Bigfoot Skeptics, New Atheists, Politics and Religion

[rug]

Published by Steven Novella under Skepticism
Jan 29 2013

The skeptical movement is having some (charitably characterized) growing pains. It’s nothing new, actually. Ever since I have been involved in organized skepticism (about 17 years) we have been struggling with the exact same identity crisis, and from speaking with older skeptics it seems much longer than that.

What is the skeptical community all about? What are the limits, if any, of skeptical analysis? What should be our goals, and our main focus of attention? There is also an even deeper question – are we, in fact, a movement at all?

These are all interesting and important questions. Recently PZ Myers wrote a brief but provocative blog post addressing some of these questions, which in turn was a response to a longer blog post at Grime and Reason. These posts reflect some common themes that crop up in this discussion, namely that skeptics should address more political, social, and religious issues. This position is nothing new – Paul Kurtz wrote about this years ago, arguing for “free inquiry in every area of human interest.”

At the other end of the spectrum are those like Daniel Loxton who feel that the skeptical movement is best served if we focus on the basics that have defined us as a movement – the scientific analysis of fringe claims.

http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/bigfoot-skeptics-new-atheists-politics-and-religion/

[longship]

1. I am a huge fan of the Novellams.

I listen to the Skeptics Guide to the Universe every week, without fail. These people have been doing a weekly podcast, without fail, for years. They didn't even miss a week when one of their regular podcasters died, Perry DeAngelis. Instead, they devoted two episodes to the memory of their dear friend.

Steven Novella is the host and is an academic clinical neurologist at Yale. But Damn! He is one helluva broadcaster. His brothers, Bob and Jay, Evan Bernstein, and Rebecca Watson round up the SGU team.

I never miss them, and often go back to previous episodes. It's that fucking good.

Monkeys can beat up birds!

[rug]

2. I didn't know about their podcast.

I can't get to their site. Maybe it's down for maintenance. The wiki entry looks good.

I'll bookmark it for later. Thanks!

[longship]

3. SGU goes back to May, 2005.

They just released their 393rd weekly podcast. There were a few gaps the first year, but have not missed since, surely a podcast record.

And they are very informative with a sense of humor.

I can't believe their site is down. Here's another link:
http://www.theskepticsguide.org/

The link in my post above works for me, and that's on an iPhone.

[rug]

5. That one did it.

I look forward to browsing through there. It sounds like they're to skeptics what Click and Clack are to cars.

Thanks again.

[longship]

6. The get very serious, too.

But they have humorous bits, too. It is all unscripted and comes off pretty damned good. I don't know how Steve Novella does it all. In addition to being a clinical neurologist who teaches students at Yale how to be clinical neurologists, he also hosts all the shows, does all the post production, travels all over for conferences in skepticism and neurology, Blogs regularly on at least three blogs, and raises two daughters with his wife.

The guy's nearly omnipotent. As an example, SGU did a 24 hour podcast last fall with guests from all over the planet. It was only available live, so I missed it. But I suspect that they probably recorded it all. I would pay to be able to download the whole thing.

I am a huge fanboy of SGU. Even the early episodes showed that it was something very special.

[cbayer]

4. Well done. I particularly like what he has to say about skepticism and religion.

The issue is not with religion or religious-based claims. We address them all the time (creationism, miracles, faith healing, separation of church and state, secular moral philosophy, etc.) Really – we are right there shoulder to shoulder with organized atheists taking on every such issue. It is NOT that religious claims are untestable (some are, some aren’t), it is only that when claims (religious or otherwise) are framed as untestable then they are matters of faith and not science.

Making that distinction, which I think he does very articulately, presents the crux of the problem in many debates.

[longship]

7. Hi friend!

His podcast is awesome! See my posts above.

[cbayer]

8. I saw that, and, iirc, you have talked about these before.

I will check it out.

Hope you are well. We are currently in the "big city" (pop. 2000) and enjoying a little socialization.

[longship]

9. My two closest "towns".

Woodville and Hawkins, Michigan. Neither have more than a dozen or so.

Woodville has a little country store with gas pumps, a church and a few houses.

Hawkins has a country store, a bar with cheap beer and good food -- the best fish and chips in the area (all you can eat on Wed, Fri, and Sat), and a few more people than Woodville.

Neither towns are incorporated.

That's Newaygo county Michigan, more deer than peoples and lots of dirt roads, not so many paved, and many only suitable for off road vehicles.

Thank goodness I live on a school bus route, which gets plowed in winter. No paved roads here, but there are school kids.

[cbayer]

10. Sounds like where we spend a good deal of our time, but with snow.

You can keep the snow, longship.

[longship]

11. Not so much this year, or last.

No accumulations measured in feet yet the last couple of winters, but not unusual for these parts. I haven't seen more than three inches of fluffy, and very navigable, white stuff. That melted the other day. But my 17 year old Volvo has seat heaters and snow tires. The old ones work very well and keep one warm in winter. Wouldn't have a new one, but my first was a 1962.

If I have a religion, it's four cylinder Volvos. I've owned eight, all but one were great, all were old when I bought them.

I wonder what car Pastafarians drive. I suspect old Saabs, or Citroens. (The latter like "The Mentalist&quot

[Phillip McCleod]

12. very interesting

i read pz about weekly and generally agree with him politically and philosophically in regards to what the direction of the atheist movement ought to be. this debate between novella and pz is part of an ongoing discourse that has all the nuance of playing pinata with a beehive. i know several atheists who have 'sided' with the atheism+ 'splitters' and several who have 'sided' with the 'old guard' in that debate and it seems to me the same discourse is spilling into the skeptic movement and i fail to see how that could be construed as a bad thing. certainly novella and pz are enjoying themselves, as am i, as we do some collective and desperately needed hair-splitting.

from the 'outside' it might look like atheist/skeptic movements are severely divided and i suppose that's a fact. what i find refreshing is that nobody denies it. yeah we call out our own as pz and freethoughtblogs has done in general and as the skepchicks have done in the skeptic movement and hell yeah there are lots of ruffled manfeathers around. only those with ruffled feathers think this level of collective self-honesty is bad.

[tama]

13. There's been strain also inside the mevement

between philosophical skepticism (skeptic all the way; Socrates, Pyrrhon, Nagarjuna, Descartes etc.) and scientific skepticism, which (perhaps too) easily takes form of a metaphysical belief system (e.g. ontological realism, materialism), taking a scientific axiom or presupposition or paradigmatic research program for "real". Haven't been following and don't know if there's any of that discussion currently going on in skeptic movement.