Biased Logic

Q1: Do you think that there is a chance that life (living beings) exists in any of the stars that you see in the sky every night? If you say yes> Go to Q2. If you say no> Go to conclusion. Q2: Do you think life exists on sun? If you say yes > Go to conclusion. If you say no > Go to Q3. Q3: Do you think life doesn't exist on sun because its hot and boiling. If you say yes > Go to Q4. If you say no due to some other reason > Still go to Q4. Q4: Isn't sun a star itself and hence if life can exist on star, it can exist on sun also? Conclusion: If you said "no" to the first question and reached here, you probably thought a bit before answering. My point is to demonstrate our logical bias that makes us think stars to be inhabitable since they look similar to moon and earth, cooler in appearance. If you said "yes" to Q1 and Q2 and reached here, then probably you think like me. Science says sun is too hot for life to exist. But I think scientific knowledge is limited whereas reality is not. If science is not able to prove the existence of something, it does not mean non-existence of that particular thing. Its like saying that life does not exist in water since humans and other terrestrial animals cannot live in water before seeing aquatic life.

Tweet

Save on Delicious

Pin It