Tag Archives: Skeptics

Infighting: reflections from my childhood

Don't let the innocent face fool you.

When I was young I would often get into fights with the kids from other streets in the village I grew up in. The kids in my street would considered ourselves to often be ‘at war’ with the kids from the next street over and I can remember my parents constantly telling me off after fights and explaining how the best action was to ‘ignore them’. I would try, of course, but it didn’t mean they went away. We’d still see them taunting us, hear them shouting at us, and they’d throw stones from no mans land (the alley that linked our streets).

My friends and I would talk about how stupid they were and what they were probably plotting against us in secret, and each group of kids would get so wound up by the other group that eventually we would fight, call each other names and kick each others bikes. Our parents would pull us aside (often by our ears) and tell us to ‘ignore them’ all over again. We were kids, we were immature and petty, but eventually we wised up and learned to move past our differences. Years later my mum would admit to me that ignoring people didn’t necessarily solve problems, but that their advice was a temporary measure until we were mature enough to realise what the better course of action was.

In an open letter posted to the CFI website today, secular community leaders in America such as David Silverman, Rebecca Hale, Ronald Lindsay, Margaret Downey and D.J. Grothe called for people to reconsider their on-line behaviour by outlining some useful things they plan to do to make their own on-line communities ‘a place where ideas can be exchanged instead of insults.’ The actions listed were

  • Moderate blogs and forums.
  • Go offline before going on-line: pick up the phone. 
  • Dial down the drama.
  • Be more charitable.
  • Trust but verify.
  • Help others along.

Their aim?

By improving our on-line culture, we can make this movement a place that engages, fulfills and welcomes a growing number and increasing diversity of secular people.

I want the communities I am part of to be welcoming and diverse and constantly expanding and I think they largely are already – but hey, there’s always room for improvement. I think that each of us who wants to achieve these ideals must work towards making out communities the best they can be, but being a rationalist means turning critical thinking inwards as well as outwards – not only to ourselves but to the social groups we belong to as well.

However, what has become clear to me in the many years that I have identified as a skeptic, as an atheist and as a secularist is that not everybody wants to engage with other people, and some people get gratification from hurling insults and driving wedges between like minded people – just like us kids in my village used to. I’ve watched perfectly intelligent people who have practically the same values and would make great allies trade bitter words and bitch about one another simply because of things that happened in the past or to other people – just like the kids in my village used to. I’ve seen petty behaviour dished out that isn’t tolerated when handed back – just like the kids in my village, and I’ve seen people loosing hope that this will ever stop and we’ll ever be able to move past these conflicts – just like the parents in my village used to.

We did move on though – or, at least, those of us who wanted to move on did – those of us kids who realised that nothing productive would come of our fights and that if we couldn’t make friendships work, then we could at least just leave each other alone. There was always those few kids who still threw stones from the alley or called out names and insults, but they became the minority, the smaller voice – and suddenly their actions didn’t have such a large negative impact.

The infighting and conflicts within secular, skeptic and atheist communities has often reminded me of the conflicts in the village among the children I grew up with, and I’m not so sure that’s a good thing. I try to stay out of the conflicts and prefer instead to focus on the positives and the areas in which I can make a positive impact, but often I sit and watch people I respect get so wound up in viscous online fights and bitching sessions, and I’ve come to suspect they don’t even realise how caught up in a cycle they are. It reminds me somewhat of ghost hunters I often encounter who are so completely engrossed in waving around their EMF meters and talking to invisible beings that they see nothing wrong with what they do because ‘that other group are much worse because…’ – despite exhibiting the same deluded and negative behaviour they only focus their critical thinking outward and not inward!

What am I getting at with this example?

I love that the community leaders in the US have come together to say that they want to make positive changes but I’m not overly optimistic. Before you can change the world around you, you have to change your own world first, and some people are perfectly comfortable just as they are.

flattr this!

The Heretics: thoughts from a skeptic who used to be an enemy of science

Just six years ago I could be found sitting at a table in a dark room, eyes closed with concentration as my team mates and I built up psychic energy to allow ghosts to use the table to communicate with us. Earlier this month the president of the James Randi Education Foundation, DJ Grothe, referred to me and others as the workhorses of skepticism who actually do scientific paranormal investigations of claims’.

Why am I telling you this? So that you know exactly the kind of skeptic that I am. There’s a stark difference between who I was and who I am, and it’s one shaped by belief.

hereticsI’m not content with simply pointing out ‘it can’t be a ghost because ghosts defy the rules of physics’. The difficult and often lonely transition that  I went through – discarding my beliefs and picking apart the very things that had defined me as a person – makes me the kind of skeptic who knows what it is like to be wrong, to hold her hands up and say ‘holy shit, look how wrong I’ve been all of this time!‘. I’m the kind of skeptic who is sympathetic to those who believe weird stuff because I know why they do and how easy it is to convince yourself that you are right.

It’s this theme that runs through The Heretics: Adventures with the Enemies of Sciencein which journalist Will Storr documents his often scary adventure to discover why people believe strange and bizarre things. It isn’t just the unconventional belief systems that Storr is interested in though, it’s why those he meets believe what they do, and how they interpret the skeptical world around them.

Storr also speaks to a wide range of experts about neurological, psychological, and environmental factors that cause people to reach weird conclusions, with fascinating insight being presented that often demonstrates how everyone is biased and susceptible to irrational thinking – but he has received criticism for giving scientific research an equal footing to the ideas promoted by the likes of Holocaust denier David Irving, homeopathic practitioners, and ESP researcher Rupert Sheldrake.

“It is not enough for Storr to consider why people believe weird things; he also wants to challenge whether these things really are weird. He seems to accept, deep down, that they are, but he doesn’t want to admit this. He is like the child who still wants to believe in Father Christmas, but who is just old enough to know better. Life would be more magical, more fun, if the story were true. So it is that homeopaths are given a more sympathetic hearing than sceptics, with no discussion of the harm that unscientific medicine can do” Mark Henderson, The Guardian

Although at times it did feel as though Storr was too trusting of people with faulty reasoning, the reviewer at The Guardian could have stopped to ask why those with odd ideas are given a more sympathetic hearing. In Heretics Storr admits that when attending a Skeptics conference he cannot justify why he feels a dislike of those in the audience. Perhaps, as one of the skeptics on stage with Prof Chris French I should feel offended, yet Storr goes on to wonder if it might be because of the time he has spent with people who might be considered as stupid by those who identify as skeptics, and as someone who used to be mocked by skeptics I can confirm it probably is that. Even now, as I stand in front of audiences of skeptics as a speaker, I sometimes feel as though I don’t quite belong. Like I’m some sort of an imposter who will be outed at any moment – ‘you used to *feel* psychic energy, get the fuck out!’

That said, not all skeptics are killjoys who parrot every word of the big name skeptics such as Dawkins, Goldacre and more. Storr writes about peoples beliefs stemming from their stories, and it’s exactly the same for nonbelievers. Someone who has never believed in ghosts probably isn’t going to be as sympathetic to the biased thought-processes that someone who does believe in ghosts is going to use to convince themselves they are right. People arrive at their skepticism through different means, and that’s often reflected in their approach to different ideas and topics. Skeptics often have an image problem because the conclusions they reach and the ideas they are skeptical of are what other people use to form their worldview. That cannot be helped, but the way in which skeptics communicate can be. It’s something I’ve written about many times before – how the ‘Ghost don’t exist, move on’ approach isn’t going to convince anyone who disagrees with you that you’re right.

A therapist happily explaining to Storr how Satanic cults eat babies might sound like a ludicrous idea to an outsider,  but when you know how easy it is to fall into the routine of validating your ideas, you know why that sounds plausible to her. A voice-hearer whose fantasies of being recruited as a spy turned into an alternative version of reality for him tells Storr how he used to turn the radio on and “detune” it to pick out messages being transmitted to him by those recruiting him as a spy. To demonstrate this to Storr, he “detunes” the kitchen radio and a voice on the radio says ‘…the British Government has a shoot-to-kill policy’ shocking Storr and the others in the room. It’s a random broadcast, but listened to by someone convinced secret messages are being transmitted, it becomes something entirely more than just a chance coincidence. It reminded me of the hours spent listening to Dictaphones to hear the voices of the dead – when you seek validation you often find it, even though it isn’t even there…

Listening to people with strange beliefs, getting to know both them and what they believe can make you more understanding of them than you might feel if you’d just heard about the ideas they think are true. That isn’t a bad thing. A passage at the end of the book summed things up perfectly:

I will try to remember though, that as right as I can sometimes feel, there is always the chance that I am wrong. And that happiness lies in humility; in forgiving others, and in forgiving myself. We are creatures of illusion. We are made out of stories. From the Heretics to the Skeptics, we are all lost in our own neural tjukurpas, our own secret worlds. We are just ordinary heroes fighting phantom Goliaths, doing our best in the service of truth when the only thing that we really know are the pulses.
- Will Storr, Heretics, 

Go and buy this book,I loved it. Read it, and read it again. Take notes, explore the ideas being discussed for yourself, and take time to ponder. Be warned though, fans of James Randi might be forced to make some difficult considerations about the leader of the JREF. Though, it’s important to point out that unsavory views held by an individual do not represent all of those who identify as a skeptics, and that surely the comments made by Randi just provide further proof that we are all biased in our beliefs one way or another, intelligent or not…

flattr this!

Good Thinking Society: Funding for SitP

I was skeptical of the Good Thinking Society’s £500 award for Skeptics in the Pub group that is being judged at QEDcon this year. Announced on their website yesterday, the Society said

If you can come up with an idea that requires this sort of funding you’re in with a chance. All you need to do is submit a short proposal (max 200 words) to us here at Good Thinking. We’ll then select our favourites and those chosen will be asked to pitch their proposals to a panel at QED. Ideas could cover almost anything: skeptical activism, improving your particular SitP group, providing a resource to support all SitP groups and so on. The proposer will be grilled by both the panel and the audience. At the end, the panel will decide on the winner and they will walk away with £500 to use for the proposal.

Think Dragon’s Den, but in a less confrontational, more supportive way (Unicorn’s Lair? Kitten’s Krib?). Ideas could cover almost anything: skeptical activism, improving your particular SitP group, providing a resource to support all SitP groups and so on.

Some people have taken the ‘Dragon’s Den’ description literally, and have ignored the mention of ‘a less confrontational, more supportive way’. One friend of mine commented

Making SITP groups compete with each other for cash in reality TV style competitions is not the way to build a thriving, cooperative network.

What is being missed here is that the Good Thinking Society offer these sorts of grants outside of the QEDcon through their website all of the time – this is simply the Society using the popular QEDcon to engage with the sorts of people they can help, and offering a breakout event where people can share and showcase their ideas.

As another of my friends commented

£500 could buy plenty of grass roots skepto-goodness. I can’t imagine anyone having actual objections to the idea

£500 is a lot of money for groups who typically ask audience members for a £2 donation on the door, but as I mentioned in my blog post about the Golden Duck Awards last year, what works for one Skeptics in the Pub group doesn’t work for others, and not all Skeptics in the Pub groups have the same missions or intentions. I think that offering £500 for a SitP group is a great idea that could offer a group the chance to do something they’ve been wanting to do but haven’t managed because of funding, but I also understand that many groups might see it as not for them, but it’s these sorts of differences between groups that make Skeptics in the Pub groups so great, it’s this individuality that will be celebrated at QEDcon, and it’s the new ideas being brought to the table and shared in the Good Thinking Society session that will help people make their groups grow.

So, if you have an idea and you could use the funding then head over to The Good Thinking Society website now and make a submission. It could be good.

flattr this!

Coming Soon – Be Reasonable!

Next week sees the launch of a new monthly podcast from the Merseyside Skeptics Society, featuring Hayley Stevens (me!) and Michael Marshall: Be Reasonable.

Each month, we’ll be speaking to people who believe in ideas and theories that run contrary to the mainstream scientific and skeptical worldview, in order to examine how such beliefs are constructed and what evidence people feel supports their case.

Be Reasonable is about approaching subjects with respect and an open mind, engaging with people of differing viewpoints in an environment where debate is polite and good-natured, yet robust and intellectually rigorous.

Episode One features an interview with Anita Ikonen - a Swedish national who describes herself as a medical intuitive. Anita believes she can detect medical information about a person by simply looking at them. She runs a website called Vision From Feeling which documents her abilities, and her attempts to test them.

You can find Be Reasonable at the Merseyside Skeptics website, on iTunes, follow us on Twitter and Facebook, and you can get in touch with the show by contacting reasonablepod@merseysideskeptics.org.uk.

We look forward to exploring the other side of skeptical issues with the people who strongly believe them, and we hope you’ll join us.

flattr this!