are not the best way to know what happened for these reasons : Number one , these sightings have existed for a large portion of human history, meaning sightings of unusual creatures are a part of our world ,
    – loopit
    Aug 11 at 19:31

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .