What do you think?
Rate this book
Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time
"This sparkling book romps over the range of science and anti-science." --Jared Diamond, author of Guns, Germs, and Steel
Revised and Expanded Edition.
In this age of supposed scientific enlightenment, many people still believe in mind reading, past-life regression theory, New Age hokum, and alien abduction. A no-holds-barred assault on popular superstitions and prejudices, with more than 80,000 copies in print, Why People Believe Weird Things debunks these nonsensical claims and explores the very human reasons people find otherworldly phenomena, conspiracy theories, and cults so appealing. In an entirely new chapter, "Why Smart People Believe in Weird Things," Michael Shermer takes on science luminaries like physicist Frank Tippler and others, who hide their spiritual beliefs behind the trappings of science.
Shermer, science historian and true crusader, also reveals the more dangerous side of such illogical thinking, including Holocaust denial, the recovered-memory movement, the satanic ritual abuse scare, and other modern crazes. Why People Believe Strange Things is an eye-opening resource for the most gullible among us and those who want to protect them.
Revised and Expanded Edition.
In this age of supposed scientific enlightenment, many people still believe in mind reading, past-life regression theory, New Age hokum, and alien abduction. A no-holds-barred assault on popular superstitions and prejudices, with more than 80,000 copies in print, Why People Believe Weird Things debunks these nonsensical claims and explores the very human reasons people find otherworldly phenomena, conspiracy theories, and cults so appealing. In an entirely new chapter, "Why Smart People Believe in Weird Things," Michael Shermer takes on science luminaries like physicist Frank Tippler and others, who hide their spiritual beliefs behind the trappings of science.
Shermer, science historian and true crusader, also reveals the more dangerous side of such illogical thinking, including Holocaust denial, the recovered-memory movement, the satanic ritual abuse scare, and other modern crazes. Why People Believe Strange Things is an eye-opening resource for the most gullible among us and those who want to protect them.
384 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1997
About the author
Michael Shermer
95 books1,113 followersMichael Brant Shermer (born September 8, 1954 in Glendale, California) is an American science writer, historian of science, founder of The Skeptics Society, and Editor in Chief of its magazine Skeptic, which is largely devoted to investigating and debunking pseudoscientific and supernatural claims. The Skeptics Society currently has over 55,000 members.
Shermer is also the producer and co-host of the 13-hour Fox Family television series Exploring the Unknown. Since April 2004, he has been a monthly columnist for Scientific American magazine with his Skeptic column. Once a fundamentalist Christian, Shermer now describes himself as an agnostic nontheist and an advocate for humanist philosophy.
more info:
http://us.macmillan.com/author/michae...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_...
Shermer is also the producer and co-host of the 13-hour Fox Family television series Exploring the Unknown. Since April 2004, he has been a monthly columnist for Scientific American magazine with his Skeptic column. Once a fundamentalist Christian, Shermer now describes himself as an agnostic nontheist and an advocate for humanist philosophy.
more info:
http://us.macmillan.com/author/michae...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 513 reviews
February 14, 2024
Un inventar pitoresc al neroziilor omenești.
Oamenii au adesea convingeri (beliefs) iraționale. Unii cred în stafii, alții în extratereștri, unii sînt convinși că la o masă de spiritism ajung să comunice cu defuncții, alții sînt „răpiți” de OZN-uri și purtați prin văzduh într-un univers paralel etc. În sfîrșit, mulți cred că virusul SARS-CoV-2 e o invenție a ocultei mondiale și găsesc acest moment potrivit pentru a-și reafirma libertatea. Desigur, ultimul caz nu se găsește în lucrarea de față, dar ar fi extrem de potrivit, fiind cunoscut de toți.
Bizar este că și savanți reputați, chimiști, biologi, matematicieni, economiști cu un IQ peste medie (pentru a nu-i aminti și pe fizicienii care consideră că Principiul antropic constituie o dovadă științifică a existenței lui Dumnezeu) ajung să creadă în bazaconii (weird things) și să le promoveze.
Toate exemplele menționate de Shermer atestă imensa credulitate a omului dintotdeauna. Indivizii nu cred pentru că au dovezi, cred pur și simplu pentru că vor să creadă și se simt bine crezînd cutare lucru bizar, incert, absurd etc. William James a comentat mai demult „the will to believe”, voința de a crede în pofida evidenței. Atîta vreme cît o credință ne face fericiți și oferă un sens vieții noastre, ce rost ar avea să o punem la îndoială?
Exemplele sînt numeroase și convingătoare. Mai puțin convingător e răspunsul la întrebarea din titlu. În fond, de ce cred oamenii în bazaconii? De ce se amăgesc singuri? A numi ignoranța și lipsa de educație, a invoca prostia (p.363) mi se pare insuficient. Titlul e înșelător.
P. S. Am reținut cîteva amănunte:
- O trăsnaie pe care au crezut-o mulți americani: Fiindcă își pierduse pînă la vîrsta de 30 de ani toată dantura (cu o excepție), George Washington avea dinți sculptați din lemn de tek (p.93). Să nu uităm că și Tolstoi a pățit la fel: cam la 30 de ani a rămas fără dinți, dar nu și-a mai comandat alții...
- Pentru teologul german Wolfhart Pannenberg (1928 - 2014), Dumnezeu este o ființă viitoare, niciodată prezentă (p.352). }n Evul Mediu, despre Antichrist se spunea la fel...
- Savanți care au crezut în bazaconii: Duane Gish (creaționist), John Barrow, Frank Tipler (proponenții Principiului antropic).
- Principiul lui David Hume: „Un înțelept își potrivește credințele după dovezi” (p.85).
Oamenii au adesea convingeri (beliefs) iraționale. Unii cred în stafii, alții în extratereștri, unii sînt convinși că la o masă de spiritism ajung să comunice cu defuncții, alții sînt „răpiți” de OZN-uri și purtați prin văzduh într-un univers paralel etc. În sfîrșit, mulți cred că virusul SARS-CoV-2 e o invenție a ocultei mondiale și găsesc acest moment potrivit pentru a-și reafirma libertatea. Desigur, ultimul caz nu se găsește în lucrarea de față, dar ar fi extrem de potrivit, fiind cunoscut de toți.
Bizar este că și savanți reputați, chimiști, biologi, matematicieni, economiști cu un IQ peste medie (pentru a nu-i aminti și pe fizicienii care consideră că Principiul antropic constituie o dovadă științifică a existenței lui Dumnezeu) ajung să creadă în bazaconii (weird things) și să le promoveze.
Toate exemplele menționate de Shermer atestă imensa credulitate a omului dintotdeauna. Indivizii nu cred pentru că au dovezi, cred pur și simplu pentru că vor să creadă și se simt bine crezînd cutare lucru bizar, incert, absurd etc. William James a comentat mai demult „the will to believe”, voința de a crede în pofida evidenței. Atîta vreme cît o credință ne face fericiți și oferă un sens vieții noastre, ce rost ar avea să o punem la îndoială?
Exemplele sînt numeroase și convingătoare. Mai puțin convingător e răspunsul la întrebarea din titlu. În fond, de ce cred oamenii în bazaconii? De ce se amăgesc singuri? A numi ignoranța și lipsa de educație, a invoca prostia (p.363) mi se pare insuficient. Titlul e înșelător.
P. S. Am reținut cîteva amănunte:
- O trăsnaie pe care au crezut-o mulți americani: Fiindcă își pierduse pînă la vîrsta de 30 de ani toată dantura (cu o excepție), George Washington avea dinți sculptați din lemn de tek (p.93). Să nu uităm că și Tolstoi a pățit la fel: cam la 30 de ani a rămas fără dinți, dar nu și-a mai comandat alții...
- Pentru teologul german Wolfhart Pannenberg (1928 - 2014), Dumnezeu este o ființă viitoare, niciodată prezentă (p.352). }n Evul Mediu, despre Antichrist se spunea la fel...
- Savanți care au crezut în bazaconii: Duane Gish (creaționist), John Barrow, Frank Tipler (proponenții Principiului antropic).
- Principiul lui David Hume: „Un înțelept își potrivește credințele după dovezi” (p.85).
February 9, 2017
I finished this book and came to the conclusion, the same as the Amish have, if you get someone young enough and you deny them a scientific education they will believe almost anything. In other words, brainwash them young when they don't know the difference between reality and fantasy and the big frightening man that will come and get them if they bite their nails is as real in their heads as their mother or father.
Not that you can't brainwash adults though. Look at the 8 glasses of water a day people. Like no one on earth can possibly be healthy if they don't drink that much. They don't take into account that a lot of the world can't get that much clean drinking water in a day and they still manage to live to a ripe old age. They also don't take into account it was an eighties marketing campaign* by Nestle launching their bottled water that started it. Nestle must have laughed, still be laughing, all the way to the bank. *See Bottlemania: How Water Went on Sale and Why We Bought It
And so it goes. Promise people this desirable thing and they will buy this supplement, believe that theory, and spend a day screeching their hearts out in a ballroom with cheap chairs and saying the therapy changing their lives. My own personal opinion on religion whether or not it is benign, mildly evil or out and out murderous is that it is all invented by man. Not woman. (There are exceptions I'm sure).
I recently read in a book a statement by a Confucian in centuries past. He thought that Confucianism was a beautiful, life-enriching thing with wonderful traditions, so long as you didn't take it too seriously and start imputing anything divine to it.
That really applies to any belief that has no basis in fact or science. It might be very personally rewarding, but don't go shouting it is the truth, the only truth and all those who don't believe in it are idiots... or worse.
_____________
Written on reading the book.
Not that you can't brainwash adults though. Look at the 8 glasses of water a day people. Like no one on earth can possibly be healthy if they don't drink that much. They don't take into account that a lot of the world can't get that much clean drinking water in a day and they still manage to live to a ripe old age. They also don't take into account it was an eighties marketing campaign* by Nestle launching their bottled water that started it. Nestle must have laughed, still be laughing, all the way to the bank. *See Bottlemania: How Water Went on Sale and Why We Bought It
And so it goes. Promise people this desirable thing and they will buy this supplement, believe that theory, and spend a day screeching their hearts out in a ballroom with cheap chairs and saying the therapy changing their lives. My own personal opinion on religion whether or not it is benign, mildly evil or out and out murderous is that it is all invented by man. Not woman. (There are exceptions I'm sure).
I recently read in a book a statement by a Confucian in centuries past. He thought that Confucianism was a beautiful, life-enriching thing with wonderful traditions, so long as you didn't take it too seriously and start imputing anything divine to it.
That really applies to any belief that has no basis in fact or science. It might be very personally rewarding, but don't go shouting it is the truth, the only truth and all those who don't believe in it are idiots... or worse.
_____________
Written on reading the book.
June 18, 2016
Like many people, I could hardly believe my eyes when Donald Trump, in the wake of the Orlando shooting, actually went as far as to insinuate that President Obama could in some way have been complicit in causing this appalling hate crime and act of terrorism. The idea is so offensive and absurd that you hardly know where to start. A common reaction has been to point out that, if Obama is on the side of the terrorists, you'd have to explain why he'd want to invest so much effort in killing Osama bin Laden, not to mention authorizing thousands of drone strikes. To me, an even stronger counter-argument is cui bono. Just what hidden agenda would Obama be trying to progress by allowing this hideous crime to happen?
But, and I freely admit it, I'm behind the times: conspiracy theory is the new black. I suppose I need to catch up, so let me ask what makes us so sure that Trump is in the clear? Unlike Obama, he has an obvious reason for wanting events like Orlando to happen: they help his campaign, which is largely fuelled by polarizing narratives of "us" against "them". He was remarkably quick in reacting to the news, and hardly even bothered to express shock or sympathy with the victims before he started harvesting political capital. All in all, he behaved pretty much exactly the way he'd have behaved if he had in fact been behind it.
Well, I'm not saying Trump was the guy behind Omar Mateen. But I'm not saying he wasn't either. As you can see, there's a case, and I'd like to hear him deny it in so many words... which, to the best of my knowledge, he hasn't yet done. Suspicious or what?
But, and I freely admit it, I'm behind the times: conspiracy theory is the new black. I suppose I need to catch up, so let me ask what makes us so sure that Trump is in the clear? Unlike Obama, he has an obvious reason for wanting events like Orlando to happen: they help his campaign, which is largely fuelled by polarizing narratives of "us" against "them". He was remarkably quick in reacting to the news, and hardly even bothered to express shock or sympathy with the victims before he started harvesting political capital. All in all, he behaved pretty much exactly the way he'd have behaved if he had in fact been behind it.
Well, I'm not saying Trump was the guy behind Omar Mateen. But I'm not saying he wasn't either. As you can see, there's a case, and I'd like to hear him deny it in so many words... which, to the best of my knowledge, he hasn't yet done. Suspicious or what?
October 3, 2020
1. The Taj Mahal is actually a Siva Temple called Tejo Mahalaya.
2. Indian civilisation is terrifically ancient and completely indigenous. There have been no migrations into India. The Hindu religion we see today is "Sanatana Dharma", the Eternal Law, which has been in existence since time immemorial.
3. Indian Muslims are carrying out an organised covert operation to seduce Hindu girls and convert them to Islam. This is called "Love Jihad".
4. There is an underground "Deep State" in India comprising Maoists, Jihadis and other "anti-national" elements, who are waging a war against the state.
5. All the elections in India are rigged to support the Narendra Modi government. The electronic voting machines are all compromised.
These are some of the weird beliefs educated Indians hold - a handful I could pull out of the top of my head. There are many, many more. The first four are the favourites of Hindu fundamentalists - with the government actively promoting 2, 3 and 4 - while no:5 is the pet of left-liberals. Needless to say, none of these have any concrete evidence to support them. Then why do apparently smart people believe in them?
Nobody has done a study for India - but Michael Shermer, a confirmed sceptic, has done so for America and the result is this brilliant and eminently readable book.
***
Before going into the various pseudoscientific ideas and kooky conspiracy theories examined in this book, let's look at how thinking goes wrong. Shermer has identified various possible reasons.
1. Problems in Scientific Thinking
1.1. Theory influences observations: to put it simply, scientists construct the theory first and try to find data that match it.
1.2. The observer changes the observed: sometimes, the act of studying an event changes the event.
1.3. Equipment constructs the results: the result of any observation is directly dependent on the equipment used.
2. Problems in Pseudoscientific Thinking
2.1. The use of anecdotal evidence. I have heard a lot of this, supporting homeopathy and astrology.
2.2. The use of scientific language, not backed up by any scientific analysis or data
2.3. The use of bold statements without any evidence to back it up
2.4. The belief that anything challenging the existing scientific theory must have some substance
2.5. Shifting the burden of proof to the challenger. "You say there is no God? Well, prove it!"
2.6. The readiness to believe unsubstantiated rumours (or what we call the "WhatsApp University" nowadays)
2.7. The conviction that something unexplained will always be inexplicable
2.8. Failures that disprove a theory are rationalised
2.9. After-the-fact reasoning - or believing that correlation equals causation
2.10. Coincidences are considered to be proof of correlation. The number of times the coincidence didn't work out is ignored.
3. Logical Problems in Thinking
3.1. Use of emotive words makes us think illogically
3.2. Rejecting an argument because one can't accept the person making the argument
3.3. Accepting an argument because someone with perceived authority makes it
3.4. Always going for an "either-or" argument. If you can't prove evolution conclusively, then it means God created life.
3.5. Circular reasoning. "My religious text is the word of God, so it can't be wrong." "How do you know it's the word of God?" "It says so in the text."
3.6. Reduction ad absurdum - taking an argument to its logical end and reaching an extreme conclusion.
4. Psychological Problems in Thinking
4.1. The need to find certainty in a random world
4.2. Inadequacies in individual problem solving capacities
4.3. Resistance to changing one's paradigm
Confronted with all these, the development of sceptical thinking is essential in every human being. And it is just not bland denial. It is the critical review of each and every new idea, especially if they challenge one's worldview, weighing the pros and cons before accepting or rejecting it. As Shermer says, Hume's admirable maxim can be followed:
***
The crazy ideas examined in this book are wide and varied. They include:
1. Near-death experiences and the quest for immortality
2. Alien abductions
3. Witch hunts
4. The Ayn Rand Cult
5. Creationism
6. Holocaust denial
7. Racist theories of humanity
8. The quest to establish a "God" in the quantum sphere
Each one is discussed at such length that one can write individual reviews! However, I am staying away from that temptation because then this review will never get posted.
***
So we come to the ultimate question: why do smart people believe weird things? Shermer says
Shermer points out two logical biases:
1. Intellectual Attribution Bias: attributing logical basis to one's own illogical beliefs and trying to justify it using rational arguments.
2. Confirmation Bias: the tendency to seek or interpret evidence favorable to already existing beliefs, and to ignore or reinterpret evidence unfavorable to already existing beliefs.
So how to be a true sceptic? Shermer quotes Carl Sagan:
Now I have to decide how do that in a country where people in power are arguing that bullshit has radiation shielding capabilities, and that cow-piss contains gold.
2. Indian civilisation is terrifically ancient and completely indigenous. There have been no migrations into India. The Hindu religion we see today is "Sanatana Dharma", the Eternal Law, which has been in existence since time immemorial.
3. Indian Muslims are carrying out an organised covert operation to seduce Hindu girls and convert them to Islam. This is called "Love Jihad".
4. There is an underground "Deep State" in India comprising Maoists, Jihadis and other "anti-national" elements, who are waging a war against the state.
5. All the elections in India are rigged to support the Narendra Modi government. The electronic voting machines are all compromised.
These are some of the weird beliefs educated Indians hold - a handful I could pull out of the top of my head. There are many, many more. The first four are the favourites of Hindu fundamentalists - with the government actively promoting 2, 3 and 4 - while no:5 is the pet of left-liberals. Needless to say, none of these have any concrete evidence to support them. Then why do apparently smart people believe in them?
Nobody has done a study for India - but Michael Shermer, a confirmed sceptic, has done so for America and the result is this brilliant and eminently readable book.
***
Before going into the various pseudoscientific ideas and kooky conspiracy theories examined in this book, let's look at how thinking goes wrong. Shermer has identified various possible reasons.
1. Problems in Scientific Thinking
1.1. Theory influences observations: to put it simply, scientists construct the theory first and try to find data that match it.
1.2. The observer changes the observed: sometimes, the act of studying an event changes the event.
1.3. Equipment constructs the results: the result of any observation is directly dependent on the equipment used.
2. Problems in Pseudoscientific Thinking
2.1. The use of anecdotal evidence. I have heard a lot of this, supporting homeopathy and astrology.
2.2. The use of scientific language, not backed up by any scientific analysis or data
2.3. The use of bold statements without any evidence to back it up
2.4. The belief that anything challenging the existing scientific theory must have some substance
2.5. Shifting the burden of proof to the challenger. "You say there is no God? Well, prove it!"
2.6. The readiness to believe unsubstantiated rumours (or what we call the "WhatsApp University" nowadays)
2.7. The conviction that something unexplained will always be inexplicable
2.8. Failures that disprove a theory are rationalised
2.9. After-the-fact reasoning - or believing that correlation equals causation
2.10. Coincidences are considered to be proof of correlation. The number of times the coincidence didn't work out is ignored.
3. Logical Problems in Thinking
3.1. Use of emotive words makes us think illogically
3.2. Rejecting an argument because one can't accept the person making the argument
3.3. Accepting an argument because someone with perceived authority makes it
3.4. Always going for an "either-or" argument. If you can't prove evolution conclusively, then it means God created life.
3.5. Circular reasoning. "My religious text is the word of God, so it can't be wrong." "How do you know it's the word of God?" "It says so in the text."
3.6. Reduction ad absurdum - taking an argument to its logical end and reaching an extreme conclusion.
4. Psychological Problems in Thinking
4.1. The need to find certainty in a random world
4.2. Inadequacies in individual problem solving capacities
4.3. Resistance to changing one's paradigm
Confronted with all these, the development of sceptical thinking is essential in every human being. And it is just not bland denial. It is the critical review of each and every new idea, especially if they challenge one's worldview, weighing the pros and cons before accepting or rejecting it. As Shermer says, Hume's admirable maxim can be followed:
The plain consequence is (and it is a general maxim worthy of our attention), “That no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish.”To put it in simple terms: if someone told me that he saw a pink elephant in his drawing room in the morning, I would think that he had a drop too much the night before, instead of going on an expedition to discover this rare pachyderm.
***
The crazy ideas examined in this book are wide and varied. They include:
1. Near-death experiences and the quest for immortality
2. Alien abductions
3. Witch hunts
4. The Ayn Rand Cult
5. Creationism
6. Holocaust denial
7. Racist theories of humanity
8. The quest to establish a "God" in the quantum sphere
Each one is discussed at such length that one can write individual reviews! However, I am staying away from that temptation because then this review will never get posted.
***
So we come to the ultimate question: why do smart people believe weird things? Shermer says
For those of us in the business of debunking bunk and explaining the unexplained, this is what I call the Hard Question: Why do smart people believe weird things? My Easy Answer will seem somewhat paradoxical at first: Smart people believe weird things because they are skilled at defending beliefs they arrived at for non-smart reasons.To put it simply: for the majority of humanity, deeply ingrained beliefs are not the result of logical ratiocination but rather due to "genetic predispositions, parental predilections, sibling influences, peer pressures, educational experiences, and life impressions". That is, we have formed a worldview by the time we encounter critical thinking. (For example, as a Hindu, it was very difficult for me to reject the Upanishadic idea of the Brahman. I kept on trying to find scientific explanations for it, before finally admitting it was only a philosophical conjecture.)
Shermer points out two logical biases:
1. Intellectual Attribution Bias: attributing logical basis to one's own illogical beliefs and trying to justify it using rational arguments.
2. Confirmation Bias: the tendency to seek or interpret evidence favorable to already existing beliefs, and to ignore or reinterpret evidence unfavorable to already existing beliefs.
So how to be a true sceptic? Shermer quotes Carl Sagan:
It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite balance between two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of all hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a great openness to new ideas. If you are only skeptical, then no new ideas make it through to you. You never learn anything new. You become a crotchety old person convinced that nonsense is ruling the world. (There is, of course, much data to support you.)I have a simpler definition which I use myself. "Keep an open mind - but put up a strong bullshit filter."
On the other hand, if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish useful ideas from the worthless ones. If all ideas have equal validity then you are lost, because then, it seems to me, no ideas have any validity at all.
Now I have to decide how do that in a country where people in power are arguing that bullshit has radiation shielding capabilities, and that cow-piss contains gold.
July 26, 2007
Having spent a fair amount of time on my spiritual path believing things that at best had no evidence and at times were quite outrageous, I’ve become very interested in the question that forms the title of this book. A former born-again Christian who is now head of the Skeptic society, Michael Shermer has written a very readable and compelling exploration of the cognitive thinking errors humans regularly make that support belief in ideas that can often be very detrimental to our overall well-being. Shermer is a good storyteller and his discussions of subjects including the alien abduction phenomenon, the personality cult of Ayn Rand, and the tactics “creation scientists” use to try to discredit the theory of evolution make for compelling reading.
Perhaps most importantly, Shermer eloquently argues that being a skeptic is not the same thing as being a cynic. In his description of the scientific process, it becomes clear that maintaining a sense of awe and wonder at the universe is not only compatible with science, it can actually be enhanced by the willingness to remain in the unknown as evidence is being gathered and examined. In addition, a maintaining a healthy skepticism can go a long way towards preserving both one’s sanity and one’s cash in the alternative spiritual realm.
Perhaps most importantly, Shermer eloquently argues that being a skeptic is not the same thing as being a cynic. In his description of the scientific process, it becomes clear that maintaining a sense of awe and wonder at the universe is not only compatible with science, it can actually be enhanced by the willingness to remain in the unknown as evidence is being gathered and examined. In addition, a maintaining a healthy skepticism can go a long way towards preserving both one’s sanity and one’s cash in the alternative spiritual realm.
August 18, 2008
This guy is in Australia at the moment for Science Week and I was thinking of going to see him, but this is not really a week in which I can engage in such optional behaviours – so, I thought I’d get out one of his books instead.
And look, it was very good and if it had been the first book I’d ever read on scepticism (which I think it was written to be) than I really would have been impressed. But it wasn’t the first book I’d read on this subject and so that in itself gave the book a bit of a struggle ahead of itself.
Brookmyre’s latest is also on pretty much the same subject, particularly at the start of this one, but the Brookmyre is a much better book – but then, it is a Brookmyre, even if not a terribly funny Brookmyre. Reading this book actually made me reconsider just how good Brookmyre’s last book actually was.
There was an odd bit towards the end of this one about the Holocaust – and I really struggled with that being in this book. To compare David Irving and the holocaust deniers with Creationists and the deniers of Evolution – I mean, I can see where he is coming from, but really, of the two, Creationists are the much more dangerous, as they are by far considered the more ‘credible’ by a larger part of society. Only someone with virtually no brain at all could deny the holocaust – it is hard to take that view seriously, so I struggled over this being put in the book.
But everyone needs to take Creationism seriously – when the guy with his hand on the big red button calls himself a Creationist and believes in Armageddon, the world really does need to take Creationism more seriously than Holocaust denial.
The start of this book is very well put together – he goes through the logical fallacies that people often make when they believe in such things as alien abduction or spiritualism. Even as an introduction to logical fallacies it is worth reading. In fact, I found most of the book well put together. It is just I have read so much on this stuff and so very little here is ‘new’.
However, there really was a wonderful bit in the middle where he quotes from Dianetics , quotes my mate L. Ron saying that Dianetics is the greatest human discovery since the wheel. I really am going to have to read that book one of these days. Scientology has got to be the funniest religion around. If the point of religion is to make me smile, then really, compared to Scientology (and perhaps the Latter Days) other religions really aren’t trying.
It might be that with this stuff one does tend to go back to the first book one read on the subject – but I still do think that A Physicist’s Guide to Scepticism by Rothman was a much better book.
All the same, this is a book worth reading because it is on a very important topic – while it is still the case that the majority of people in the world believe in ghosts and UFOs there will always be room for yet another book on scepticism. And this one is easy to read and quite comprehensive.
And look, it was very good and if it had been the first book I’d ever read on scepticism (which I think it was written to be) than I really would have been impressed. But it wasn’t the first book I’d read on this subject and so that in itself gave the book a bit of a struggle ahead of itself.
Brookmyre’s latest is also on pretty much the same subject, particularly at the start of this one, but the Brookmyre is a much better book – but then, it is a Brookmyre, even if not a terribly funny Brookmyre. Reading this book actually made me reconsider just how good Brookmyre’s last book actually was.
There was an odd bit towards the end of this one about the Holocaust – and I really struggled with that being in this book. To compare David Irving and the holocaust deniers with Creationists and the deniers of Evolution – I mean, I can see where he is coming from, but really, of the two, Creationists are the much more dangerous, as they are by far considered the more ‘credible’ by a larger part of society. Only someone with virtually no brain at all could deny the holocaust – it is hard to take that view seriously, so I struggled over this being put in the book.
But everyone needs to take Creationism seriously – when the guy with his hand on the big red button calls himself a Creationist and believes in Armageddon, the world really does need to take Creationism more seriously than Holocaust denial.
The start of this book is very well put together – he goes through the logical fallacies that people often make when they believe in such things as alien abduction or spiritualism. Even as an introduction to logical fallacies it is worth reading. In fact, I found most of the book well put together. It is just I have read so much on this stuff and so very little here is ‘new’.
However, there really was a wonderful bit in the middle where he quotes from Dianetics , quotes my mate L. Ron saying that Dianetics is the greatest human discovery since the wheel. I really am going to have to read that book one of these days. Scientology has got to be the funniest religion around. If the point of religion is to make me smile, then really, compared to Scientology (and perhaps the Latter Days) other religions really aren’t trying.
It might be that with this stuff one does tend to go back to the first book one read on the subject – but I still do think that A Physicist’s Guide to Scepticism by Rothman was a much better book.
All the same, this is a book worth reading because it is on a very important topic – while it is still the case that the majority of people in the world believe in ghosts and UFOs there will always be room for yet another book on scepticism. And this one is easy to read and quite comprehensive.
September 12, 2018
Έλα μου ντε.... Γιατί άραγε???
Μέσα στο βιβλίο σας περιμένουν κάποιες απαντήσεις, αλλά ταυτόχρονα και πολλές περιγραφές θεωριών που πιστεύουν μεγάλες ομάδες ανθρώπων (για να σκεφτείτε ότι τελικά κάποιοι άνθρωποι είναι τελείως θεότρελοι).
Δυστυχώς το βιβλίο είναι σχετικά παλιό και δεν περιλαμβάνει τις δυο σύγχρονες τάσεις: τη θεωρία της επίπεδης Γης (έτσι, για να γελάσουμε λίγο με τα επιχειρήματά τους - ή να κλάψουμε με το ρόλο που επιτελούν οι συνάδελφοι εκπαιδευτικοί ανά τον κόσμο) και την αντι-εμβολιαστική καμπάνια, που δυστυχώς γίνεται μάστιγα σε όλο και περισσότερα μέρη του κόσμου, την Ελλάδα συμπεριλαμβανομένης με τις Μανούλες του fb και άλλους παρόμοιους τιτανοτεράστιους οργανισμούς να πρωτοστατούν...
Και φυσικά εγώ υπερασπίζομαι την άποψη ότι μας ψεκάζουν, καθώς αρνούμαι να πιστέψω ότι είμαστε τόσο ηλίθιοι από μόνοι μας!! (σε κάποιο τουίτ το διάβασα αλλά δεν θυμάμαι από ποιον!!)
Μέσα στο βιβλίο σας περιμένουν κάποιες απαντήσεις, αλλά ταυτόχρονα και πολλές περιγραφές θεωριών που πιστεύουν μεγάλες ομάδες ανθρώπων (για να σκεφτείτε ότι τελικά κάποιοι άνθρωποι είναι τελείως θεότρελοι).
Δυστυχώς το βιβλίο είναι σχετικά παλιό και δεν περιλαμβάνει τις δυο σύγχρονες τάσεις: τη θεωρία της επίπεδης Γης (έτσι, για να γελάσουμε λίγο με τα επιχειρήματά τους - ή να κλάψουμε με το ρόλο που επιτελούν οι συνάδελφοι εκπαιδευτικοί ανά τον κόσμο) και την αντι-εμβολιαστική καμπάνια, που δυστυχώς γίνεται μάστιγα σε όλο και περισσότερα μέρη του κόσμου, την Ελλάδα συμπεριλαμβανομένης με τις Μανούλες του fb και άλλους παρόμοιους τιτανοτεράστιους οργανισμούς να πρωτοστατούν...
Και φυσικά εγώ υπερασπίζομαι την άποψη ότι μας ψεκάζουν, καθώς αρνούμαι να πιστέψω ότι είμαστε τόσο ηλίθιοι από μόνοι μας!! (σε κάποιο τουίτ το διάβασα αλλά δεν θυμάμαι από ποιον!!)
April 19, 2009
This is a joint review of this book and How We Believe
Shermer postulates that humans have evolved a belief module that helps us find patterns in what appears otherwise to be a meaningless universe. (Why we feel compelled to find meaning in everything continues to puzzle me.) Until about four hundred years ago, when the process of science gave us a method to determine the difference between patterns that are real and those that are mere illusion, the tautologies myth and religion, (a tautology) explained the relationship of man to the universe. Despite the rise of science, humans continue to hold all sorts of unsupportable beliefs: 90% believe in heaven, 72% believe in angels, 67% believe they have had a psychic experience (Wall Street Journal, January 30, 1996). Mostly we have adopted the fruits of science, i.e. technology, without teaching or employing the principles of scientific thinking.
The reason, Shermer suggests, lies in the evolution of the “ module.” Several million years of evolution were required to change the fist-sized brain of Australopithecines to the cantaloupe-sized brain of the Homo sapiens sapiens, and civilization as we understand it has been around for only about 13,000 years. Evolutionary psychologists believe the conditions of our existence shaped the brain. The brain is basically a collection of computational devices that evolved to “solve” problems regularly encountered by our huntergatherer ancestors.” Shermer argues that “belief” evolved to help interpret patterns. Recognition of patterns has survival value, e.g., being upwind of an animal means one is more likely to be discovered, etc. These are meaningful. Other patterns such as drawing images and magical thinking may reduce anxiety but are essentially meaningless or irrelevant from a survival standpoint. In short, we developed two kinds of thinking: type 1, believing a falsehood or rejecting the truth and type 2, not believing a falsehood and believing a truth.
Magical thinking evolved as a necessary corollary to causal thinking, a spandrel, if you will. (A spandrel is the space formed by the intersection of two arches — it looks to be structurally essential but are not) between seeking answers through magic, i.e., religion and other nonevidentiary- based beliefs and fact-based conclusions. That magical thinking and making mistakes in order to eventually correctly interpret patterns is undeniable. Shermer cites several examples of superstition and magical thinking among indigenous peoples to support his hypothesis. For example, among the Yanomamö peoples of South America superstitions and taboos related to the Jaguar even when incorrect serve a useful purpose because the jaguar is the only animal that hunts people, and the superstitions help to convey the power and danger of the animal that presents a very real danger.
Bronislaw Malinski, in his study of the Trobriand Islanders, found that rituals and superstitions increased as they ventured farther out to sea. He drew the conclusion that thinking derived from environmental conditions finds magic wherever the elements of chance and accident are present. “The emotional play between hope and fear have a wide and extensive range. We do not find magic wherever the pursuit is certain, reliable and well under the control of rational methods and technological processes. . . There are no peoples however primitive without religion and magic.” During the Middle Ages, given the uncertainties and vagaries of daily life, and that almost 90% of the people were illiterate, superstition and belief in magic were ubiquitous. Plague was believed to be caused by a misalignment of the stars, and when a person died, all the water in the house was discarded lest the soul of the departed drown, etc. (For more see Keith Thomas's Religion and the Decline of Magic "Only religion could rival astrology as an all-embracing explanation for the vicissitudes of life."
The rise of rationalism and science following the sixteenth century did much to replace superstitions as an explanation for the unknown or uncertain. The twentieth century is not immune to superstitious belief, and the more uncertain an activity, the more likely there are to be superstitions associated with it. Take baseball. Hitting a baseball is so difficult that even the best players fail to get a hit seven times out of 10 at bats so many hitters have harmless superstitions associated with their batting. Fielders, on the other hand, who succeed catching a fly ball almost nine times out of ten have few — until they come bat. In France there is a company that provides emergency guests for any dinner party of triskaidekaphobes who discover that they number thirteen at table. Bad things happen to good people, and good things often happen to bad people. Conspiracy theorists are simply trying to bring order to a complex world containing such dissonances. It's a way of bringing order to what appears random. Surely JFK could not have been killed by a lone gunman. It's impossible! (G. Gordon Liddy said that two elements were required for a conspiracy: competence, a rare commodity, and secrecy, a secret can be kept among two people only if two of them are dead.)
Almost any kind of bizarre unrelated event then becomes "evidence" for the conspiracy. Our belief modules in action. Shermer argues the best "regulator" of the Belief Module is science. It is the best method for determining the difference between falsehood and truth. "Does extract of seaweed really cure cancer? All the anecdotes in the world will not answer the question. You need 100 people, all properly diagnosed as having the same type of cancer. Then have 50 of them eat extract of seaweed and 50 take the placebo." If none of them knows what they are taking and none of the experimenters knows (double-blind) and the results show a statistically significant difference then you might have something.
Shermer postulates that humans have evolved a belief module that helps us find patterns in what appears otherwise to be a meaningless universe. (Why we feel compelled to find meaning in everything continues to puzzle me.) Until about four hundred years ago, when the process of science gave us a method to determine the difference between patterns that are real and those that are mere illusion, the tautologies myth and religion, (a tautology) explained the relationship of man to the universe. Despite the rise of science, humans continue to hold all sorts of unsupportable beliefs: 90% believe in heaven, 72% believe in angels, 67% believe they have had a psychic experience (Wall Street Journal, January 30, 1996). Mostly we have adopted the fruits of science, i.e. technology, without teaching or employing the principles of scientific thinking.
The reason, Shermer suggests, lies in the evolution of the “ module.” Several million years of evolution were required to change the fist-sized brain of Australopithecines to the cantaloupe-sized brain of the Homo sapiens sapiens, and civilization as we understand it has been around for only about 13,000 years. Evolutionary psychologists believe the conditions of our existence shaped the brain. The brain is basically a collection of computational devices that evolved to “solve” problems regularly encountered by our huntergatherer ancestors.” Shermer argues that “belief” evolved to help interpret patterns. Recognition of patterns has survival value, e.g., being upwind of an animal means one is more likely to be discovered, etc. These are meaningful. Other patterns such as drawing images and magical thinking may reduce anxiety but are essentially meaningless or irrelevant from a survival standpoint. In short, we developed two kinds of thinking: type 1, believing a falsehood or rejecting the truth and type 2, not believing a falsehood and believing a truth.
Magical thinking evolved as a necessary corollary to causal thinking, a spandrel, if you will. (A spandrel is the space formed by the intersection of two arches — it looks to be structurally essential but are not) between seeking answers through magic, i.e., religion and other nonevidentiary- based beliefs and fact-based conclusions. That magical thinking and making mistakes in order to eventually correctly interpret patterns is undeniable. Shermer cites several examples of superstition and magical thinking among indigenous peoples to support his hypothesis. For example, among the Yanomamö peoples of South America superstitions and taboos related to the Jaguar even when incorrect serve a useful purpose because the jaguar is the only animal that hunts people, and the superstitions help to convey the power and danger of the animal that presents a very real danger.
Bronislaw Malinski, in his study of the Trobriand Islanders, found that rituals and superstitions increased as they ventured farther out to sea. He drew the conclusion that thinking derived from environmental conditions finds magic wherever the elements of chance and accident are present. “The emotional play between hope and fear have a wide and extensive range. We do not find magic wherever the pursuit is certain, reliable and well under the control of rational methods and technological processes. . . There are no peoples however primitive without religion and magic.” During the Middle Ages, given the uncertainties and vagaries of daily life, and that almost 90% of the people were illiterate, superstition and belief in magic were ubiquitous. Plague was believed to be caused by a misalignment of the stars, and when a person died, all the water in the house was discarded lest the soul of the departed drown, etc. (For more see Keith Thomas's Religion and the Decline of Magic "Only religion could rival astrology as an all-embracing explanation for the vicissitudes of life."
The rise of rationalism and science following the sixteenth century did much to replace superstitions as an explanation for the unknown or uncertain. The twentieth century is not immune to superstitious belief, and the more uncertain an activity, the more likely there are to be superstitions associated with it. Take baseball. Hitting a baseball is so difficult that even the best players fail to get a hit seven times out of 10 at bats so many hitters have harmless superstitions associated with their batting. Fielders, on the other hand, who succeed catching a fly ball almost nine times out of ten have few — until they come bat. In France there is a company that provides emergency guests for any dinner party of triskaidekaphobes who discover that they number thirteen at table. Bad things happen to good people, and good things often happen to bad people. Conspiracy theorists are simply trying to bring order to a complex world containing such dissonances. It's a way of bringing order to what appears random. Surely JFK could not have been killed by a lone gunman. It's impossible! (G. Gordon Liddy said that two elements were required for a conspiracy: competence, a rare commodity, and secrecy, a secret can be kept among two people only if two of them are dead.)
Almost any kind of bizarre unrelated event then becomes "evidence" for the conspiracy. Our belief modules in action. Shermer argues the best "regulator" of the Belief Module is science. It is the best method for determining the difference between falsehood and truth. "Does extract of seaweed really cure cancer? All the anecdotes in the world will not answer the question. You need 100 people, all properly diagnosed as having the same type of cancer. Then have 50 of them eat extract of seaweed and 50 take the placebo." If none of them knows what they are taking and none of the experimenters knows (double-blind) and the results show a statistically significant difference then you might have something.
May 14, 2019
I don't think I learned why people believe weird things, just that they do (which I already knew).
It also mentions how these beliefs don't listen to reason, because that was never the point, but the author also proceeds to tell you how to logically refute every moronic argument of creationists or Holocaust denials. As if the lack of logical counter-arguments was ever the problem.
I did enjoy the history of the evolution theory denialism in the US which from the European perspective is really shocking.
It also mentions how these beliefs don't listen to reason, because that was never the point, but the author also proceeds to tell you how to logically refute every moronic argument of creationists or Holocaust denials. As if the lack of logical counter-arguments was ever the problem.
I did enjoy the history of the evolution theory denialism in the US which from the European perspective is really shocking.
August 10, 2018
Μέντιουμ, ύπνωση, επιθανάτιες εμπειρίες, απαγωγές από εξωγήινους (ο αγαπημένος μου Neil deGrasse Tyson προτείνει να τους κλέψεις ένα τασάκι όταν δε βλέπουν και να το φέρεις στη γη για μελέτη), αρνητές της εξέλιξης και του Ολοκαυτώματος. Γιατί υπάρχουν εν έτει 2018 (το βιβλίο το 2002 κυκλοφόρησε αλλά δε νομίζω ότι είναι λιγότερο επίκαιρο στις μέρ��ς μας) που η επιστήμη κυριαρχεί, ποια ανθρώπινα χαρακτηριστικά εκμεταλλεύονται σαμάνοι, αστρολόγοι και ξεματιάστρες και πώς μπορούμε να αμυνθούμε.
Ενδιαφέρον, σαφές και καθόλου κουραστικό. 4*
Ενδιαφέρον, σαφές και καθόλου κουραστικό. 4*
July 29, 2013
There have been enough positive reviews of this book that I'm sure it won't hurt the author's self-esteem if I say this: This book is dumb. It was on my to-read list forever, so maybe my expectations were a little high. But fair warning to anyone planning to read this, it's not what you think it is. It doesn't even address the question in the title directly until a final chapter, which I gather was added after the first edition was published.
If you want to read about the history of holocaust denial, that's in here. Or the history of the legal challenge to teaching evolution in schools, that's here. Those are probably the highlights in fact. But the writing is poor, it's disjointed and in need of an editor. It's long-winded and directionless for most of the book. It's ... not what I expected. I like Michael Shermer, don't really have any disagreements with the man. But being a subject matter expert does not make you a writer.
If you want to read about the history of holocaust denial, that's in here. Or the history of the legal challenge to teaching evolution in schools, that's here. Those are probably the highlights in fact. But the writing is poor, it's disjointed and in need of an editor. It's long-winded and directionless for most of the book. It's ... not what I expected. I like Michael Shermer, don't really have any disagreements with the man. But being a subject matter expert does not make you a writer.
March 23, 2018
Nu-mi place să încep proiecte marțea. Bat în lemn să alung ghinionul, da’ nu în masă că se potrivește. Nu pun niciodată paharul jos fără să beau din el, după ce am dat noroc. Am o ușoară stare de neliniște existențială în zilele de 13 (mai ales dacă-i și marți). Nu mă duc la biserică, da’ nici nu îndrăznesc să mă declar atee – dacă Dumnezeu există totuși și mă aude? Nu mă miră deci că, de-a lungul întregii lecturi a eseului De ce cred oamenii în bazaconii, Michael Shermer mi-a vorbit cu vocea prietenei mele Nana – cu aceeași ironie, cu același umor și cu aceeași mirare amuzată în fața misterelor din mintea umană, care-i conduce uneori la raționamente absurde chiar și pe cei mai inteligenți (așa ca mine ☺ ).
Desigur, la fel ca prietena mea Nana, care s-a priceput nu o dată să pună frîu imaginației mele cînd începea s-o ia razna, Michael Shermer e un sceptic. Iar scepticii sînt adesea priviți cu suspiciune de ceilalți, ba chiar acuzați că ar călca în picioare lucrurile sacre ale umanității, ca tradiții, eresuri, credințe. Aceasta pentru că lumea uită că, așa cum observă și Stephen Jay Gould în prefață, aceste intangibile sacralități au scos adesea la iveală monștrii din noi, conducînd la genocide, la robie și alte încălcări flagrante ale demnității umane, demnitate pe care scepticismul vrea s-o restabilească pentru că el este „agentul rațiunii împotriva iraționalului organizat... una din cheile decenței umane, sociale și civice.”
Lucrarea lui Michael Shermer este într-adevăr o pledoarie în favoarea rațiunii, cu atît mai mult cu cît știe că oamenii sînt greu de zdruncinat din convingerile lor, și dă ca exemplu o întîmplare trăită de el însuși: invitat la o experiență de percepție extrasenzorială, a fost mai apoi abordat de o femeie care, identificîndu-l drept sceptic, l-a întrebat cum îşi explică totuşi coincidențele de tipul prietenei care sună exact în momentul în care te-ai gîndit la ea, și pe care ea le consideră dovezi irefutabile de comunicare paranormală. La replica autorului că e doar o coincidență statistică între numărul de dăți în care s-a gîndit la acea prietenă fără ca ea să telefoneze, ori s-a îndreptat spre telefon fără ca acesta să sune și dățile în care chiar a telefonat, femeia pare a înțelege că-și amintește doar de ocaziile cînd aceste lucruri s-au întîmplat, pe celelalte uitîndu-le, dar nu acceptă că ar fi vorba de o percepție selectivă, fiind convinsă în continuare că aceasta se întîmplă doar pentru că puterile paranormale nu funcționează mereu.
Metoda științifică pe care o aplică Michael Shermer se bazează pe triada ipoteză –teorie – fapt, atrăgînd atenția că una este teoria (care demonstreză că organismele vii au evoluat, de exemplu) și alta concepția (care doar afirmă că organismele vii au fost create de Dumnezeu).
Încă din Introducere, Shermer împarte bazaconiile în două categorii: cele izvorîte din credința în ceva ce nu există (OZN-uri, paranormal, spiritism etc.) și cele bazate pe respingerea unui adevăr (creaționiștii și cei care neagă Holocaustul).
La limită între aceste două tipuri stă experiența morții iminente, care, alături de experiența ieșirii din corp, continuă să fascineze psihologia. Mai greu de definit ca bazaconie, ea a fost trăită de numeroase persoane, ale căror mărturii au fost consemnate în lucrări devenite celebre, ca aceea a lui Raymond Moody, Viața de după viață, din 1972. Un deceniu mai tîrziu, medicul Michael Sabom a prezentat în Amintirile morții rezultatele studiului său asupra unui mare număr de indivizi care au trecut prin această experiență remarcînd asemănările dintre ele la oameni foarte diferiți. Singura obiecție a lui Shermer la acest studiu este că autorul lui trece sub tăcere faptul că oameni de religii diferite „văd figuri religioase diferite în timpul experiențelor de moarte iminentă, ceea ce arată că fenomenul se petrece înăuntrul minții, nu în afara ei.”
De aceea, el preferă să pună aceste experiențe pe seama stărilor alterate ale conștienței (provocate de acele evenimente înregistrate de un „observator ascuns” din mintea umană, dar care nu ajung la nivel conștient), teorie care ar conduce la explicații mai realiste ale fenomenului, de natură biologică și neurofiziologică: halucinația zborului e declanșată de atropină și alți alcaloizi ai beladonei, experiențele extracorporale de anestezicele disociative, alte droguri utilizate stimulează senzația de regresie în timp, provocînd amintirea lucrurilor uitate, iar LSD-ul produce halucinații vizuale și auditive și creează o senzație de contopire cu universul.
Cu toate acestea, autorul recunoaște că experiențele trăite în timpul morții clinice nu sînt încă pe deplin elucidate.
Mărturiile de răpiri de către extratereștri însă, deși provin din partea unor oameni care cu greu pot fi bănuiți de șarlatanie sînt mai greu de crezut, este de părere autorul, care a trăit pe propria piele una asemănătoare, pe cînd participa la o cursă ciclistă în Mexic. Pentru a cîștiga timp, nu dormea aproape deloc, iar lipsa somnului i-a provocat halucinații puternice: „Majoritatea erau halucinații de genul celor trăite de șoferii de camion istoviți care numesc fenomenul „febra liniei albe”: tufișurile iau formă de animale, crăpăturile drumurilor devin contururi încărcate de sens, iar cutiile poștale seamănă cu oamenii. Am văzut girafe și lei. Le-am făcut cu mâna cutiilor poștale. Am trecut chiar printr-o experiență extracorporală lângă Tucumari, New Mexico, unde m-am văzut de sus rulând pe autostrada Interstate 40.” Ba la un moment dat era ferm convins că membrii echipajului său au fost înlocuiți de extratereștri. Abia cînd și-a revenit, a realizat că creierul său procesase multe clișee și fragmente de emisiuni sau filme SF pe care le văzuse. Din acest motiv, preferă să aplice criteriul filosofului David Hume de testare a minunilor („nici o mărturie nu ajunge pentru a stabili producerea unei minuni decât dacă mărturia este cumva de așa natură încât falsitatea ei să fie mai miraculoasă decât faptul pe care ea năzuiește să-l stabilească”): deși nu e imposibil ca extratereștrii să aterizeze fără a fi detectați, e mult mai probabil ca oamenii să treacă prin stări alterate ale conștienței, influențate de puhoiul de filme, programe de televiziune și literatură științifico-fantastică despre extratereștri și OZN-uri.
Vînătoarea de vrăjitoare, din aceeași categorie, se explică prin feedbackul pozitiv (aceeași informație intră și iese în mod repetat într-un sistem închis, ceea ce face ca o trăsătură a ei să crească galopant – ca la bursă). Ea nu s-a sfîrșit din păcate în Evul Mediu: în anii ’80, s-a declanșat panica satanistă (se credea că mii de culte sataniste activau în secret în toată America, sacrificând și mutilând animale, maltratând sexual copii și practicând ritualuri sataniste), iar în anii ’90 a apărut așa-numitul curent al „memoriei regăsite”: prin tehnici terapeutice speciale (chestionare care sugerează răspunsurile, hipnoza, regresia hipnotică în timp, vizualizarea, injecțiile cu amital de sodiu („serul adevărului”) și interpretarea viselor) se regăseau pretinse amintiri despre abuzuri sexuale suferite în copilărie și reprimate de victime. Oricine poate fi astfel acuzat, mulți bărbați și chiar câteva femei ajungînd la închisoare, fiind condamnați pentru abuz sexual doar pe baza memoriei regăsite.
Cu creaționiștii și negaționiștii intrăm în cea de-a doua categorie, a celor care neagă un adevăr.
Lupta între religie și știință, veche de secole, a luat forme noi în epoca modernă, fundamentaliștii creștini utilizînd pe rînd, în scopul anihilării teoriei evoluției, trei strategii de impunere a convingerilor lor religioase: scoaterea evoluționismului în afara legii în 1925, prin legea Butler, votată în Tennessee, care a fosti anulată în urma celebrului „Proces al maimuțelor” din același an (ceea ce n-a dus însă la predarea evoluționismului în licee); solicitarea unui timp egal pentru povestea Genezei și darwinism, după ce America, realizînd că dacă nu încurajează educația științifică rămîne în urma rușilor (care lansaseră în 1957, primul satelit artificial, Sputnik), readuce evoluționismul în curentul principal al învățământului public; botezarea creaționismului drept știință pentru a putea solicita timp egal de curs pentru „știința” creației și știința evoluției, în procesul de la Louisiana, pierdut din fericire în apel în urma solidarității fără precedent a comunității științifice.
Cît despre negaționiști, aceștia pretind că nu neagă Holocaustul în totalitate, ci doar trei puncte din definiția acestuia: intenția unui genocid rasial (condițiile de război sînt aspre pretutindeni); existența unui program de exterminare (camerele de gazare erau folosite doar pentru dezinfecție); cifra evreilor uciși (mult sub cinci-șase milioane, zic ei). Autorul dovedește pe rînd lipsa de fundament a acestor trei puncte, deși este de părere că în fața multitudinii dovezilor este clar că nu e de datoria istoricilor Holocaustului să demonstreze că acesta a existat, ci a celor care-l neagă să demonstreze că nu a existat.
În ultimul capitol, după ce observă că bazaconiile ca atare sînt ușor de recunoscut chiar dacă mai greu de definit, autorul enumeră cîteva dintre cauzele pentru care ele par atît de convingătoare, de la lipsa educației și a gândirii critice, la lecturile insuficiente sau greșite, și, bineînțeles, la ignoranță și prostie. Oamenii cred pentru a se consola (credo consolam), sau pentru că multe bazaconii oferă o răsplată imediată, sau pentru că ele oferă explicații mult mai ușor de înțeles cu privire la lumea complexă și haotică în care trăim decît explicațiile științifice.
Eseul se încheie atrăgînd atenția iar și iar că singura modalitate de a contracara aceste credințe este informația: experiența mersului pe cărbuni aprinși, de exemplu, îşi pierde caracterul magic, în momentul în care aflăm că ea se explică nu prin gîndirea pozitivă, ci prin fizică: așa cum în cuptor, în ciuda faptului că aerul, tava și prăjitura au toate 200°C, numai tava te frige, nici cărbunii încinși nu te ard dacă mergi suficient de repede pe ei, pentru că nici ei nu conduc foarte bine căldura.
Nu pot încheia fără să promit solemn că voi încerca să renunț la micile superstiții și tabu-uri personale, de care Michael Shermer m-a făcut să mă rușinez corespunzător.
P.S. Habar n-aveam că:
• Imaginea omulețului gri a fost impusă de filmul The UFO Incident, difuzat de NBC în 1975;
• Columb, pentru că se credea în Asia, a identificat mai multe plante din Lumea Nouă ca fiind asiatice: scorțișoara, rubarba chinezească etc.;
• grupul rock The Doors și-a luat numele de la cartea lui Aldous Huxley Porțile percepției;
• este un mit că s-ar fi fabricat săpun din evreii din lagărele de concentrare;
• Taofizica lui Fritjof Capra s-a vândut în peste 500.000 de exemplare deși costă 30 de dolari, e plină cu grafice, diagrame, curbe și are trei sute de pagini de anexe, note și referințe, iar subiectul este obscura psihometrie, doar pentru că „una dintre aceste curbe prezintă diferența de cincisprezece puncte între coeficientul de inteligență al americanilor albi și cel al americanilor negri.”;
• există oameni de știință care au încercat să reconcilieze religia și știința, ca Frank Tipler, care, în Fizica nemuririi, îşi imaginează că omul va crea în viitor un supercalculator atît de atotcunoscător și de atotputernic, încît va fi aidoma lui Dumnezeu.
Desigur, la fel ca prietena mea Nana, care s-a priceput nu o dată să pună frîu imaginației mele cînd începea s-o ia razna, Michael Shermer e un sceptic. Iar scepticii sînt adesea priviți cu suspiciune de ceilalți, ba chiar acuzați că ar călca în picioare lucrurile sacre ale umanității, ca tradiții, eresuri, credințe. Aceasta pentru că lumea uită că, așa cum observă și Stephen Jay Gould în prefață, aceste intangibile sacralități au scos adesea la iveală monștrii din noi, conducînd la genocide, la robie și alte încălcări flagrante ale demnității umane, demnitate pe care scepticismul vrea s-o restabilească pentru că el este „agentul rațiunii împotriva iraționalului organizat... una din cheile decenței umane, sociale și civice.”
Lucrarea lui Michael Shermer este într-adevăr o pledoarie în favoarea rațiunii, cu atît mai mult cu cît știe că oamenii sînt greu de zdruncinat din convingerile lor, și dă ca exemplu o întîmplare trăită de el însuși: invitat la o experiență de percepție extrasenzorială, a fost mai apoi abordat de o femeie care, identificîndu-l drept sceptic, l-a întrebat cum îşi explică totuşi coincidențele de tipul prietenei care sună exact în momentul în care te-ai gîndit la ea, și pe care ea le consideră dovezi irefutabile de comunicare paranormală. La replica autorului că e doar o coincidență statistică între numărul de dăți în care s-a gîndit la acea prietenă fără ca ea să telefoneze, ori s-a îndreptat spre telefon fără ca acesta să sune și dățile în care chiar a telefonat, femeia pare a înțelege că-și amintește doar de ocaziile cînd aceste lucruri s-au întîmplat, pe celelalte uitîndu-le, dar nu acceptă că ar fi vorba de o percepție selectivă, fiind convinsă în continuare că aceasta se întîmplă doar pentru că puterile paranormale nu funcționează mereu.
Metoda științifică pe care o aplică Michael Shermer se bazează pe triada ipoteză –teorie – fapt, atrăgînd atenția că una este teoria (care demonstreză că organismele vii au evoluat, de exemplu) și alta concepția (care doar afirmă că organismele vii au fost create de Dumnezeu).
Prin metoda științifică, tindem spre obiectivitate: fundamentarea concluziilor pe validare exterioară. Și evităm misticismul: fundamentarea concluziilor pe trăiri personale care eludează validarea exterioară.
Încă din Introducere, Shermer împarte bazaconiile în două categorii: cele izvorîte din credința în ceva ce nu există (OZN-uri, paranormal, spiritism etc.) și cele bazate pe respingerea unui adevăr (creaționiștii și cei care neagă Holocaustul).
La limită între aceste două tipuri stă experiența morții iminente, care, alături de experiența ieșirii din corp, continuă să fascineze psihologia. Mai greu de definit ca bazaconie, ea a fost trăită de numeroase persoane, ale căror mărturii au fost consemnate în lucrări devenite celebre, ca aceea a lui Raymond Moody, Viața de după viață, din 1972. Un deceniu mai tîrziu, medicul Michael Sabom a prezentat în Amintirile morții rezultatele studiului său asupra unui mare număr de indivizi care au trecut prin această experiență remarcînd asemănările dintre ele la oameni foarte diferiți. Singura obiecție a lui Shermer la acest studiu este că autorul lui trece sub tăcere faptul că oameni de religii diferite „văd figuri religioase diferite în timpul experiențelor de moarte iminentă, ceea ce arată că fenomenul se petrece înăuntrul minții, nu în afara ei.”
De aceea, el preferă să pună aceste experiențe pe seama stărilor alterate ale conștienței (provocate de acele evenimente înregistrate de un „observator ascuns” din mintea umană, dar care nu ajung la nivel conștient), teorie care ar conduce la explicații mai realiste ale fenomenului, de natură biologică și neurofiziologică: halucinația zborului e declanșată de atropină și alți alcaloizi ai beladonei, experiențele extracorporale de anestezicele disociative, alte droguri utilizate stimulează senzația de regresie în timp, provocînd amintirea lucrurilor uitate, iar LSD-ul produce halucinații vizuale și auditive și creează o senzație de contopire cu universul.
Cu toate acestea, autorul recunoaște că experiențele trăite în timpul morții clinice nu sînt încă pe deplin elucidate.
Mărturiile de răpiri de către extratereștri însă, deși provin din partea unor oameni care cu greu pot fi bănuiți de șarlatanie sînt mai greu de crezut, este de părere autorul, care a trăit pe propria piele una asemănătoare, pe cînd participa la o cursă ciclistă în Mexic. Pentru a cîștiga timp, nu dormea aproape deloc, iar lipsa somnului i-a provocat halucinații puternice: „Majoritatea erau halucinații de genul celor trăite de șoferii de camion istoviți care numesc fenomenul „febra liniei albe”: tufișurile iau formă de animale, crăpăturile drumurilor devin contururi încărcate de sens, iar cutiile poștale seamănă cu oamenii. Am văzut girafe și lei. Le-am făcut cu mâna cutiilor poștale. Am trecut chiar printr-o experiență extracorporală lângă Tucumari, New Mexico, unde m-am văzut de sus rulând pe autostrada Interstate 40.” Ba la un moment dat era ferm convins că membrii echipajului său au fost înlocuiți de extratereștri. Abia cînd și-a revenit, a realizat că creierul său procesase multe clișee și fragmente de emisiuni sau filme SF pe care le văzuse. Din acest motiv, preferă să aplice criteriul filosofului David Hume de testare a minunilor („nici o mărturie nu ajunge pentru a stabili producerea unei minuni decât dacă mărturia este cumva de așa natură încât falsitatea ei să fie mai miraculoasă decât faptul pe care ea năzuiește să-l stabilească”): deși nu e imposibil ca extratereștrii să aterizeze fără a fi detectați, e mult mai probabil ca oamenii să treacă prin stări alterate ale conștienței, influențate de puhoiul de filme, programe de televiziune și literatură științifico-fantastică despre extratereștri și OZN-uri.
Vînătoarea de vrăjitoare, din aceeași categorie, se explică prin feedbackul pozitiv (aceeași informație intră și iese în mod repetat într-un sistem închis, ceea ce face ca o trăsătură a ei să crească galopant – ca la bursă). Ea nu s-a sfîrșit din păcate în Evul Mediu: în anii ’80, s-a declanșat panica satanistă (se credea că mii de culte sataniste activau în secret în toată America, sacrificând și mutilând animale, maltratând sexual copii și practicând ritualuri sataniste), iar în anii ’90 a apărut așa-numitul curent al „memoriei regăsite”: prin tehnici terapeutice speciale (chestionare care sugerează răspunsurile, hipnoza, regresia hipnotică în timp, vizualizarea, injecțiile cu amital de sodiu („serul adevărului”) și interpretarea viselor) se regăseau pretinse amintiri despre abuzuri sexuale suferite în copilărie și reprimate de victime. Oricine poate fi astfel acuzat, mulți bărbați și chiar câteva femei ajungînd la închisoare, fiind condamnați pentru abuz sexual doar pe baza memoriei regăsite.
Cu creaționiștii și negaționiștii intrăm în cea de-a doua categorie, a celor care neagă un adevăr.
Lupta între religie și știință, veche de secole, a luat forme noi în epoca modernă, fundamentaliștii creștini utilizînd pe rînd, în scopul anihilării teoriei evoluției, trei strategii de impunere a convingerilor lor religioase: scoaterea evoluționismului în afara legii în 1925, prin legea Butler, votată în Tennessee, care a fosti anulată în urma celebrului „Proces al maimuțelor” din același an (ceea ce n-a dus însă la predarea evoluționismului în licee); solicitarea unui timp egal pentru povestea Genezei și darwinism, după ce America, realizînd că dacă nu încurajează educația științifică rămîne în urma rușilor (care lansaseră în 1957, primul satelit artificial, Sputnik), readuce evoluționismul în curentul principal al învățământului public; botezarea creaționismului drept știință pentru a putea solicita timp egal de curs pentru „știința” creației și știința evoluției, în procesul de la Louisiana, pierdut din fericire în apel în urma solidarității fără precedent a comunității științifice.
Cît despre negaționiști, aceștia pretind că nu neagă Holocaustul în totalitate, ci doar trei puncte din definiția acestuia: intenția unui genocid rasial (condițiile de război sînt aspre pretutindeni); existența unui program de exterminare (camerele de gazare erau folosite doar pentru dezinfecție); cifra evreilor uciși (mult sub cinci-șase milioane, zic ei). Autorul dovedește pe rînd lipsa de fundament a acestor trei puncte, deși este de părere că în fața multitudinii dovezilor este clar că nu e de datoria istoricilor Holocaustului să demonstreze că acesta a existat, ci a celor care-l neagă să demonstreze că nu a existat.
În ultimul capitol, după ce observă că bazaconiile ca atare sînt ușor de recunoscut chiar dacă mai greu de definit, autorul enumeră cîteva dintre cauzele pentru care ele par atît de convingătoare, de la lipsa educației și a gândirii critice, la lecturile insuficiente sau greșite, și, bineînțeles, la ignoranță și prostie. Oamenii cred pentru a se consola (credo consolam), sau pentru că multe bazaconii oferă o răsplată imediată, sau pentru că ele oferă explicații mult mai ușor de înțeles cu privire la lumea complexă și haotică în care trăim decît explicațiile științifice.
Eseul se încheie atrăgînd atenția iar și iar că singura modalitate de a contracara aceste credințe este informația: experiența mersului pe cărbuni aprinși, de exemplu, îşi pierde caracterul magic, în momentul în care aflăm că ea se explică nu prin gîndirea pozitivă, ci prin fizică: așa cum în cuptor, în ciuda faptului că aerul, tava și prăjitura au toate 200°C, numai tava te frige, nici cărbunii încinși nu te ard dacă mergi suficient de repede pe ei, pentru că nici ei nu conduc foarte bine căldura.
...oamenii sunt, prin natura lor, o specie care privește înainte, căutând mereu să-și sporească fericirea și mulțumirea. Din păcate, corolarul este că oamenii sunt prea adesea înclinați să se agațe de promisiuni nerealiste privind o viață mai bună sau să creadă că pot ajunge la o viață mai bună doar rămânând intoleranți și ignoranți. Uneori, concentrându-ne asupra vieții viitoare, pierdem din vedere viața aceasta. Dar speranța ar putea veni din altă parte. Am putea spera că inteligența umană, însoțită de compasiune, e în stare să rezolve nenumăratele noastre probleme și să ne aducă o viață mai bună, că progresul istoric ne va aduce libertate și toleranță, iar că rațiunea și știința, împreună cu dragostea și empatia, ne pot ajuta să ne înțelegem universul, lumea și pe noi înșine.
Nu pot încheia fără să promit solemn că voi încerca să renunț la micile superstiții și tabu-uri personale, de care Michael Shermer m-a făcut să mă rușinez corespunzător.
P.S. Habar n-aveam că:
• Imaginea omulețului gri a fost impusă de filmul The UFO Incident, difuzat de NBC în 1975;
• Columb, pentru că se credea în Asia, a identificat mai multe plante din Lumea Nouă ca fiind asiatice: scorțișoara, rubarba chinezească etc.;
• grupul rock The Doors și-a luat numele de la cartea lui Aldous Huxley Porțile percepției;
• este un mit că s-ar fi fabricat săpun din evreii din lagărele de concentrare;
• Taofizica lui Fritjof Capra s-a vândut în peste 500.000 de exemplare deși costă 30 de dolari, e plină cu grafice, diagrame, curbe și are trei sute de pagini de anexe, note și referințe, iar subiectul este obscura psihometrie, doar pentru că „una dintre aceste curbe prezintă diferența de cincisprezece puncte între coeficientul de inteligență al americanilor albi și cel al americanilor negri.”;
• există oameni de știință care au încercat să reconcilieze religia și știința, ca Frank Tipler, care, în Fizica nemuririi, îşi imaginează că omul va crea în viitor un supercalculator atît de atotcunoscător și de atotputernic, încît va fi aidoma lui Dumnezeu.
December 12, 2019
Interesantākās nodaļas likās par Holokausta noliedzējiem un plakanās zemes teorijas piekritējiem. Ja interesē tēma,iesaku šo grāmatu. Tomēr dažas nodaļas ir pārāk piebāztas ar sausiem statistikas datiem, lasās lēnām, bet šādas tēmas grāmatā laikam bez skaitļiem neiztikt.
April 18, 2020
Why People believe weird things is something I have also wondered a lot when I hear people talking about ghosts or astrology or God. Things are different here in India and you wouldn't find people shouting for creationism or Holocaust deniers here as you neither have prominently christian people here and not too many Jewish people but still we in India have our own laundry list of weird things people believe in. It was a fun read and shocking though I already knew that still so many people believe in supernatural stuff despite so many irrefutable proof. YouTube is filled with stupid videos portraying all kind of weird things you will find flatearthers there, aliens and try all kind of conspiracy theories.
Everyone should read this and more such books and more people should be skeptics after all that's the call of today and only education and more knowledge can pierce through the darkness of superstition and always remember to just Keep on Reading.
People who don't read generally ask me my reasons for reading. Simply put I just love reading and so to that end I have made it my motto to just Keep on Reading. I love to read everything except for Self Help books but even those once in a while. I read almost all the genre but YA, Fantasy, Biographies are the most. My favorite series is, of course, Harry Potter but then there are many more books that I just adore. I have bookcases filled with books which are waiting to be read so can't stay and spend more time in this review, so remember I loved reading this and love reading more, you should also read what you love and then just Keep on Reading.
Everyone should read this and more such books and more people should be skeptics after all that's the call of today and only education and more knowledge can pierce through the darkness of superstition and always remember to just Keep on Reading.
People who don't read generally ask me my reasons for reading. Simply put I just love reading and so to that end I have made it my motto to just Keep on Reading. I love to read everything except for Self Help books but even those once in a while. I read almost all the genre but YA, Fantasy, Biographies are the most. My favorite series is, of course, Harry Potter but then there are many more books that I just adore. I have bookcases filled with books which are waiting to be read so can't stay and spend more time in this review, so remember I loved reading this and love reading more, you should also read what you love and then just Keep on Reading.
July 27, 2012
I have read many of Shermer's articles for Skeptics Magazine but this was the first book by him that I've read. It was probably a good one to start out with. He appears to be setting out his basic ideas on why people often lean to unscientific and illogical beliefs. He goes through these reasons and also describes the basis of scientific inquiry well. However he also gives specific examples of pseudo-science and outright erroneous thinking including Holocaust denial, aliens abductions and Creationism. While I enjoyed it, I felt some of this material would have been better in a separate book, especially the chapters on Ayn Rand and objectivism. They appeared to have been Skeptic Magazines essays that were glued together and, in fact, Shermer pretty much admits that in the foreword. Nonetheless, there was some valuable information throughout the book and I recommend it as a essential primer on the difference between science and pseudo-science. Three and a half stars.
June 26, 2016
Audiobook - Abridged - 3.5 hours
-- Note this is not the Revised and Expanded edition (if there even is one for audio). I listened to the original audio from '98.
Shermer is the founder of The Skeptics Society and Editor in Chief of its magazine Skeptic. He knows his stuff. In this book, he explores alien abductions, Holocaust denial, the legal history of creationism in science classrooms, and some other things. These are all interesting and covers Shermer's experiences with all of them.
My primary trouble with this book is the title. With that title, I expected more psychology and less logic. Shermer spends a great deal of time talking about the various fallacies the various groups make, but doesn't spend enough time, in my view, on the actual why. You all know I'm a huge proponent of reviewing what was written, not what one wanted to read... but 'Why' is in the title. While the 'what' is interesting, I was promised 'why', and answers are in too short of supply.
-- Note this is not the Revised and Expanded edition (if there even is one for audio). I listened to the original audio from '98.
Shermer is the founder of The Skeptics Society and Editor in Chief of its magazine Skeptic. He knows his stuff. In this book, he explores alien abductions, Holocaust denial, the legal history of creationism in science classrooms, and some other things. These are all interesting and covers Shermer's experiences with all of them.
My primary trouble with this book is the title. With that title, I expected more psychology and less logic. Shermer spends a great deal of time talking about the various fallacies the various groups make, but doesn't spend enough time, in my view, on the actual why. You all know I'm a huge proponent of reviewing what was written, not what one wanted to read... but 'Why' is in the title. While the 'what' is interesting, I was promised 'why', and answers are in too short of supply.
November 7, 2007
This book seems to hold great promise from the outset. It's a book (as the author would confess) that values reason, science, knowledge and the examination of beliefs. Nothing wrong with that. However, the book seems to ramble on a bit and takes on the feel of the author's personal musings instead of objective examination of the material. A couple of the chapters could be condensed into one chapter that contains more focus and sticks to the topic. For instance, in one chapter Shermer drones on about the diff. aspects of creation-science and real science which is testable. This is great except he lists a myriad of arguments in brief. The only way you could do anything worthwhile with the material intellectually is to dig deeper into other books with more insight on the topic. In other words, you aren't going to reach any conclusions yay or nay with such brief explanations. He discusses holocaust denial in a "part" of the book which is fine except a couple of the chapters once again could be condensed since the later chapter seems to rehash much of what was said before only in greater detail. Lastly, the very last chapter which deals with a Dr. Tipler and his fantasy-like Omega Point theory is superfluous. This is Shermer's personal book review of Tipler's physics work. To put it crudely, who really gives a crap except someone with a vested interest in physics? A short description of the weirdness of Tipler's work would have been sufficient. Also, one other gripe; Shermer seems to portray the personal idea that objective science is good and that theories are subject to change over time-"facts are data". Yet, despite him stating these points I found him more than once claiming evolution as fact. I am not saying that it isn't but am suggesting he should reframe himself to say it's commonly accepted as fact because of such and such testable evidence. Also, Shermer does discuss fringe beliefs somewhat such as; alien abductions, afrocentrism, witch hunts and the like. However, in my opinion he strayed away too much from these interesting topics and went into personal musings about science instead. Anyway, I can see many people giving negative reviews of this book simply because they do not like Shermer's relativistic, hard-science stand. That's no fault of his own though...Finally, I would recommend the book despite its flaws because it is for lack of a better description interesting. It could have been much better but we will have to accept it on merit of the ideas it espouses and not so much for the overall content.
May 4, 2015
Why People Believe Weird Things is a meticulously researched and presented deep-dive into the causes and explanations of human irrationality. It probably deserves four stars but I'm leaving it at three because it's easily the most depressing book I've ever read (and there's no way to "really like" that). Shermer explains that our brains are hardwired to look for patterns as a way of making sense of our world. Sometimes the patterns we detect are genuine (which we either accept or reject as real), and sometimes they are merely illusions (which we can also either accept or reject as real).This means that every judgement call on a pattern offers two ways to be right and two ways to be wrong.
When we accept a pattern as genuine, but it isn't, we are committing a Type 1 error or false positive. For example, we think we hear a wolf and raise the alarm, but there was no wolf. In this case the danger passes without harm and the error has no consequences. On the other hand, if we think what we're hearing isn't a wolf, but it really is, then we are committing a Type 2 error or false negative. In this case, the consequences could be fatal. This in a nutshell is why human beings have a bias for seeing patterns that aren't really there. In survival terms, it pays to be watchful for patterns even if your conclusions are wrong much of the time.
It doesn't end there, either. Shermer goes into detail about 25 fallacies that encourage people to believe weird things, including a whole slew of logical and psychological problems that lead inevitably to false conclusions. Shermer is much less interested in what people believe and why, than how they come to believe it. Accordingly, religion plays no real part in this book, except for his systematic debunking of "creation science" as just one example of pseudoscience. Similarly, pseudohistorical Holocaust deniers get a proper dressing down for their oblivious rejection of known facts. How should we deal with the many pitfalls that lead us to false thinking? Scepticism is Shermer's proposed solution, in the sense of keeping an open mind and remembering to weigh the facts objectively. This may be more a balm than a solution, given that people are going to bend the facts to better fit their a priori beliefs anyway.
All of this leads me to the fascinating subject of fraud which I would have loved to see touched on in this book. Fraud is essentially the art of exploiting and capitalizing on other people's false beliefs. There has never been a time in human history when people were better-educated than today or better-equipped to reason out false beliefs, if they so choose. Nevertheless, fraud abounds because people remain highly gullible. A science-fiction writer makes a bet with a friend that he can get rich starting a religion – and it works. A dishonest quack who stands to make millions by discrediting the MMR vaccine falsifies his research and sets off a public health disaster that could threatens the lives of thousands. Why is it that the bigger and more audacious the fraud, the more vigorously people are willing to defend it? Perhaps that is a subject for another book, one that Shermer would be well-equipped to write.
When we accept a pattern as genuine, but it isn't, we are committing a Type 1 error or false positive. For example, we think we hear a wolf and raise the alarm, but there was no wolf. In this case the danger passes without harm and the error has no consequences. On the other hand, if we think what we're hearing isn't a wolf, but it really is, then we are committing a Type 2 error or false negative. In this case, the consequences could be fatal. This in a nutshell is why human beings have a bias for seeing patterns that aren't really there. In survival terms, it pays to be watchful for patterns even if your conclusions are wrong much of the time.
It doesn't end there, either. Shermer goes into detail about 25 fallacies that encourage people to believe weird things, including a whole slew of logical and psychological problems that lead inevitably to false conclusions. Shermer is much less interested in what people believe and why, than how they come to believe it. Accordingly, religion plays no real part in this book, except for his systematic debunking of "creation science" as just one example of pseudoscience. Similarly, pseudohistorical Holocaust deniers get a proper dressing down for their oblivious rejection of known facts. How should we deal with the many pitfalls that lead us to false thinking? Scepticism is Shermer's proposed solution, in the sense of keeping an open mind and remembering to weigh the facts objectively. This may be more a balm than a solution, given that people are going to bend the facts to better fit their a priori beliefs anyway.
All of this leads me to the fascinating subject of fraud which I would have loved to see touched on in this book. Fraud is essentially the art of exploiting and capitalizing on other people's false beliefs. There has never been a time in human history when people were better-educated than today or better-equipped to reason out false beliefs, if they so choose. Nevertheless, fraud abounds because people remain highly gullible. A science-fiction writer makes a bet with a friend that he can get rich starting a religion – and it works. A dishonest quack who stands to make millions by discrediting the MMR vaccine falsifies his research and sets off a public health disaster that could threatens the lives of thousands. Why is it that the bigger and more audacious the fraud, the more vigorously people are willing to defend it? Perhaps that is a subject for another book, one that Shermer would be well-equipped to write.
September 24, 2012
The final four pages of the book summarizes why people believe in weird things quite well. Funnily, the other 270-odd pages deal argues in an orthogonal manner to these propositions made by the author himself. Let me elaborate in my own words.
The author says that as a culture, we seem to have trouble distinguishing science from pseudo-science, history from pseudo-history and sense from nonsense. He gives the underlying motivations for this shortcoming as follows:
1. Atheists and skeptics are butting up against ten thousand years of recorded history and possibly hundred thousand years of evolution in arguing against religion, afterlife, miracles and supernatural phenomena.People believe in them because it is comforting, consoling and makes them feel good, thereby fulfilling a primordial psychological need.
2. Weird things often offer immediate gratification, fulfilling yet another human need.
3. The world is complex, intimidating and confusing but weird things offer simple answers to our problems. In contrast, science offers complicated reasoning and requires training and effort to work through.
4. Scientific and secular systems of meaning and morality have proved relatively unsatisfactory to most people. Without a higher power in the universe, why be moral or ethical? What is the meaning of life then? People prefer the comforting pseudo-scientific answers to these questions than the cold, brutal logic of rationality.
Now, if the author concludes that the above reasons are why people believe in weird things, what is the point in writing another 270-odd pages refuting creationism, holocaust denial, the cult of Ayn Rand etc by appealing to scientific reason? By his own admission, science is cold and brutal and in contrast, most people want simple, comforting answers to our existential questions. To me it looks as though I can sum up the book in one sentence that ' people believe in weird things because they are unscientific and irrational'.
The title of the book was attractive to me, which is why I wanted to read and learn from the book. But I was disappointed because the issues which are dealt with are mostly weird things on the fringe rather than in the mainstream, except for one chapter which deals with a more prevalent notion of the 15-point difference in IQ between white and black Americans as an evolutionary trait. Arguments against holocaust denial and creationism are elaborated over many chapters and I found them rambling and uninteresting because the author's argument can be summed up as 'it is unscientific to deny the holocaust or believe in creationism'. The same goes for the chapter on Ayn Rand and how her appeal to rationalism through her philosophy of Objectivism eventually led to a weird 'cult of personality'.
The author quotes Martin Gardner and Carl Sagan in his book, both of whom I admire very much. However, I was surprised to find that Martin Gardner endorsed this book as follows: ...'Michael Shermer's brilliant, informed, and incisive dissections of bogus science and history are a major contribution...". It makes me even more skeptical than ever about endorsements and reviews of a book on its back flap!
The author says that as a culture, we seem to have trouble distinguishing science from pseudo-science, history from pseudo-history and sense from nonsense. He gives the underlying motivations for this shortcoming as follows:
1. Atheists and skeptics are butting up against ten thousand years of recorded history and possibly hundred thousand years of evolution in arguing against religion, afterlife, miracles and supernatural phenomena.People believe in them because it is comforting, consoling and makes them feel good, thereby fulfilling a primordial psychological need.
2. Weird things often offer immediate gratification, fulfilling yet another human need.
3. The world is complex, intimidating and confusing but weird things offer simple answers to our problems. In contrast, science offers complicated reasoning and requires training and effort to work through.
4. Scientific and secular systems of meaning and morality have proved relatively unsatisfactory to most people. Without a higher power in the universe, why be moral or ethical? What is the meaning of life then? People prefer the comforting pseudo-scientific answers to these questions than the cold, brutal logic of rationality.
Now, if the author concludes that the above reasons are why people believe in weird things, what is the point in writing another 270-odd pages refuting creationism, holocaust denial, the cult of Ayn Rand etc by appealing to scientific reason? By his own admission, science is cold and brutal and in contrast, most people want simple, comforting answers to our existential questions. To me it looks as though I can sum up the book in one sentence that ' people believe in weird things because they are unscientific and irrational'.
The title of the book was attractive to me, which is why I wanted to read and learn from the book. But I was disappointed because the issues which are dealt with are mostly weird things on the fringe rather than in the mainstream, except for one chapter which deals with a more prevalent notion of the 15-point difference in IQ between white and black Americans as an evolutionary trait. Arguments against holocaust denial and creationism are elaborated over many chapters and I found them rambling and uninteresting because the author's argument can be summed up as 'it is unscientific to deny the holocaust or believe in creationism'. The same goes for the chapter on Ayn Rand and how her appeal to rationalism through her philosophy of Objectivism eventually led to a weird 'cult of personality'.
The author quotes Martin Gardner and Carl Sagan in his book, both of whom I admire very much. However, I was surprised to find that Martin Gardner endorsed this book as follows: ...'Michael Shermer's brilliant, informed, and incisive dissections of bogus science and history are a major contribution...". It makes me even more skeptical than ever about endorsements and reviews of a book on its back flap!
January 12, 2010
Michael Schermer is the founding publisher of Skeptic magazine and a contributing editor of Scientific American. In this book, an update of an earlier version, with a foreword by Stephen Jay Gould, he takes on a number of worthy targets, including:
* believers in the paranormal and extra-sensory perception (ESP)
* near-death experiences and those who channel "past lives"
* alien abductions
* witch-hunting and the recovered memory movement
* Ayn Rand and the cult of objectivism
* anti-evolutionism and "creation science"
* holocaust deniers and other pseudohistorians
* scientific "proofs" for the existence of God
* assorted conspiracy theories pertaining to aliens and coverups
The chapters containing the repudiation of these various instances of pseudoscience and pseudohistory form the core of the book. They are flanked by a three-chapter introduction, "Science and Skepticism", and two concluding chapters: "Why do people believe weird things?" and "Why smart people believe weird things".
I have read a number of books along the lines of this one (e.g. Damian Thompson's "Counterknowledge" , Robert Park's "Voodoo Science"). Each triggers a fundamental question - who is the author's intended audience? Scientists, after all, are unlikely to need this kind of primer on logical thinking, and how likely is it that the kind of person who believes in alien abduction, the healing power of crystals, or past-life channeling will actually read this book. Isn't there an element of preaching to the choir that renders this kind of book superfluous?
Among the three books mentioned, Schermer's is most effective in addressing this criticism, in my opinion. The particular examples that he considers establish that magical thinking is in no way confined to "dumb" people - there are plenty of very smart people on the roster of those who have embraced one kind of pseudoscientific notion or another. His third chapter, "How Thinking goes Wrong (25 fallacies that lead us to believe weird things)" and his final chapter, exploring the kind of cognitive errors that smart people may be particularly prone to commit, are particularly valuable. For instance, this overview of mistakes people make when given the task of selecting the right answer to a problem after being told whether particular guesses are right or wrong:
A. Immediately form a hypothesis and look only for examples to confirm it.
B. Fail to seek evidence to disprove one's current hypothesis.
C. Show great reluctance to change one's current hypothesis, even when it is obviously wrong.
D. Fail to consider more complex solution strategies in the face of more complicated data.
E. Find "patterns" where none exist.
All the evidence suggests that everyone, even "smart" people, is hard-wired to fall into these cognitive traps.
Schermer's writing style is clear, lively, if a bit undisciplined at times. His refutation of some of the specific topics, creation science and holocaust denial in particular, is spread over several chapters, and could have been done more concisely. And the inclusion of the chapter on Ayn Rand struck me as being somewhat out of place, though it's always fun to read an articulate smackdown of her ridiculous "philosophy". For me, the introductory remarks on science and skepticism, and the final two chapters were the most interesting sections.
Nonetheless, the book addresses important questions in a well-written, entertaining manner. I give it a strong recommendation.
* believers in the paranormal and extra-sensory perception (ESP)
* near-death experiences and those who channel "past lives"
* alien abductions
* witch-hunting and the recovered memory movement
* Ayn Rand and the cult of objectivism
* anti-evolutionism and "creation science"
* holocaust deniers and other pseudohistorians
* scientific "proofs" for the existence of God
* assorted conspiracy theories pertaining to aliens and coverups
The chapters containing the repudiation of these various instances of pseudoscience and pseudohistory form the core of the book. They are flanked by a three-chapter introduction, "Science and Skepticism", and two concluding chapters: "Why do people believe weird things?" and "Why smart people believe weird things".
I have read a number of books along the lines of this one (e.g. Damian Thompson's "Counterknowledge" , Robert Park's "Voodoo Science"). Each triggers a fundamental question - who is the author's intended audience? Scientists, after all, are unlikely to need this kind of primer on logical thinking, and how likely is it that the kind of person who believes in alien abduction, the healing power of crystals, or past-life channeling will actually read this book. Isn't there an element of preaching to the choir that renders this kind of book superfluous?
Among the three books mentioned, Schermer's is most effective in addressing this criticism, in my opinion. The particular examples that he considers establish that magical thinking is in no way confined to "dumb" people - there are plenty of very smart people on the roster of those who have embraced one kind of pseudoscientific notion or another. His third chapter, "How Thinking goes Wrong (25 fallacies that lead us to believe weird things)" and his final chapter, exploring the kind of cognitive errors that smart people may be particularly prone to commit, are particularly valuable. For instance, this overview of mistakes people make when given the task of selecting the right answer to a problem after being told whether particular guesses are right or wrong:
A. Immediately form a hypothesis and look only for examples to confirm it.
B. Fail to seek evidence to disprove one's current hypothesis.
C. Show great reluctance to change one's current hypothesis, even when it is obviously wrong.
D. Fail to consider more complex solution strategies in the face of more complicated data.
E. Find "patterns" where none exist.
All the evidence suggests that everyone, even "smart" people, is hard-wired to fall into these cognitive traps.
Schermer's writing style is clear, lively, if a bit undisciplined at times. His refutation of some of the specific topics, creation science and holocaust denial in particular, is spread over several chapters, and could have been done more concisely. And the inclusion of the chapter on Ayn Rand struck me as being somewhat out of place, though it's always fun to read an articulate smackdown of her ridiculous "philosophy". For me, the introductory remarks on science and skepticism, and the final two chapters were the most interesting sections.
Nonetheless, the book addresses important questions in a well-written, entertaining manner. I give it a strong recommendation.
September 15, 2019
Interesting read, enlightening a bit.
The book does answer the question, to a satisfying degree at least.
The weird things referred to are mainly: psychics, aliens, creation, holocaust denial, but many others are mentioned. The author provides arguments against those things and refutation to the arguments for them, relying on critical thinking and science.
Honestly, I was not very satisfied with this book, as I somewhat expected more.
The information presented is not mindbending or hard to wrap your head around, it should not be a mystery why people believe weird things, yet with so many people involved, one gets to thinking there must be something bigger to it, I am starting to think there isn't and I just think too much of people. (personal note)
I also was not fond of the method the author uses, this book is more for people who do not believe in weird things than for those who do. Above that, this book does not provide raw material as much as it makes use of it, kind of gives you the fish instead of teaching you how to fish.
On a more positive note, the material and the examples employed are highly valuable and deserve taking note of.
The philosophy of skepticism promoted by the author seems to be promising and useful, and one of which I, as well as many others I bet (and hope), have stumbled into unintentionally. It is not so radical or counterintuitive, it touches upon the core of philosophy and science, yet it is very underrated, especially nowadays.
Will this book enrich you with information and arguments? definitely. Will it stop you from believing weird thing? maybe.
The book does answer the question, to a satisfying degree at least.
The weird things referred to are mainly: psychics, aliens, creation, holocaust denial, but many others are mentioned. The author provides arguments against those things and refutation to the arguments for them, relying on critical thinking and science.
Honestly, I was not very satisfied with this book, as I somewhat expected more.
The information presented is not mindbending or hard to wrap your head around, it should not be a mystery why people believe weird things, yet with so many people involved, one gets to thinking there must be something bigger to it, I am starting to think there isn't and I just think too much of people. (personal note)
I also was not fond of the method the author uses, this book is more for people who do not believe in weird things than for those who do. Above that, this book does not provide raw material as much as it makes use of it, kind of gives you the fish instead of teaching you how to fish.
On a more positive note, the material and the examples employed are highly valuable and deserve taking note of.
The philosophy of skepticism promoted by the author seems to be promising and useful, and one of which I, as well as many others I bet (and hope), have stumbled into unintentionally. It is not so radical or counterintuitive, it touches upon the core of philosophy and science, yet it is very underrated, especially nowadays.
Will this book enrich you with information and arguments? definitely. Will it stop you from believing weird thing? maybe.
April 10, 2024
__________________________
“Name me one thing that’s going on that you don’t know about. There—you can’t, can you?”
–– Terry Pratchett, discussion on government cover ups in Thud.
Ghost Story
I had returned to my tiny hometown because of a family emergency. My 97-year-old mother had fallen and broken her hip, and the operation that followed had left her with severe anesthetic-induced dementia. It was obvious that she couldn’t live at home any longer, and my younger brother and sister had called me in to fix things for them. I was bunking in my mother’s 140 year old Victorian, which was every bit as solid as the first piggy’s residence of choice, when the spooky event occurred. As I walked through the kitchen, I heard a disembodied voice say, “John!” “John!” My sister was at work, my brother was out of town, and my mother was in the nursing home. I searched the house. There was no one there but me. I decided it had definitely not happened and that I should never ever mention it to anyone.
Then, several days later, my sister asked me if I had run into the ghost. She laughed but then told me she had heard a voice calling her name in the house, and that my brother had confessed that the same thing had happened to him.
Now, it’s hard not to draw supernatural explanations when confronted with facts like these. All three of us had heard our respective names called in the same house without hearing other people’s stories first.
Shermer has an explanation for eerie encounters of this particular type. He blames sleep deprivation. That explanation fits my situation perfectly. My sister and brother lived with my mother rent free. Neither of them had good paying jobs or substantial savings, and I was going to have to sell my mother’s property to pay for the nursing home. [My brother and sister were both in their 60s, so it seems like they should have been weaned by this time, but that’s family for you.] I had been there for 3 or 4 weeks, was extremely stressed, and was not sleeping more than 1 or 2 hours a night. I expect my siblings were not sleeping much more than I was.
I confirmed Shermer's statement from other sources, and discovered that hearing one’s name being called by disembodied voices was indeed a very common aural hallucination caused by sleep deprivation. So chalk up one for Shermer.
Methought I heard a voice cry, “Sleep no more! --MacBeth, Act 2, Scene 2
★★★ Most of Shermer’s debunking, though, is not about ghosts or UFO’s, ESP or jackalopes. It is about such serious topics as claims from evangelicals that any public school teaching about evolution must give “creation science” equal time in the science classrooms, claims that the Holocaust never happened, claims that African Americans have lower IQs than white Europeans, and claims that hypnosis therapy proves that children were being abused in Satanic rites by their parents and teachers.
NOTE: This book was written in the 1990s, and the topics it discusses were headline news at the time. People were going to prison because some inept or corrupt "therapists" were planting false memories to "help" disturbed people remember being abused by Satan worshippers or being abducted by UFOs . The educational publisher I worked for at the time lost a great deal of money trying to please both science teachers and creationists by publishing a biology book that covered natural selection but never mentioned Darwin or the word evolution. The publisher was boycotted by science teachers, and went out of business several months later.
Shermer’s analyses and explanations are very professorial and are filled with references to back his statements. This is appropriate, but may be off putting to many readers.
“Name me one thing that’s going on that you don’t know about. There—you can’t, can you?”
–– Terry Pratchett, discussion on government cover ups in Thud.
Ghost Story
I had returned to my tiny hometown because of a family emergency. My 97-year-old mother had fallen and broken her hip, and the operation that followed had left her with severe anesthetic-induced dementia. It was obvious that she couldn’t live at home any longer, and my younger brother and sister had called me in to fix things for them. I was bunking in my mother’s 140 year old Victorian, which was every bit as solid as the first piggy’s residence of choice, when the spooky event occurred. As I walked through the kitchen, I heard a disembodied voice say, “John!” “John!” My sister was at work, my brother was out of town, and my mother was in the nursing home. I searched the house. There was no one there but me. I decided it had definitely not happened and that I should never ever mention it to anyone.
Then, several days later, my sister asked me if I had run into the ghost. She laughed but then told me she had heard a voice calling her name in the house, and that my brother had confessed that the same thing had happened to him.
Now, it’s hard not to draw supernatural explanations when confronted with facts like these. All three of us had heard our respective names called in the same house without hearing other people’s stories first.
Shermer has an explanation for eerie encounters of this particular type. He blames sleep deprivation. That explanation fits my situation perfectly. My sister and brother lived with my mother rent free. Neither of them had good paying jobs or substantial savings, and I was going to have to sell my mother’s property to pay for the nursing home. [My brother and sister were both in their 60s, so it seems like they should have been weaned by this time, but that’s family for you.] I had been there for 3 or 4 weeks, was extremely stressed, and was not sleeping more than 1 or 2 hours a night. I expect my siblings were not sleeping much more than I was.
I confirmed Shermer's statement from other sources, and discovered that hearing one’s name being called by disembodied voices was indeed a very common aural hallucination caused by sleep deprivation. So chalk up one for Shermer.
Methought I heard a voice cry, “Sleep no more! --MacBeth, Act 2, Scene 2
★★★ Most of Shermer’s debunking, though, is not about ghosts or UFO’s, ESP or jackalopes. It is about such serious topics as claims from evangelicals that any public school teaching about evolution must give “creation science” equal time in the science classrooms, claims that the Holocaust never happened, claims that African Americans have lower IQs than white Europeans, and claims that hypnosis therapy proves that children were being abused in Satanic rites by their parents and teachers.
NOTE: This book was written in the 1990s, and the topics it discusses were headline news at the time. People were going to prison because some inept or corrupt "therapists" were planting false memories to "help" disturbed people remember being abused by Satan worshippers or being abducted by UFOs . The educational publisher I worked for at the time lost a great deal of money trying to please both science teachers and creationists by publishing a biology book that covered natural selection but never mentioned Darwin or the word evolution. The publisher was boycotted by science teachers, and went out of business several months later.
Shermer’s analyses and explanations are very professorial and are filled with references to back his statements. This is appropriate, but may be off putting to many readers.
January 20, 2011
Why People Believe Weird Things is kind of a modernistic blend of Martin Gardner’s pioneering Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science and Carl Sagan’s masterpiece, The Demon-haunted World. Author and prominent skeptic Michael Shermer begins with a recollection of his own conversion from evangelical Christian to skeptic, and generalizes from his personal experiences in an overview of the difference between science and pseudoscience/superstition starring the 25 Fallacies That Lead Us To Believe Weird Things, a somewhat more technically oriented version of Sagan’s famous Baloney Detection Kit.
Shermer briefly discusses several of the usual suspects in pseudoscience—ESP, alien abductions and medieval witch hunts—and devotes considerable attention to two topics of current importance: creationism and historical revisionism, the latter with special emphasis on Holocaust denial. While the rotten corpse of creation “science” has been picked clean (see, for example, Why Darwin Matters: The Case against Intelligent Design by the same author; or, for a quicker read, Science Evolution and Creationism published by the National Academy of Sciences), Holocaust denial is not that commonly covered in general books on skepticism, and should be. Shermer, who has studied Holocaust revisionism in depth, going so far as to interview (politely) the principal deniers, takes this “weird thing” as a teaching example in why we should believe the Holocaust was as horrific and deadly as is claimed by mainstream historians. The trick, he explains, is to see how numerous lines of evidence, though none are complete and all may not be perfectly consistent (and we’d suspect them if they were), converge on a common historical narrative. It is also important to pay attention to the tactics the deniers use to cast false doubt, as they all show evidence of flawed reasoning. Though Shermer doesn’t make too much of it, there is an obvious parallel between the cumulative processes of science and history, and between the approaches of creationists and Holocaust deniers, respectively, to discredit them.
This book, with its somewhat different point of view and selection of topics, nicely complements The Demon-haunted World as a general guide to critical thinking. Or, in the words of Penn and Teller, “How about you buy this book? It’s a great real. It’s funny, it’s smart, and it’ll be really hip not to be a credulous nut and the world will be a better place.”
Shermer briefly discusses several of the usual suspects in pseudoscience—ESP, alien abductions and medieval witch hunts—and devotes considerable attention to two topics of current importance: creationism and historical revisionism, the latter with special emphasis on Holocaust denial. While the rotten corpse of creation “science” has been picked clean (see, for example, Why Darwin Matters: The Case against Intelligent Design by the same author; or, for a quicker read, Science Evolution and Creationism published by the National Academy of Sciences), Holocaust denial is not that commonly covered in general books on skepticism, and should be. Shermer, who has studied Holocaust revisionism in depth, going so far as to interview (politely) the principal deniers, takes this “weird thing” as a teaching example in why we should believe the Holocaust was as horrific and deadly as is claimed by mainstream historians. The trick, he explains, is to see how numerous lines of evidence, though none are complete and all may not be perfectly consistent (and we’d suspect them if they were), converge on a common historical narrative. It is also important to pay attention to the tactics the deniers use to cast false doubt, as they all show evidence of flawed reasoning. Though Shermer doesn’t make too much of it, there is an obvious parallel between the cumulative processes of science and history, and between the approaches of creationists and Holocaust deniers, respectively, to discredit them.
This book, with its somewhat different point of view and selection of topics, nicely complements The Demon-haunted World as a general guide to critical thinking. Or, in the words of Penn and Teller, “How about you buy this book? It’s a great real. It’s funny, it’s smart, and it’ll be really hip not to be a credulous nut and the world will be a better place.”
June 2, 2010
I have always felt like the books I read intertwine themselves into my memories of that point in my life, but this book, more than any other, stands out as one that isn't just a part of my experience in a time and place but a book that actually changed how I think and view the world, in a meaningful way.
Why People Believe Weird Things is a great first book for exploring the basics of critical thinking and gives one a chance to see real life examples of how faulty reasoning can lead one to fallacious conclusions. While some of the examples are so fringe as to be comical, they are no less illustrative of where reasoning can go awry. Recognizing the flawed justifications in these examples can also help one recognize them in as yet unexplored topics.
I spent much of my teens, straight through my college years, studying books on tarot, astrology, ESP, ghosts, and any other sort of magical thinking. At the time, I thought this would give me control and power over my world. To understand how the lines on my hands would predict my future would be my opportunity to better respond to what life had coming my way. And yet, time and again, I found myself incapable of understanding and applying what I had read; found conflicting answers in books on the same topic and I saw this as a reflection of my own short comings and inability to grasp the concepts not as a limitation of the theories themselves.
This first foray into skepticism and critical thinking taught me that there is no understanding in magic, no answers to my love life in the alignment of stars. Pseudoscience, conspiracy theories, and untestable hypotheses do nothing to help us better understand our lives and cannot give us no control over our world. It’s been over a decade since I read this book and I feel like there is more wonder and awe in understanding the testable physical and rational world around me than there ever was in outdated and fallacious thinking. To understand, to question and to think critically is to better appreciate the world around us, and for me, this was a life changing discovery.
Why People Believe Weird Things is a great first book for exploring the basics of critical thinking and gives one a chance to see real life examples of how faulty reasoning can lead one to fallacious conclusions. While some of the examples are so fringe as to be comical, they are no less illustrative of where reasoning can go awry. Recognizing the flawed justifications in these examples can also help one recognize them in as yet unexplored topics.
I spent much of my teens, straight through my college years, studying books on tarot, astrology, ESP, ghosts, and any other sort of magical thinking. At the time, I thought this would give me control and power over my world. To understand how the lines on my hands would predict my future would be my opportunity to better respond to what life had coming my way. And yet, time and again, I found myself incapable of understanding and applying what I had read; found conflicting answers in books on the same topic and I saw this as a reflection of my own short comings and inability to grasp the concepts not as a limitation of the theories themselves.
This first foray into skepticism and critical thinking taught me that there is no understanding in magic, no answers to my love life in the alignment of stars. Pseudoscience, conspiracy theories, and untestable hypotheses do nothing to help us better understand our lives and cannot give us no control over our world. It’s been over a decade since I read this book and I feel like there is more wonder and awe in understanding the testable physical and rational world around me than there ever was in outdated and fallacious thinking. To understand, to question and to think critically is to better appreciate the world around us, and for me, this was a life changing discovery.
March 25, 2016
“...no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavors to establish.” - David Hume
What kind of person could deny that the holocaust actually happened? Who could argue against the evidence for evolution? And how do smart people believe such outlandish claims as ESP, alien abductions, and haunted houses? In his book, Michael Shermer explains the logical fallacies and cycles of belief that cause smart people to believe some really weird stuff. This book is worth reading for the in-depth discussion of logical fallacies alone; these fallacies should be taught in high school science classes. Shermer points out that part of the issue with pseudoscience is the way we approach science eduction: as a collection of facts, instead of an imperfect but self-correcting method for discovering the truth.
Shermer treats believers kindly: he does not attack them as ignorant or crazy. Indeed, he claims that intelligence and belief in weird things are completely orthogonal (in other words, statistically unrelated). However, he does compare creationists with holocaust deniers (both fringe groups that use similar tactics to deny a well-established truth), and he certainly counts a belief in God, particularly a belief that God can be proven scientifically, as strange. Shermer's discussion of Ayn Rand's cult of objectivism is amusingly vitriolic, and one of my favorite sections of the book.
What kind of person could deny that the holocaust actually happened? Who could argue against the evidence for evolution? And how do smart people believe such outlandish claims as ESP, alien abductions, and haunted houses? In his book, Michael Shermer explains the logical fallacies and cycles of belief that cause smart people to believe some really weird stuff. This book is worth reading for the in-depth discussion of logical fallacies alone; these fallacies should be taught in high school science classes. Shermer points out that part of the issue with pseudoscience is the way we approach science eduction: as a collection of facts, instead of an imperfect but self-correcting method for discovering the truth.
Shermer treats believers kindly: he does not attack them as ignorant or crazy. Indeed, he claims that intelligence and belief in weird things are completely orthogonal (in other words, statistically unrelated). However, he does compare creationists with holocaust deniers (both fringe groups that use similar tactics to deny a well-established truth), and he certainly counts a belief in God, particularly a belief that God can be proven scientifically, as strange. Shermer's discussion of Ayn Rand's cult of objectivism is amusingly vitriolic, and one of my favorite sections of the book.
June 24, 2017
As much as I liked this book, I can't give it a full 5 star review because it is too dated. Yes, 'holocaust denial' folks are pretty much a fringe idiot band, but that was a long time ago comparatively speaking. There is nothing about global warming whatsoever. Nor is there anything about "Scientology".
This is not to say this book is not worthwhile. It is. I'm afraid it is difficult to keep up with the various crackpot things with our ratings driven media, but i would enjoy an updated version of this book very much.
This is not to say this book is not worthwhile. It is. I'm afraid it is difficult to keep up with the various crackpot things with our ratings driven media, but i would enjoy an updated version of this book very much.
March 1, 2017
I picked up this book a few years ago, but just started reading it. I wanted a better understanding of how people can believe in certain things such as creation-science, but then deny other phenomena such as climate change. The author does a good job discussing how cults gain popularity, and how pseudoscience and pseudo-history are perpetrated. In light of today's hype of "alternative facts", and fake news, this book underscores the ever-growing importance of critical thinking.
June 29, 2014
“Why People Believe Weird Things” by Michael Shermer is a primer on skepticism, written by an author whose once strong religious faith, gave way to down right dubitation. Shermer does his best to explain why people have the propensity to believe in things that cannot be proven (alien abductions, ghosts), and others that can be proven but are controversial such as holocaust denial, repressed memories, and psychic powers.
His third chapter “How Thinking Goes Wrong,” points out 25 ways in which the average person can be deceived into believing the unbelievable. This can take the shape of anecdotal evidence,unscientific testing of the paranormal (after the fact reasoning, rationalization for failing to prove the theory etc.)
Although this chapter and the others in the book are full of useful information it is sometimes hard for the laymen to keep up with all of the different theories of skepticism. I found myself looking up some of them in more detail (like the Hume's Method) in order to understand the concept accurately. I did the same thing for other chapters, like chapter eight on the cult of objectivism. Shermer covers the basics of this topic but I found it lacking in enough detail to understand it fully.
To my surprise I found this book relatively free of bias. Of course Shermer is trying to argue is point, but he does not do so at the expense or the humiliation of the believers. He makes a point to say that an attack on creationism is not an attack on religion. Instead he has a problem with people who are trying to deny science at all costs to the benefit of their belief. He also, rightfully so, has a few choice words for holocaust deniers and those that believe in race superiority. I think those topics are rooted in something else entirely different from beliefs in ghosts and religion, so he goes at them with a different approach.
All in all I found this book to be a good jumping off point to the field of skepticism. It is a relatively unbiased and thought provoking view on the beliefs that many people hold. He tries to explain the etiology of these beliefs, but probably should have limited it to a few topics so the reader does not have to do so much extra research. I would recommend this book to believers and nonbelievers alike.
His third chapter “How Thinking Goes Wrong,” points out 25 ways in which the average person can be deceived into believing the unbelievable. This can take the shape of anecdotal evidence,unscientific testing of the paranormal (after the fact reasoning, rationalization for failing to prove the theory etc.)
Although this chapter and the others in the book are full of useful information it is sometimes hard for the laymen to keep up with all of the different theories of skepticism. I found myself looking up some of them in more detail (like the Hume's Method) in order to understand the concept accurately. I did the same thing for other chapters, like chapter eight on the cult of objectivism. Shermer covers the basics of this topic but I found it lacking in enough detail to understand it fully.
To my surprise I found this book relatively free of bias. Of course Shermer is trying to argue is point, but he does not do so at the expense or the humiliation of the believers. He makes a point to say that an attack on creationism is not an attack on religion. Instead he has a problem with people who are trying to deny science at all costs to the benefit of their belief. He also, rightfully so, has a few choice words for holocaust deniers and those that believe in race superiority. I think those topics are rooted in something else entirely different from beliefs in ghosts and religion, so he goes at them with a different approach.
All in all I found this book to be a good jumping off point to the field of skepticism. It is a relatively unbiased and thought provoking view on the beliefs that many people hold. He tries to explain the etiology of these beliefs, but probably should have limited it to a few topics so the reader does not have to do so much extra research. I would recommend this book to believers and nonbelievers alike.
April 27, 2020
I had been meaning to read this book for years, but have finally got around to it after reading the social media rantings of an acquaintance against Bill Gates and vaccines. I found myself less interested in “debating” the well-established benefits of vaccines than in understanding the actual reasons WHY someone would believe the things this guy believes, against almost all credible evidence and logic. I’ve read lots on critical thinking and common fallacies, but still feel confused when seemingly intelligent, rational individuals sprout off conspiracy theories, then dig in their heels when presented evidence that counters their beliefs.
While Shermer’s book does touch on reasons for belief systems, a disproportionate amount of space is given to the actual debunking of specific various pseudoscientific and pseudo historic claims. While these forays into absurdities make for interesting reading, I don’t need to be convinced that the Earth is more than 10,000 years old or that the Holocaust actually happened. A more pressing question is why are flat-earthers and chemtrail believers suddenly a thing?
I think this book was published in 1996 and while the psychology insights into personality traits and fallacious reasoning perhaps haven’t changed much, any modern treatise on the subject needs to examine the role the Internet (and more specifically social media) has played in faulty belief systems.
While Shermer’s book does touch on reasons for belief systems, a disproportionate amount of space is given to the actual debunking of specific various pseudoscientific and pseudo historic claims. While these forays into absurdities make for interesting reading, I don’t need to be convinced that the Earth is more than 10,000 years old or that the Holocaust actually happened. A more pressing question is why are flat-earthers and chemtrail believers suddenly a thing?
I think this book was published in 1996 and while the psychology insights into personality traits and fallacious reasoning perhaps haven’t changed much, any modern treatise on the subject needs to examine the role the Internet (and more specifically social media) has played in faulty belief systems.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 513 reviews