illusion of knowing and the illusion of having control
See an externally linked topic on "Illusion of control".
Al Nino effect was blamed for a California wildfire that had raged for weeks, and reduced everything to ashes in its wake. In this disaster, thousands of houses were lost, and many firefighters were among those who have perished in this burn of the century. Such an event is usually treated as "Act of God".
Nonetheless, a meticulous investigation suggests there was a more fundamental cause that thus had evolved into this fire monster.In relentless efforts for decades, human have seemed to be able to overcome nature for its spontaneous wildfires. This was by enforcing legislation with strict measures to suppress all fires quickly, made efficient with evolving technologies to effectively control their spread. However, the successful measures for decades had resulted in massive cumulation of combustible materials, heavily stacked by fallen branches, leaves and the likes, layers over layers ladened on over the years.
For this case, it took the awe of nature for us to wake up from this cognitive paradox of our delusion, and realize the real culprit for this burn of the century; our ignorance.See an externally linked topic on "Fire paradox" that elaborates on learning to live with fire.
See a news report on "Tsunami Animals: A Sixth Sense?".
Nonetheless, before an earthquake or when a Tsunami has initiated, it is known that the Earth or sea would rumble with low frequencies, and electromagnetic waves emission occurs. It is now known that these infrasound vibrations though are inaudible to the human ears, can be thunderous roars of nature to seismically disturb these creatures on different continents. And the influence of electromagnetic waves emission during the geological event could also had prompted those animals with such sensories to flee; any of these evolved sensory mechanisms could have caused a synchronized reaction for these creatures on different continents to run for their life.
See the UVS topic on "Natural events on Earth with aligned and cross-aligned Solar System objects" that illustrates an externally triggered causality for natural events.
The manner without a solid basis with clear definitions, one can mask his ignorance by cranking up a not falsifiable proposition for any mysterious phenomenon that is apparently inexplicable. In its illusion of knowing, it has the comfort of being at ease, and this can also boost confidence with a sense of superiority in its illusion of having control. This is how one can create an illusion of knowing with an inclination towards a belief that has a higher order type of abstract explanation that reinforces with circular reasoning, and could always assert the mythical belief in the fallacy of affirming the consequent.
There are lots of busted myths for old and new ones alike, however, human psychology tends to hold firmly onto believing in myths.
It is difficult to get a man to understand a simple truth when his pride, faith, or belief depends upon his not understanding it.
“By denying scientific principles, one may maintain any paradox.” - Galileo Galilei
Chickens hatch from eggs, but eggs are laid by chickens, making it difficult to say which originally gave rise to the other. To ancient philosophers, the question about the first chicken or egg also evoked the questions of how life and the universe in general began. - Excerpt from Wikipedia on "The chicken or the egg".
It is a fact that macroevolution happens, and new animal species can evolve, so whatever laid the egg that had hatched into a first distinct chicken, by definition that whatever was not a chicken. The answer to this question according to its specifications is, egg definitely had come first before the first chicken could be evolved. Specifically, this egg with an embryo of a chicken that had hatched into a first chicken, was not an egg of chicken. This is the distinction between an egg of a non-chicken, and an egg of a chicken; chicken egg is laid by chicken.
The problems of the chicken and egg issue were caused by its fallacy of definition, which renders its paradox that can invalidate any hypothesis with its circular reasonings. Thus, by denying the antecedent or affirming the consequent with circular logic, it can always invalidate any hypothesis to illustrate that the paradox could never be solved.
It is illogical to expect a definite answer to be consistence when the questions are put forth in a paradox with ambiguous definitions on the chicken and egg issue; it could never have a definite answer to the non-consistent question. It is illogical to think that by cracking this chicken and egg sequence it should also be able to find the answer for “how life and the universe in general began”, and hence has expected the answer to be something that is more sophisticated and complex. Attached to this notion, simple straight answer that does not fit the bracket would not even be considered as authentic with such fixed mindset.
Even by changing the definitions in any way for this issue, it would still have a precedent and therefore would still have a definite answer to it; an egg laid by a chicken is a chicken egg and this is regardless to whatever it hatches into. Therefore if the question goes “Which came first, the chicken or the chicken egg?”, then the definite answer is chicken had to come first; this is a logically valid answer to the specifically defined question from the evolutionism point of view.
It is true that “At no point was a ‘chicken egg’ created from a distinct ‘non-chicken’ species”, but this argument that was used to maintain the paradox is non sequitur. A “non-chicken” of course could not have laid a “chicken egg”, moreover, the conclusion was unrelated and could not conclude egg did not come first. It merely confuses the issue by contradicting it with a valid proposition that does not address the issue at all; this is a red herring fallacy of ignoratio elenchi. Note: The argument on “At no point was a ‘chicken egg’ created from a distinct ‘non-chicken’ species.” had been removed from an earlier version of "The chicken or the egg?" article from Wikipedia.
With lame logic and moot reasoning that asserts ambiguity, we can persistently fool ourselves.
Disclaimers: The treatise of Universal Vortical Singularity (UVS) in its epistemological paradigm shift, is fundamentally unconventional. Its hypotheses grounded on a generally unheard-of UVS model, bound to have shortcomings, such as loose ends, errors, and omissions errors. Many details and assumptions in its propositions have yet to be further researched, probed, evaluated, validated, or verified. Its implicit explanations are for casual understanding of the UVS topics presented in the UVS worldview, so if any term or statement is offensive in any manner from whatsoever perspectives, is most regretted. Links to other sites do not imply endorsement of their contents; apply appropriate discretion whenever necessary. Also, the content of the UVS topics, from time to time could be arbitrarily modified without any notice.
Viewing tips: Despite the presentations of the UVS web pages has went through much accommodation for their viewings on smart phones, they are still not entirely friendly to these mobile devices. For the best experiences, use a MS Windows based PC or computer system with Java enabled browser for running its interactive applets. (Such as Java Applet of Moiré pattern, JPL Small-Body Database Browser, and Planet Finder.)
Copyright information: This UVS web site is for non-profit purposes and not for commercial use. Wherever possible, direct credits to the origins of the works or images were provided, be it on fair dealings, with explicit permission from their owners, or the materials were believed to be from the public domain.