> How is it possible that civilization all across the globe without contact have some sort of ghosts, spirits, demons, Jinns in their world view. This is an ar

> How is it possible that civilization all across the globe without contact have some sort of ghosts, spirits, demons, Jinns in their world view. This is an argument from incredulity, a common logical fallacy. The consensus (across many scientific disciplines) is that our brains are more "buggy"than we realize. We routinely fall for biases, fallacies, superstitions, mass hysterias/hallucinations and other silly behaviour. We're intellectually sophisticated compared to our ancestors. Yet, many of our contemporaries still "see" ghosts. "The Believing Brain" by Michael Shermer is a very approachable intro to the topic of how this phenomenon came about and why it persists. > How many times do people pull out their microscope and scientific instruments to verify the world around them using the scientific method It's a regular occurrence in schools around me. YMMV > Essentially we can assign high probability something is the truth with testimonials of individuals. This statement is another example of fallacious logic (specifically, argumentum ad populum). The business of truth is not a democracy. > Why do we discard their testimony instead on saying what is the probability that civilization without contact all have belief in a super natural entities? Because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.