There are scientists who like to insist that “absence of evidence is evidence of absence.” At least, there are those who like to do so when the subject is the existence of God; I don’t know if they chant the same mantra with regard to SETI (Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence). Certainly, though, there are many outside the scientific community who consider SETI a waste of time and money, and who make essentially that argument against it—and not without scientific support (see for instance the Fermi paradox).
Against that, though, xkcd’s Randall Munroe raises an important question: are we looking for the right sort of evidence? Can we really say that the evidence for which we’re looking is sufficient to draw any conclusions about the existence of extraterrestrial life? Put another way, do we know so much about extraterrestrial life that we can be certain that any such beings would necessarily produce evidence of their existence that meets our pre-determined criteria? Or are we, like these ants, looking for the wrong sort of thing?
This is a cluster of questions deserving serious consideration—and not only when it comes to the existence of extraterrestrial life, but also with regard to the existence of God. As the philosopher Edward Tingley has pointed out, much of the argument offered for atheism rests on the dogmatic insistence that if God exists, he must necessarily be subject to scientific proof based on evidence deemed acceptable by people who are philosophically and emotionally committed to atheism. The insistence is, essentially, “Prove yourself on our terms”; which is, essentially, a justification for the fixed intention to disbelieve. God didn’t take that from the Pharisees, and there’s no reason to think he has any interest in taking it from the scientific community, either. One suspects he probably has that in common with the aliens, if there are any.
if there ARE any? IF? really?
you mean… you mean… Aunt Beast wasn't REAL?!?!
In my view, the limitation isn't so much imagination but more technology (for SETI and, I suppose, God too). That is, there's no way to detect pheromones from hundreds of light years away.
Similarly with God, there aren't ways to find God that are verifiable. If there were, I imagine we'd have found them by now. I also think, philosophically, that given God's nature (infinite and paradoxical in a number of ways from our POV), verifying God's existence is necessarily impossible.
Hap: I only knew Luci Shaw, I never met Madeleine L'Engle, so I never had the chance to ask her that question. 🙂
Doug, I wasn't really talking about imagination as such (at least, I didn't think I was); otherwise, I think I pretty much agree.