The Dragon In My Garage
by Carl Sagan
"A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage"
Suppose (I'm following a group therapy approach
by the psychologist Richard Franklin) I seriously make such an assertion to
you. Surely you'd want to check it out, see for yourself. There
have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real
evidence. What an opportunity!
"Show me," you say. I lead you
to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old
tricycle -- but no dragon.
"Where's the dragon?" you ask.
"Oh, she's right here," I reply,
waving vaguely. "I neglected to mention that she's an invisible
dragon."
You propose spreading flour on the floor of the
garage to capture the dragon's footprints.
"Good idea," I say, "but this
dragon floats in the air."
Then you'll use an infrared sensor to detect the
invisible fire.
"Good idea, but the invisible fire is also
heatless."
You'll spray-paint the dragon and make her
visible.
"Good idea, but she's an incorporeal dragon
and the paint won't stick." And so on. I counter every
physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won't work.
Now, what's the difference between an invisible,
incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at
all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable
experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon
exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same
thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune
to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in
inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to
do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so. The
only thing you've really learned from my insistence that there's a dragon in my
garage is that something funny is going on inside my head. You'd wonder,
if no physical tests apply, what convinced me. The possibility that it
was a dream or a hallucination would certainly enter your mind. But then,
why am I taking it so seriously? Maybe I need help. At the least,
maybe I've seriously underestimated human fallibility. Imagine that,
despite none of the tests being successful, you wish to be scrupulously
open-minded. So you don't outright reject the notion that there's a
fire-breathing dragon in my garage. You merely put it on hold.
Present evidence is strongly against it, but if a new body of data emerge
you're prepared to examine it and see if it convinces you. Surely it's
unfair of me to be offended at not being believed; or to criticize you for
being stodgy and unimaginative -- merely because you rendered the Scottish
verdict of "not proved."
Imagine that things had gone otherwise.
The dragon is invisible, all right, but footprints are being made in the flour
as you watch. Your infrared detector reads off-scale. The spray
paint reveals a jagged crest bobbing in the air before you. No matter how
skeptical you might have been about the existence of dragons -- to say nothing
about invisible ones -- you must now acknowledge that there's something here,
and that in a preliminary way it's consistent with an invisible, fire-breathing
dragon.
Now another scenario: Suppose it's not just
me. Suppose that several people of your acquaintance, including people
who you're pretty sure don't know each other, all tell you that they have
dragons in their garages -- but in every case the evidence is maddeningly
elusive. All of us admit we're disturbed at being gripped by so odd a
conviction so ill-supported by the physical evidence. None of us is a
lunatic. We speculate about what it would mean if invisible dragons were
really hiding out in garages all over the world, with us humans just catching
on. I'd rather it not be true, I tell you. But maybe all those
ancient European and Chinese myths about dragons weren't myths at all.
Gratifyingly, some dragon-size footprints in the
flour are now reported. But they're never made when a skeptic is
looking. An alternative explanation presents itself. On close
examination it seems clear that the footprints could have been faked.
Another dragon enthusiast shows up with a burnt finger and attributes it to a
rare physical manifestation of the dragon's fiery breath. But again,
other possibilities exist. We understand that there are other ways to
burn fingers besides the breath of invisible dragons. Such
"evidence" -- no matter how important the dragon advocates consider
it -- is far from compelling. Once again, the only sensible approach is
tentatively to reject the dragon hypothesis, to be open to future physical
data, and to wonder what the cause might be that so many apparently sane and
sober people share the same strange delusion.
Awesome Stuff !! xD
ReplyDelete"Religious wars are basically people killing each other over who has the best imaginary friend."
ReplyDeleteThis parable was first used by John Wisdom and then by Anthony Flew, but instead of a dragon they used an invisible, intangible gardener who tends to an area of plants.
ReplyDeleteThis is essentially how the currently so popular 'ghost sightings' should be approached. Not everything we 'see' is even actually there, our brains do respond to many different stimuli. And the EMF for instance is not 'proof of ghosts' but the very reason itself why people feel uneasy, feel they're being watched and sometimes it even makes them hallucinate shadows. But we interpret what we experience according to custom and expectation, so people now 'see' ghosts not because they are massively clamouring for attention but because EVERYONE is seeing them.. The brain is a fascinating organ.
ReplyDelete