Tag Archives: freethinking

Open-mindedness

Posted on by
Comment

Defined with a video.

In keeping with this weekend’s theme of skepticism (in celebration of The Amazing Meetint (TAM) 7 going on in Las Vegas right now — but allowing for the fact that I’m working on a book revision and can’t spend much time blogging — I present the YouTube video “Open-mindedness” by QualiaSoup. The director, Doug, does a better job of explaining open-mindedness and skepticism than I ever could.

A side note here: I found this video on the Skeptoid Web site, which I mentioned in another blog post. Brian Dunning says he “*loves*” this video and I can see why. But unlike Brian, I can’t see how anyone could possibly be offended by it. If they are, well they must not be very open-minded at all.

Some Skeptic Resources on the Web

Posted on by
4

Where I get my doses of reality and reason.

July 9, 2009 was the opening day of The Amazing Meeting 7, an annual gathering of skeptics. This year (and last, too, I believe), they’re meeting in Las Vegas, NV. If I weren’t contracted to sit around and wait for it to rain here in central Washington state, I’d be there among them, breathing the fresh air of reason, meeting people who know how to think for themselves, and watching presentations that help me to understand more about the world around me.

The real world.

I realized that I was a skeptic about four years ago. I’d begun listening to podcasts and had stumbled upon Penn Jillette’s radio show podcast. He and his guests and callers spoke frankly about religion, helping me realize that I wasn’t alone in my thoughts on the topic. Somewhere along the line, the term “skeptic” must have been mentioned. I searched out other resources. Soon, I was listening to skeptic podcasts and subscribing to skeptic magazines. Penn’s radio show has since been discontinued, but I’ll cherish its memory — as weird as that might sound. After all, it triggered the dawn of my skepticism and every free-thinking thought that came afterwards.

A skeptic — in case you’re not familiar with the term as I use it here — is someone who does not believe in anything without evidence to support it. Religion, psychic power, homeopathy, ghosts, Big Foot, the Loch Ness Monster — these are all topics we’re not very likely to take at face value. We look at everything — or at least most things — with a skeptical eye, always thinking about the evidence that might prove it’s true. I found that the deeper I dug into the world of critical thinking, the more I really thought about the world around me.

It also made me a lot less tolerant when I encountered stupidity, but that’s something to discuss elsewhere.

Anyway, I can’t attend TAM7 in person, but I’ve found a way to attend it virtually, through the tweets of fellow tweeple online. If you’re a Twitter user and skeptic, you might consider following these folks:

@TAMLive
@briandunning
@dcolanduno
@Swoopy
@RichardWiseman
@Daniel_Loxton
@derekcbart
@southernskeptic
@scottsigler
@pennjillette
@MrTeller

If you’re not on Twitter, you might want to tune into some excellent Skeptic podcasts. These are the three I’m currently subscribed to:

  • Skepticality is probably my favorite skeptic podcast. Derek and Swoopy have a great casual style as they interview folks in the world of science and philosophy, and are able to share information in an enjoyable, approachable way. After a Skepticality interview, I feel as if I’ve not only learned something, but I’ve had fun doing it. This is the official podcast of Skeptic magazine, which I subscribed to until recently. (Long story what I can discuss elsewhere.) Each episode is an hour or longer in length, making it a good listen on a long car ride.
  • Skeptoid, by Brian Dunning is a different sort of podcast. Each episode is about 10 minutes long (although some go longer) and looks at the facts behind “pop phenomena.” Brian does his homework and presents each argument well, often making you wonder why you ever thought there was a shred of truth in some of the non-scientific claims. He tends to be a bit sarcastic at times, but the sarcasm often makes for an entertaining episode. Brian is not connected with any particular organization and appreciates contributions; a donation is a good way to get all back episides as MP3s on a CD so you can easily listen to an old episode or share it with a friend.
  • Point of Inquiry is the official podcast of the Center for Inquiry. Hosted by D.J. Grothe, it also uses an interview format. D.J.’s interview style can clearly be seen as “devil’s advocate,” as he often takes the opposite view of his subject, encouraging to explain or defend their views. I’m not a big fan for this kind of interview style, but fortunately, D.J. falls just short of overdoing it. I enjoy most episodes, but since I tend to listen to several in a row, I find that the somewhat lengthy and repetitive advertisements for the Center of Inquiry and its publications can get a bit tiresome. Still, I think this is one of the best out there.

This is my list, in celebration of TAM. Have Twittering skeptics to add to this list? Or skeptic podcasts you think I might enjoy? Please list them in the comments for this post.

How Expressing My Opinions Gets Me in “Trouble”

Posted on by
Comment

And why I don’t care.

If you’ve been reading this blog for a while, you’ll know that I occasionally — or often, depending on how I’m feeling — express my opinions about things. And sometimes those opinions seem rather harsh in that they go against the grain of what other people think. Or think they think.

That’s the key, of course. It all comes down to thinking. And I believe that’s where I differ from my critics. I think. They let other people think for them.

[Uh-oh. Another harsh one coming. Better put on your mental armor and get your hackles up.]

For example, a few years back I wrote a blog entry putting forth my opinions of the snowbirds that flock to Wickenburg every winter. I commented on the increased traffic, crowded parking lots, and blocked supermarket aisles. I made some observations about the attitude of most of these people toward their winter home and its year-round residents. The observations were not positive. I also commented about how the town’s dependence on a seasonal economy supported by fixed-income, part-year residents was a big mistake. The blog entry gained me fame throughout Wickenburg. The people who spread the blog entry were trying to make me look evil. But most of the people who read it — the year-round residents in the same boat I was in, looking with the same kind of eyes and heart — agreed with me. I was stopped quite often for a few weeks by people who told me how much the blog entry had made them laugh or how it was nice to read something that wasn’t the same old party line.

I’ve written other blog entries with my opinions in them. I think my opponents have realized that calling attention to my blogs was helping my cause more than theirs because I haven’t gotten much local publicity lately. Too bad. It’s always fun to stir up the pot here in Wickenburg. Too much old school, old boy thinking.

I did a piece a while back about the yellow ribbons that people were sticking on their cars. It turned out that I wasn’t the only one bothered by the yellow “Support Our Troops” ribbons. I’ve since read dozens of blog entries with the same basic opinion.

And then there was the one about public sacrifices for the War in Iraq. I didn’t get any feedback about that one. Could it be that everyone who read it actually agreed with me?

Last week I wrote a podcast about NaNoWriMo where I stated a few very strong opinions. It might be safe to say that I “blasted” the folks who run the NaNoWriMo Web site. But I made my statements — as I make most of the statements I make here — after some deep thinking about the topic. In that case, I’d been exposed to NaNoWriMo for a few days and had visited the Web site in question. I was able to look at it with the eyes of an outsider, someone who has succeeded as a writer and knows something about the business, even though I’ve spent my time on the non-fiction side of the business. (More on NaNoWriMo in another new entry.)

Lately, I’ve been listening to a lot of podcasts from NPR, Slate, and the Progressive (egads!). They’re full of strong opinions, even stronger than the ones I write here. I agree with some of them and disagree with others. But in all cases, I’ll admit that the authors of the pieces have put a lot of thought into what they composed. They’re logical arguments based on facts. And I think that’s why I listen to them. They not only expand my knowledge of a topic, but they provide insight into the way other people have thought about it. People with brains. People who aren’t afraid to think for themselves. And sadly, for the rest of us.

I think that’s a huge problem today. I believe that only a small percentage of the U.S. population actually spends time learning about and thinking about the things going on around them. I don’t think they spend time making their own opinions. Why bother when someone else can make opinions for them? A political party, a church group, a club? Find a herd, join it, and follow it anywhere it goes. Put a flag or yellow ribbon on your car because everyone else is doing it. Just don’t miss the next episode of Desperate Housewives, Lost, or the latest incarnation of C.S.I. I don’t belong to a herd and I’m not interested in joining one. I’d rather think and act for myself. And if it gets me in “trouble” with people who don’t agree, so what? The more of them who speak out about the things I’ve said or written, the more I know my message has reached them.

And maybe, just maybe, it’ll get them thinking, too.