TheNightling
@TheNightling
0
This person’s thirteen-year-old blog post is precisely the sort of thing I want to see done away with.
https://mattbille.blogspot.com/2013/01/cryptozoology-is-not-parapsychology.html
I am tired of the pissing contest rivalries in the pseudosciences (esoteric sciences?). I already make the distinction between conventional cryptozoology (The search for hidden life) and paracryptozoology (the search for suspected corporeal or semi-corporeal hidden entities with a broadened definition of “life”).
To me, conventional cryptozoology often deals with things like Lazarus taxon and relic species (Bigfoot, Champ, Loch Ness Monster) but the majority of what we call cryptids (Jersey Devil, Black-eyed Children, Shadow People) would fit parapsychology and therefor we dance into the merged field of paracryptozoology.
To me it’s odd to try to umbrella these lifeforms (entities?) into Cryptozoology while being dismissive of Parapsychology as “not real science.”
Both Cryptozoology and Parapsychology are pseudosciences that try to use scientific methods and both WANT to be taken seriously. Also there are schools that offer accredited classes in parapsychology but no such things exist yet for Cryptozoology so it feels almost like an immature jealousy to say “My pseduo(Esoteric)science counts but yours doesn’t.
I respect and believe in using the distinction of Cryptozoology and Paracryptozoology and terms like Cryptid and Paracryptid but you have to admit that the majority of creatures addressed in popular cryptozoology are implied to be paranormal in nature.
The fields need to knock off this attempt to diminish each other in the hope that this would grant them validity.
https://mattbille.blogspot.com/2013/01/cryptozoology-is-not-parapsychology.html
I am tired of the pissing contest rivalries in the pseudosciences (esoteric sciences?). I already make the distinction between conventional cryptozoology (The search for hidden life) and paracryptozoology (the search for suspected corporeal or semi-corporeal hidden entities with a broadened definition of “life”).
To me, conventional cryptozoology often deals with things like Lazarus taxon and relic species (Bigfoot, Champ, Loch Ness Monster) but the majority of what we call cryptids (Jersey Devil, Black-eyed Children, Shadow People) would fit parapsychology and therefor we dance into the merged field of paracryptozoology.
To me it’s odd to try to umbrella these lifeforms (entities?) into Cryptozoology while being dismissive of Parapsychology as “not real science.”
Both Cryptozoology and Parapsychology are pseudosciences that try to use scientific methods and both WANT to be taken seriously. Also there are schools that offer accredited classes in parapsychology but no such things exist yet for Cryptozoology so it feels almost like an immature jealousy to say “My pseduo(Esoteric)science counts but yours doesn’t.
I respect and believe in using the distinction of Cryptozoology and Paracryptozoology and terms like Cryptid and Paracryptid but you have to admit that the majority of creatures addressed in popular cryptozoology are implied to be paranormal in nature.
The fields need to knock off this attempt to diminish each other in the hope that this would grant them validity.
