Date Posted:06:29 Author: Eponymous - 11 April 2002 Subject: Query for Ketch (and maybe others)
Ketch, in a post below you argue against the "aliens from outer space" interpretation of UFOs by pointing out that "there is no need to invoke aliens as the explanation."
Much the same logic can apply to the "direct perception of God" interpretation of religious experience, viz., "there is no need to invoke God as the explanation."
I wonder whether there is any principled difference between the two cases?