Page Content (OCR)
Chapter One faced with evidence of phenomena that do not fit into the belief system of one’s family, culture, or peer group, there is nothing to do but to interpret - to rationalize it away. “Swamp gas” and the Planet Venus given as an explanation for UFOs are good examples. Another is Bill Clinton’s “But I didn’t inhale” interpretation of his marijuana use. And then, there was the famous “I didn’t have sex with Monica” then, sex interpretation. I have to admit that this latter type of denial was the one that gave me the most “comfort”. I couldn’t deny many strange things, so I worked very hard to create acceptable categories for them. Sure, my categories were wider and more liberal than those of ordinary people who were not involved in the kind of work and research that engaged my thinking, but they were restricted categories nevertheless. I drew a line against “aliens and UFOs” and that line was, for many years, uncrossable. The third kind of denial is termed by Cohen as implicatory denial where there is no attempt to deny either the facts or their conventional interpretation; what is ultimately denied are the psychological, political and moral implications that follow from deep acknowledgement. For example, the idea that America is being run by a madman with designs on the entire planet is recognized as a fact, but it is not seen as psychologically disturbing or as carrying any moral imperative to act. Cohen discusses five different contexts of psychological denial: 1) perception without awareness, 2) perceptual defense 3) selective attention, 4) cognitive errors and 5) inferential failures. His conclusion is that “the scientific discourse misses the fact that the ability to deny is an amazing human phenomenon [...] a product of sheer complexity of our emotional, linguistic, moral and intellectual lives”. As my husband, Ark'® has written, science seems to be controlled by money. Scientists, for the most part, have to work on those things that get funding. There is nothing terribly unusual about that since it is a general rule for everyone. If you don’t get money for your work, you starve, and then you don’t do any work at all. Yes, that’s somewhat simplistic, but still relevant to the subject here. A few years back, our research group assembled a Timeline’ of secret and not-so-secret scientific projects - and those involved in them. The result was a compelling view of the fact that science has most there was the famous