Antípoda. Revista de Antropología y Arqueología

Antipod. Rev. Antropol. Arqueol | eISSN 2011-4273 | ISSN 1900-5407

The Possible and the Impossible: Reflections on Evidence in Chilean Ufology

No. 41 (2020-10-01)
  • Diana Espírito Santo
    Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
  • Alejandra Vergara
    Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
https://doi.org/10.7440/antipoda41.2020.06

Abstract

This article is based on a year of fieldwork with ufologists, contactees, abductees, and skeptics in Chile, using methods including ethnography, media and website analysis, and in-depth interviews. Our argument is that the “UFO” serves as, what Galison would call, a theory machine, a multiplicity generating not simply heterogeneous interpretive frameworks through which to understand anomalous flying phenomena, in different ideological spheres, but thresholds of evidence as well. We take evidence here, not as given but as an ethnographic category. In particular, the UFO as a theory machine in the Chilean context, and the different stakes of evidence found within it, yields a theory of possibility and impossibility, which we have called evidence-as-possibility. This is not confined to matters of the existence of UFOs, but also spatial differences in which one conceives of such manifestations. We pit materialist understandings of evidence against ones that regard alien contact as something interior and embodied. But we also forego this division and explore how different, apparently contradictory facets of the evidence-as-possibility theory actually work together, such that each condition or event creates its own spatial configurations for UFOs. Finally, we explore “absurd” moments in which this theory machine collapses or goes into overdrive, escaping this spectrum of possibility altogether.

Keywords: Absurd, aliens, Chile, evidence, theory machine, ufology

References

Battaglia, Debbora. 2005. “Insiders’ Voices in Outerspaces.” In E.T. Culture: Anthropology in Outerspaces, edited by DebboraBattaglia, 1-37. Durham: Duke University Press.

Bonelli, Cristóbal. 2016. “Palabras de piedra, materiales proféticos y políticas del dónde.” Antípoda. Revista de Antropología y Arqueología 26: 19-43. https://doi.org/10.7440/antipoda26.2016.01

Collins, Harry and TrevorPinch. 1979. “The Construction of the Paranormal: Nothing Unscientific is Happening.” The Sociological Review 27 (1): 237–270. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1979.tb00064.x

Denzler, Brenda. 2001. The Lure of the Edge: Scientific Passions, Religious Beliefs, and the Pursuit of UFOs. Berkeley: University of California Press

Engelke, Matthew. 2008. “The Objects of Evidence.” The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 14 (1): 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9655.2008.00489.x

Escolar, Diego. 2012. “Boundaries of Anthropology: Empirics and Ontological Relativism in a Field Experience with Anomalous Luminous Entities in Argentina.” Anthropology and Humanism 37 (1): 27-44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1409.2012.01106.x

Fort, Charles. (1919) 2014. The Book of the Damned. London: Penguin Randomhouse

Freeman, Rob. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxKOdtmHTSo. Retrieved 30th January, 2020.

Gad, Christopher, Casper BrunnJensen, and Brit RossWinthereik. 2015. “Practical Ontology: Worlds in STS and Anthropology.” NatureCulture 3: 67-86. https://www.natcult.net/journal/issue-3/

Hansen, George P. 2001. The Trickster and the Paranormal. Bloomington, Indiana: Xlibris.

Hastrup, Kirsten. 2004. “Getting it Right: Knowledge and Evidence in Anthropology.” Anthropological Theory 4 (4): 455-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463499604047921

Heelas, Paul. 1996. The New Age Movement:The Celebration of the Self and the Sacralization of Modernity. Oxford: Blackwell.

Helmreich, Stefan. 2011. “Nature/Culture/Seawater.” American Anthropologist 113 (1): 132-144. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1433.2010.01311.x

Holbraad, Martin. 2012. Truth in Motion: The Recursive Anthropology of Cuban Divination. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Jensen, Casper Bruun. 2010. Ontologies for Developing Things: Building Health Care Futures through Technology. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Law, John. 2002. “Objects and Spaces.” Theory, Culture & Society 19 (5): 91-105. https://doi.org/10.1177/026327602761899165

Mol, Annemarie. 2002. The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Durham: Duke University Press.

Pasulka W, Diana. 2019. American Cosmic: UFOs, Religion, Technology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Randle, Kevin. 1999. Scientific Ufology. New York: Avon.

Roth, Christopher F. 2005. “Ufology as Anthropology: Race, Extraterrestrials, and the Occult.” In E.T. Culture: Anthropology in Outerspaces, edited by DebboraBattaglia, 38-93. Durham: Duke University Press.

Sánchez, Sergio. 2016. Érase una vez en Ovnilandia. Santiago de Chile: Coliseo Sentosa.

Stengers, Isabelle. 2005. “Introductory Notes on an Ecology of Practices.” Cultural Studies Review 11 (1): 184–196. https://doi.org/10.5130/csr.v11i1.3459

Strieber, Whitley and Jeffrey J.Kripal. 2016. The Super Natural: A New Vision of the Unexplained. New York: Jeremy Tarcher.

Walford, Antonia. 2017. “Raw Data: Making Relations Matter.” Social Analysis 61 (2): 85-80. https://doi.org/10.3167/sa.2017.610205

Vallée, Jacques. (1969) 1982. Passport to Magonia: From Folklore to Flying Saucers. Brisbane: Daily Grail.

Zeller, Benjamin E. 2010. Prophets and Protons: New Religious Movement and Science in Late Twentieth-Century America. New York: New York University Press.