UFO Conjecture(s)

Monday, September 12, 2016

Ufology and wish-fulfillment

Psychiatry, today, is not prone to pursue Freud’s emphasis on wish-fulfillment for dreams or anything else.

Jung was loath to expand on Freud’s concept, especially as it applied to dreams.

But taking away the psychoanalytic patina of wish-fulfillment, one can see the desire of many UFO buffs to find an extraterrestrial explanation for UFOs.

They, ET-wishers, have a fear or longing, to escape from this existent drudge that many find themselves in.

In the UFO field or community one can see, rather obviously, a need for ET relief – they will save us, they will excite us with new technologies, new medicines, an exotic experience – and a concomitant need for fame or financial gain, the latter a delusion that many UFOers think exists.

One can find exorbitant needs to prove one is brilliant. (This blog is an example some think.) Commentary in most UFO blogs often consists of strident forms exhibiting an intelligence that is just not there.

One can see persons who became emerged in the UFO field to assuage their failures in their before-UFO careers: Stanton Friedman, Linda Moulton Howe, Jerome Clark, et al. (You can cite, yourselves many other inconsequential wannabes.)

But the great mass of UFO followers consist of persons who really only want to make their lives exciting, fulfilled by a need for extraterrestrials, often replacing a god or God.

In a sub-genre, I could – but won’t for various reasons – offer “evidence” that the Roswell slide group and participants were less trying to con the public and ufologists than trying to fulfill their belief that ETs crashed in Roswell and the U.S. government has confiscated the alien bodies involved, keeping them secret for obtuse reasons.

Some readers here like to attribute lying to those who see UFOs harboring interest in nuclear plants and missile sites, while those who seek and think they’ve found valid accounts of such activity are merely following their delusional need for an ET presence on Earth, a folly that I’ve tried to address here.

So-called abductees are extreme examples of a need for ET-saviors (like the angels and demons of old) or a need to gain some fame (notoriety) for their pathetic lives. (One doesn’t find famous or successful persons saying they’ve been abducted by alien beings.)

Wish-fulfillment is an underlying stratification for those with psychological needs, and UFOs offer, because of heir esoteric nature, a platform for persons who need to excel at something and who find UFOs (or ufology) an easy place where they can assume a mantle worthy of their aberrant need to be something other than what they really are.

RR

4 Comments:

  • Rich, you touch on numerous issues. This sort of tails into a loose discussion that Frank Warren and I had on my blog and at his web site: this being why debunkers/skeptics were ignoring Robert Hastings' documentary.

    The fact that I have a life other than UFOs was "discussed." Yes the subject interests me otherwise I'd not have a blog devoted primarily to a subset of the subject: UFOs and ICBMs. But even as a skeptic (or debunker if you wish) it does not dictate my life or livelihood.

    To be blunt, I can easily chuck the whole damn thing with no regrets. The blog has allowed me to have my say and folks can either agree or disagree. But, can the UFO/ET believer leave the subject behind? I submit that they can't. It's a compulsion for most. For some, it ranks as that of a pathology that is deep rooted in past experiences that they cannot, or will not come to grips with.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Monday, September 12, 2016  

  • Tim:

    We're on the same page pretty much.

    I've sort of supported Robert Hastings' views but was surprised that his UFOs had an ET patina.

    I agree that for many UFOers, the ET explanation is a compulsion. I'd like to know the root of that compulsion, as would you I think.

    There is a pathology at work, which you see in your work and I've seen in my past incarnations. (I wonder why Gilles Fernandez doesn't address the issue.)

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, September 13, 2016  

  • Hello, Rich and all.

    The bounder(y) between the pathology and the normal, is really close, as you already know.

    For me, ufologists (pro-ufo defenders) or witnesses have none pathology (or in very rare cases or individuals): they simply have (or are victims of) our common & general cognitive "need of/for Religiosity" and to be transcended by something... Period.

    Ufology is imho a direct and predicted/expected contemporain myth, regarding our "need of Religiosity" and "to be transcended by something", in any of us. Excepting ufologists have no red flag to realize/understand it... Well, that's ufology, after all... ^^

    In S.F., they are/were quasi All the components/ingredients of/for our 'contemporary' UFO myth... UFO are mimic to our own productions, realizations, culture, they claim as defense. Hum... Not really.

    UFO is a cognitive and cultural/societal thing our mind CANT have/had avoided and then he/it spoused/marry with, in a perfectly understandable way by "me". The roots are clear imho: S.F., philosophy, theosophy, us to be in a scientific area for space travels and full of promises, etc. and many more... I have several bad known articles about this.

    For me, UFO myth-tellers (I will not name them) are only some "frustrated" people who have the impression to deliver an important message for "the mankind". It is human, after all....
    It existed in Mankind for centuries now, and not really new.

    By the ufology, they are accomplishing and catalyzing such a frustration.
    They look bright and in the mirror, the buzz they made, they are "rewarded". And by Skeptics too who are exchanging with them...

    Regards,

    Gilles.

    By Blogger Gilles Fernandez, at Tuesday, September 13, 2016  

  • Thank you Gilles:

    Brilliant as usual.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, September 13, 2016  

Post a Comment

<< Home