This tells us something, namely: It’s very horribly human.

But, consider the maxim of leaving reason for antagonists and intuition for loved ones – and surely a balance could be struck. An ideal no less for being asserted. I do not think it’s perfect – however this idea is not meant to be. I view it as a foundation from which thought may spring, reason may flow and truth may prosper.

You would never rest a building on a single brick, but many bricks like it! Similarly, if we find other ideas, catering for reason and emotion we have an advantage of advancing our investigations into the supernatural, the non-science and the plain stupid (you can decide which category to slot creationism, Tarot cards and astrology).

The central way I believe we can promote reason in this Discourse of Difference is through the interaction of intelligent antagonists. For example, I am a big fan of the work of Alister McGrath – except for his The  Dawkins Delusion? Reza Aslan’s book, No God but God, provides a beautiful history of Islam for the average person. Reading these books, gives one a sense of the numinous and transcendent, longed for by nearly all of us. We are beings capable of the greatest usage of reason, of galvanizing truth into a spurious waft of beauty. We should never limit our approach to using only confirmatory writings, but be willing to test our reasoning against those who are equally charged in their own defenses.

This is why I enjoy public debates and gladly participate in them. I do not like saying “know your enemy” as being central to this piece because they are not our enemy. I hate the label of “enemy”.  It retracts from the position of making them into friends, allies or, at the very worst, acquaintances. Be not afraid to read why Francis Collins is able to bifurcate the need for evidence in one area, yet gladly give over to a frozen waterfall for the belief in the monotheist god. Sure, you might laugh at this – but I believe Collins believes (with bad reasoning, but nonetheless I can tell you why only after reading his book The Language of God: A Scienist Presents Evidence for Belief. He does not.) Perhaps my interest in people’s minds disposes me to be interested in difference and needing to quantify world-views into singular paradigms. Regardless of this, I do think that it important for us to read antagonists’ books, no matter how silly they may initially appear.

Be secure: There is no such thing as too much knowledge, too much information and, when reading a book, NO information. You might pick up a copy of John Lennox’s God’s Undertaker and be able to refute all his arguments – but it doesn’t stop you from enjoying his writing style, his explanations of mathematical concepts and his knowledge of David Hume. As a book reviewer for Skeptic magazine, I have to read books that I do not necessarily want to but have often had my mind changed.

And yes there is quite a lot of nonsense, set as an affront to sensibilities; Sylvia Browne comes to mind. This should not stop you from investigating her, finding out why she’s a fraud, a hypocrite, a morbid pestilential old bat^*. Nonetheless, find out why people love/hate her. This is my appeal to everyone, believer or none, psychic or Truther, astrologer or mediums – to investigate all claims surrounding your views. The best defenders and communicators of atheism, scepticism, science, humanism and naturalism (like Michael Shermer, for instance), are always those who know the antagonist’s viewpoints as well as their own. Sometimes, the very reason why you are an atheist, for example, is because of how well you know your opponent’s minds and points. But never stop investigating.

We have entered and engaged in a dialogue, not a shouting match. The yelling from pulpits is dying, the choirs are becoming silenced and belief without evidence is not standing up to the scrutiny of avid investigators. The point is to end this shouting match and begin a conversation, based on the long abandoned fragile animal called “reason”. Let us begin that conversation now…

_________________________

*I am aware this is namecalling, but it was done deliberately

My friend, Brian Dunning (from the excellent Skeptoid podcast), is in the process of creating a new TV show called The Skeptologists. They’ve just finished the pilot episode. Hopefully it gets picked up and we get more of this awesomeness!

From the Skeptologists site:

We’re not willing to just accept stories of the paranormal or supernatural. We want proof. Each week, we’ll take on a handful of wild claims — from the Bermuda Triangle to Bigfoot sightings to haunted houses — and apply accepted scientific practices and experiments to see if these ideas really hold up. Whether in the field or in the lab, we’ll literally put these subjects to the test in the hopes that one day we may find something that can’t be explained. Each episode will investigate one or more popular paranormal, supernatural, or other type of phenomena, in favor of evidence-based science.

The cast includes:

• Yau-Man Chan, 4th place contestant on Survivor: Fiji and Cheif Technology Officer for UC Berkeley’s College of Chemistry
• Mark Edward, a professional mentalist specializing in magic of the mind.
• Dr. Steven Novella, a academic clinical neurologist at Yale University School of Medicine, president of the New England Skeptical Society, writer of the Neurologica blog, and host of the Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe podcast.
• Dr. Phil Plait, the Bad Astronomer, writer of the Bad Astronomy blog, and a renowned astronomer, author, lecturer, and blogger.
• Dr. Kirsten Sanford, holds a PhD in physiology from UC Davis and is known more for her Sexy Geek nomination from a Wired magazine contest than for her intelligence.
• Dr. Michael Shermer, historian, author, monthly columnist for Scientific American, founding publisher of Skeptic Magazine, and Executive Director of the Skeptics Society.
• Brian Dunning, host and executive producer of The Skeptologists and producer of Skeptoid: Critical Analysis of Pop Phenomenon podcast and book of the same title.

They have a one minute sneak peak trailer out on Youtube. Here it is:

[youtube]D0xAv_CEuaE[/youtube]

You can HELP the Skeptologist by sending an e-mail of support to skeptologists@newrule.com. Write-in in support of this show idea and let them know why you would watch a show about critical thinking, science and skepticism. The e-mails will be collected and used to help with the show getting picked up. (They won’t use your e-mail for anything other than this purpose by the way.)

Let’s hope we see this on the air soon!