Mod+ UPCOMMING INTERVIEW: DR. MICHAEL SHERMER, THE MORAL ARC

Discussion in 'Skeptiko Shows' started by alex.tsakiris, Jan 27, 2015.

  1. Dmitch

    Dmitch New

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2013
    Messages:
    152
    I actually would love it if Alex could kind of bond with the personable Dr. Shermer and get invited to debate with Shermer and colleagues in a more public setting. I would definitely allow Shermer his moment to push his book and please ask about his important role in helping to create the famous endurance cycling sport 'Race Across America'.He was personally involved in inventing some of the common cycling gear we use today. He does report it was on an endurance ride that he fleshed out his skeptical materialist POV.
     
  2. Definitely agree the skeptics are driven by a sense of objective morality they profess to not believe in. Problem is the materialist cults' style of self-righteousness is how you get people to harm one another in the name of promoting a particular faith.

    Humanists who are also genuine/legitimate skeptics like myself - and if I've read you correctly your self - accept there's some Mystery, and that our shared place in this Mystery is why we should be compassionate to one another. And because this Mystery will not yield all secrets to any one strategy, we should support secularism as well as open science. Some reality tunnels - to use Robert Anton Wilson's lingo - are better gambles we should take, especially compared to the nihilistic conclusions materialism entails.

    "We look on the same stars, the sky is common, the same world surrounds us. What difference does it make by what pains each seeks the Truth?

    We cannot attain to so great a secret by one road alone. There cannot be but one answer to this great question."
    --Symmachus, (c. 340-c. 405)
     
    MysticG and Bertha Huse like this.
  3. Bertha Huse

    Bertha Huse New

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,239
    Legitimate skeptics are hard to find these days. I salute you for your due diligence Patel! :)

    My Best,
    Bertha
     
  4. Matt²

    Matt² New

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Messages:
    263
    IMO Shermer's intellectual dishonesty may stem from the fact he's a former fundamentalist Christian and therefore a void was created from the transition. His need to fill this void translates into a militant atheist behavior where science is now "God". From one extreme to the other or in this case from God to nihilism. There is no middle ground, but the problem, in cases like this, is that people in this situation have had their brains wired to require some immutable foundation and framework to wrap their worldview around. They will then vigorously and ruthlessly promote and defend, but will never see or admit fault within echoing the previous life.

    I've seen this particular attitude with former religious atheist. They are typically the most ardent and outspoken, but still proselytizing and crusading, just under a different banner.
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2015
    Sciborg_S_Patel likes this.
  5. Alex

    Alex New

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    2,608
    I think this gets to the heart of his new book. Has anyone read it and have an opinion?
     
  6. Alex

    Alex New

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    2,608
    good stuff... but I want to stick kinda close to his new book... in fairness to him.
     
    DasMurmeltier likes this.
  7. Alex

    Alex New

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    2,608
    excellent! I think this gets to the "moral" angle of his book. BTW his PhD is history.
     
  8. Bertha Huse

    Bertha Huse New

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,239
    Roger.

    My Best,
    Bertha
     
  9. Matt²

    Matt² New

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Messages:
    263
    I should add that during my credulous allegiance to materialism science years, that figures such as Shermer and the four horsemen; Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennet and Harris were who I rallied behind. And IMO it's not so much intellectual dishonesty, but rather an inability to consider beyond the materialist bubble. Anything beyond would imply a mysterious hierarchical reality that dethrones scientism (humanity itself) and their rigid framework they wrap their academia constructed ego around and cling to desperately.

    One of humanities most crippling behaviors, fear of the unknown.

    I have confidence that Alex will bridge the divide thoughtfully resulting in a rich exchange of ideas. I hope Shermer takes the same approach.
     
    Steve and Sciborg_S_Patel like this.
  10. JKMac

    JKMac New

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Messages:
    163
    In his "book trailer" he has a graphic that lists all the major scientific thinkers as he waxes about science being the force that drives out superstition from our world view. I would like you to pick a few of the famous quotes from some of his "heros" which directly refer to the non-physical "substructure" of our reality.

    He may filter out those who he views as uninformed or deluded, but I'd love to see him refute Einstein or many of the other giants who pointed to a less deterministic basis of our existence.
     
  11. JKMac

    JKMac New

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2014
    Messages:
    163
    Also how about asking about how one makes the transition from fundamentalist to materialist. I would assume that at some point he was faced with facts that flew in the face of his core beliefs. What might have been those things that changed his mind?

    Given that he was open to new information and subsequently changed his mind, is he familiar with the evidence disproving his current world view? And is he still open to perhaps change it again?

    The core issue for me is:
    I can see how those with a lifetime of reliance on a foundation of scientific materialism have a hard time breaking out of that rut. I know it took me over 50 years to really look closely at the huge amount of data demonstrating phenomenon which invalidated many of my core beliefs. I simply hadn't known all the data existed. I was just too busy living my life to take the time to really look. But once I objectively considered the details, the engineer in me forced me to acknowledge what I was seeing.

    Deciding that his fundamentalist belief system didn't hold water should have inoculated him from irrationally ignoring the data. I'm just trying to figure out if he is ignorant of the multitude of facts (like I was), or is actively ignoring the facts (such as Randi and most other hard core skeptics) in order to maintain control over his world...

    Looking forward to the interview...

    P.S.- After spending some time on the Skeptics Society Website where they state their mission as "examining extraordinary claims and promoting science", it seems clear to me that he is not ignorant of the facts that contradict his thesis... No,, he is so wrapped up in the fabric of his mission to defend science that he MUST deny anything that is in contradiction, or else his whole life purpose will crumble. Sort of like what I imagine fuels many accomplished scientists: where leaving the door open a crack to these things puts at risk a whole lifetime's investment of thought, energy, reputation, money, job security etc etc.

    Objectivity doesn't stand a chance against so numerous a list of downsides... Good luck Alex.
     
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2015
  12. Bertha Huse

    Bertha Huse New

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,239
    In the early years of the Skeptics society, there were members who argued for the scientific study of "extraordinary claims" or psi research. And the society actually did conduct some studies. But from what I have read, the early studies by the Skeptic's Society caused a schism because some of the results actually came back positive in support of the validity of psi phenomena. This caused a break away from the society by some early founding members, and also, consequently, an actual amendment of the Societies charter prohibiting members from conducting any further scientific research of psi phenomena in the Societies name. There is a very good write-up on this by the George Hansen from the SPR here: http://www.tricksterbook.com/ArticlesOnline/CSICOPoverview.htm

    So for starters, the Skeptic's Society is not even a scientific organization. It actually conducts little or no science today on "extraordinary claims" or unusual phenomena such as psi or NDE phenomena. Sure, the Society boasts of having some well-known scientific members - but as far as I know, almost none of these big name scientists have been involved in any science studying paranormal phenomena or anything that does not follow the strictures of the philosophy of materialism. There may be one or two exceptions, but the rule is, no actual scientific research.

    The Society is far more like a militant think tank for materialism than it is for the actual progression of science. It depends heavily on rhetoric and by attacking the integrity of scientists who have spent years in scientific research that does not fit the Societies' materialistic agenda. Instead of an objective open-minded examination of scientific data, and additional scientific investigation, the Skeptic's society instead is more of a propaganda organization that has relied heavily on unscientific means to promote its ideology of materialism. It is by no means a scientific organization and should not be called one.

    My Best,
    Bertha
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2015
    Matt² and Sciborg_S_Patel like this.
  13. Luke Perkins

    Luke Perkins New

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2014
    Messages:
    14
    Now that Shermer has his own "anecdote" re the experience at his wedding, does this soften his stance on the standard position that Skeptics have with regard to these experiences. Namely that they are JUST anecdotal and can be dismissed.
     
    Ian Gordon likes this.
  14. DasMurmeltier

    DasMurmeltier New

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2014
    Messages:
    501
    So, how was the interview Alex? Did it go well?
     
    Bertha Huse likes this.
  15. conceptualinertia

    conceptualinertia Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    111
    If it is not too late, please ask Dr. Shermer what kind of evidence it would take for him to accept that it was likely that some kind of paranormal phenomenon were real?
     
    Johnny likes this.
  16. Johnny

    Johnny New

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    491
    Ask him why turning his back on Christianity because it's so easy to ridicule, means that there is no paranormal possibility outside of Christianity. It's like his whole stance is, Ok Christianity doesn't make sense, therefore God doesn't exist.

    I know the interview has passed, but just wanted to add that.
     
    Matt² likes this.
  17. Matt²

    Matt² New

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Messages:
    263
    My position on the God debate is that we don't know either way, but that doesn't in any way demean personal faith in a Creator, God etc.... People seem to forget that faith has always existed. Organized Religion(OR) is relatively recent and hijacked faith in an attempt to create this inseparable connection. Faith is exclusive and encompasses OR. Not the other way around as OR would have you believe. I'm sure this isn't something your not familiar with, but my point is that creates the fallacy you're observing Shermer is attempting to argue.

    Personally I feel there is something more and my faith is based on that. Not what anyone has indoctrinated or instructed me with.
     
  18. Bro's Badass Neighbor

    Bro's Badass Neighbor New

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2015
    Messages:
    287
    Michael Shermer sounds like a specific character from the Muppets, but I can't place exactly which one.
    Anyone have any ideas?
     
    Johnny and K9! like this.
  19. Johnny

    Johnny New

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    491

    It's true, it's really true, I don't normally partake in personal attacks, but when I listen to Shermer I feel like I'm listening to a Disney channel presenter where the presenters voice sounds like he is acting really silly and really having fun, but he isn't really having fun, he is putting on an act for the kids.
     
    Bro's Badass Neighbor likes this.
  20. Johnny

    Johnny New

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    491

    I see what you're saying, but I've came to the conclusion that authorised religion really does contain an indepth knowledge of God, that is if you're lucky enough to be inspired by the cream it offers instead of rubbing up against the sludge.

    Most knowledge is inductive and passed down, just like we go to school or university to recieve knowledge from a teacher about certain subjects, concotion of our own thinking is most times not enough to understand a topic, it helps to find a genuine and bonafide teacher to pass on his knowledge so you get the best understanding of a subject.


    But each to his own I guess. :)
     

Share This Page