Status
Available
Call number
Genres
Collection
Publication
Holt Paperbacks (2002), Edition: Revised & enlarged, 384 pages
Description
The co-founder of "Skeptic" magazine explains why people are so willing to believe in mind reading, alien abductions, ghosts, and other manifestations of pseudoscience, and discusses how such wrong thinking can lead to very real danger.
User reviews
LibraryThing member brianclegg
Michael Shermer is probably best known as Scientific American's resident sceptic - a man who has what seems the wickedly enjoyable job of going around finding fault with other people's beliefs - a sort of modern day court jester without (presumably - I've never seen him) the funny costume and
Although along the same lines as Carl Sagan's The Demon Haunted World, this book works alongside Sagan's masterpiece, rather than competing with it. It focuses more on why we believe strange things, and also very usefully expands out from the paranormal and pseudoscience to include pseudohistory, a topic I hadn't even realized existed.
Shermer is something of a convert to scepticism, so has a convert's fervour, but none of the unpleasant aggressiveness of the likes of Randi and Dawkins. Instead he gently shows us how strange beliefs come into being, and why they have such a strong hold. Inevitably strong on the paranormal and UFOs, he is particularly good when looking at the likes of modern accusations of satanic rituals, and the remarkable cult of Ayn Rand. The section on creationism is a little weaker, partly because it isn't quite up-to-date enough, and also because there has been so much material going into this in more depth (see, for example, Scientists Confront...)
In some ways I was most impressed by the next section on pseudohistory, in part, I suspect, because of not having really thought about this as a concept before. The chapters on holocaust denial were fascinating, and perhaps even more surprising was the self-deception of the 'all ideas originated in Africa' movement (again new to me).
The only reason that this book doesn't get 5 stars is that I found the last section before getting to the summaries, on a scientific idea that its originator says gives a mechanism for a form of eternal life, irritating. It just isn't the same sort of problem as the other topics covered in the book. Here someone is speculating wildly based on extrapolating scientific theories to the extreme - but that's a very different game to having an unshakable belief in concepts with no support in evidence, and I think Shermer does himself and the reader a disservice by confusing the two. However, the book doesn't entirely end on this mistake, as there are a couple of short chapters pulling together the whys and wherefores of belief in weird things, so this small glitch doesn't destroy the flow, and certainly shouldn't detract from the fact that overall this is a book, alongside Sagan's, that ought to be on every thinking person's shelf.
Show More
bells. In this classic, originally published in 1997 but reviewed in a new UK edition, he gives a powerful argument for taking the sceptical viewpoint.Although along the same lines as Carl Sagan's The Demon Haunted World, this book works alongside Sagan's masterpiece, rather than competing with it. It focuses more on why we believe strange things, and also very usefully expands out from the paranormal and pseudoscience to include pseudohistory, a topic I hadn't even realized existed.
Shermer is something of a convert to scepticism, so has a convert's fervour, but none of the unpleasant aggressiveness of the likes of Randi and Dawkins. Instead he gently shows us how strange beliefs come into being, and why they have such a strong hold. Inevitably strong on the paranormal and UFOs, he is particularly good when looking at the likes of modern accusations of satanic rituals, and the remarkable cult of Ayn Rand. The section on creationism is a little weaker, partly because it isn't quite up-to-date enough, and also because there has been so much material going into this in more depth (see, for example, Scientists Confront...)
In some ways I was most impressed by the next section on pseudohistory, in part, I suspect, because of not having really thought about this as a concept before. The chapters on holocaust denial were fascinating, and perhaps even more surprising was the self-deception of the 'all ideas originated in Africa' movement (again new to me).
The only reason that this book doesn't get 5 stars is that I found the last section before getting to the summaries, on a scientific idea that its originator says gives a mechanism for a form of eternal life, irritating. It just isn't the same sort of problem as the other topics covered in the book. Here someone is speculating wildly based on extrapolating scientific theories to the extreme - but that's a very different game to having an unshakable belief in concepts with no support in evidence, and I think Shermer does himself and the reader a disservice by confusing the two. However, the book doesn't entirely end on this mistake, as there are a couple of short chapters pulling together the whys and wherefores of belief in weird things, so this small glitch doesn't destroy the flow, and certainly shouldn't detract from the fact that overall this is a book, alongside Sagan's, that ought to be on every thinking person's shelf.
Show Less
LibraryThing member melydia
I think, perhaps, that this book was not quite what I thought it was going to be. What I wanted - and this is no fault of the author's - was a book debunking specific "weird things". While I got a decent amount of that in the (fascinating) chapter on Holocaust deniers, by and large it was more
Show More
about the psychological and emotional reasons people believe things that don't make any sense. Which is fine, as far as that goes, but it seemed to keep returning to the same few theories each time. I guess you could say he was making his case with additional evidence, but I got a sort of "okay, I got it, move on" feeling about the whole thing. In short, it's an interesting read but probably something you'd more enjoy reading a chapter here and there rather than straight through, Show Less
LibraryThing member mjmorrison1971
Possibly better titled as "Some of the Weird Stuff People Believe". It is a good read but while Shermer does attempt to answer the "why?" question; often the best he can do is explain what they believe and provide the reasons their belief is scientifically or factually wrong. A well researched book
The book is worth the time to read but probably does not really explain the why people believe for all the issue looked at.
Show More
that explains what skepticism really means and how science works both at the theoretical level and more practical real world level to ensure that incorrect ideas are weeded out. He the looks at Creationism, Aliens, Cults, Holocaust denial and and other area were skeptics and science should have won out with the fact. He does explain the psychology of why people find it hard to change their beliefs and in some case just how they come to dominate their lives (particularly those "abducted by aliens" and holocaust deniers). The book is worth the time to read but probably does not really explain the why people believe for all the issue looked at.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Lenaphoenix
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
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.
Show More
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.
Show Less
LibraryThing member awriteword
I first read this book in college for a Psychology of Superstition course. I devoured it. It is written in an informative and friendly way, and the subject mattter is fascinating. Years later I plucked it from my bookshelf again, and was just as rivetted as I was the first time I had read it. In
Show More
fact, I was so taken with it, that it prompted me to begin purchasing the entire Michael Shermer library and to branch out to learn more about science and skepticism. I highly recommend this treatise on how humans believe all kinds of wacky things. Its a great way to get to know your own thinking process. Show Less
LibraryThing member amandrake
One of the few books that goes straight to the heart of this subject & proceeds to kick ass and take names. Intelligent while remaining accessible. And pretty convincing in many ways.
LibraryThing member Robin_Goodfellow
excellent book! Some of the "extended" material in the new version was just so so.
LibraryThing member jefware
Humans are pattern recognition animals and we see patterns in random noise, like seeing faces in the clouds.
LibraryThing member jpekarek
I read this book for a book club that I'm in, so it wasn't my choice. However, I found this book fairly interesting. It had some points, but it seemed to gloss over topics such as ghosts and psychics. It had a really large section on the Holocaust deniers, which didn't interest me. And he never
Show More
answered the question in the title of the book: why people believe weird things. He focused more on debunking superstitions, and not on the psychology behind them. Show Less
LibraryThing member GeekGoddess
I came across this book at Barnes and Noble many years ago. It was on a display stand, and caught my eye. I devoured it in a day.
It was not until I read this book that I realized there were other people who believed as I did, and we had a name - skeptic.
I won't say this book changed my life, but
It was not until I read this book that I realized there were other people who believed as I did, and we had a name - skeptic.
I won't say this book changed my life, but
Show More
it lead me on a path that certainly did. Show Less
LibraryThing member motjebben
Not so much about "Why people believe weird things", but rather using the tools of science and skepticism to debunk the weird things people believe.
The first chapter on the scientific method is quite good.
I was hoping for more explanations of the neurobiological and evolutionary reasons for why
It is more about a set of weird things people believe and how a skeptic can debunk these beliefs using the scientific method.
Some of the examples seem "dated" to me, and thankfully so! It appears that some of the weird beliefs are either dying out or diminishing. (Perhaps, sadly, only to be replaced by new weird things.)
The first chapter on the scientific method is quite good.
I was hoping for more explanations of the neurobiological and evolutionary reasons for why
Show More
people believe weird things, but there is only hints of such in the particular book.It is more about a set of weird things people believe and how a skeptic can debunk these beliefs using the scientific method.
Some of the examples seem "dated" to me, and thankfully so! It appears that some of the weird beliefs are either dying out or diminishing. (Perhaps, sadly, only to be replaced by new weird things.)
Show Less
LibraryThing member KR2
I was a bit disappointed in this book. I have heard Shermer many times before and liked him. This book was dull. It could perhaps be that I have come across this information before. The book did not answer the questions I had when I picked it up. I thought there would be more empirical evidence
Show More
from a diverse range of sciences. He didn't seem to deliver the knock out blow in the end. Show Less
LibraryThing member Diwanna
This book was quite interesting. Several varied topics to keep you interested ranging from Creation-science, Holocaust Deniers, Fire Walking, and more. I was slightly disappointed because the book didn't really tackle Why People Believe until the last chapter where Mr. Shermer summed it up...People
Show More
believe in weird things because they want to. It feels good, it's comforting. Show Less
LibraryThing member moonimal
Interesting trip through skeptical thought, with extensive chapters on how to argue with creationists, and even more on Holocaust deniers. Sagan's 'Demon Haunted World' is a better read, with a more complete integration of all these forms of strange belief coming together into a more unified 'why
Show More
we want this stuff to be true, and isn't religion another form of UFO's' kind of thing. Show Less
LibraryThing member psiloiordinary
A good wide coverage of both strange beliefs and the people behind them. He works methodically through such topics as holocaust denial, witch hunts and creationism.
Some surprising conclusions (which I won't spoil for you) as he tries to come up with the answer to the title of the book.
His style is
He also shows you the human side of alien abductees and holocaust deniers alike - yes honestly.
If you are human then this book will tell you something about yourself as well. Believing in weird things goes with the territory and has some positive evolutionary advantages - so try to figure out what yours are.
Enjoyable.
Some surprising conclusions (which I won't spoil for you) as he tries to come up with the answer to the title of the book.
His style is
Show More
simple and straightforward, matter of fact, and self revealing both in terms of his own past beliefs and by sharing situations where he was particularly ineffective in the face of believers. He also shows you the human side of alien abductees and holocaust deniers alike - yes honestly.
If you are human then this book will tell you something about yourself as well. Believing in weird things goes with the territory and has some positive evolutionary advantages - so try to figure out what yours are.
Enjoyable.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Devil_llama
A very good introduction to critical thinking by the editor of Skeptic magazine. Instead of spending his time just discussing what people believe, and why its weird, he delves into our evolutionary past and our psychology to explain why we continue to believe weird things, even in an era of
Show More
increasing scientific knowledge. Show Less
LibraryThing member Daniel.Estes
I remember when I first realized that people believed weird things—religions, superstitions, questionable medicinal remedies, astrology, etc.—I was astonished to say the least. What causes this magical thinking? Why is it so pervasive? And perhaps most troubling of all, what weird things did I
Shermer's writing is scientific while still being succinct. The book I'm reviewing is slightly out of date though I can see there's an updated edition. I recommend either because a healthy skepticism is timeless. One chapter in particular is especially useful: "How Thing Goes Wrong: Twenty-five Fallacies That Lead Us to Believe Weird Things." It's a critical thinking 101 class summed up in less than twenty pages.
Show More
believe but didn't realize it? Michael Shermer's aptly titled Why People Believe Weird Things is a skeptical, and yet kind, exploration of this subject.Shermer's writing is scientific while still being succinct. The book I'm reviewing is slightly out of date though I can see there's an updated edition. I recommend either because a healthy skepticism is timeless. One chapter in particular is especially useful: "How Thing Goes Wrong: Twenty-five Fallacies That Lead Us to Believe Weird Things." It's a critical thinking 101 class summed up in less than twenty pages.
Show Less
LibraryThing member jen.e.moore
There were flashes of okayness, but mostly I was pretty annoyed by this book. Shermer's a lot less condescending than a lot of skeptics, but he still has that attitude of "if I've explained it to you and you still don't agree with me, you're stupid."
LibraryThing member hcubic
Generally speaking, if you skipped every book with the word "weird" in the title, you wouldn't be missing much. This is an exception. Michael Shermer teaches the history of science at Occidental College in Eagle Rock, California and, as Editor of Skeptic Magazine, is a prominent and eloquent
Show More
proponent of the skeptical viewpoint. In this book, he provides a lively, humorous yet serious, and often personal commentary on many of the mass follies of our time. Get your students to read this book. Show Less
LibraryThing member Cheryl_in_CC_NV
Ok. ?�I read this in bits, starting on vacation, and then finishing at home between novels. ?áNot because it's difficult, but simply because I was busy. ?áAnyway, my point is, I don't have a holistic feeling about it... can't speak well to its overall effectiveness. ?áI *think* I'd like to
I mean, I already know the basic idea, from neuroscience and evolutionary psychology. ?áTo simplify, we hold beliefs because 1. finding patterns (including causation and sequence, etc.) is a survival trait and 2. peer pressure, fads, the need for comfort and/or for adventure, are more influential than our ability to think scientifically and logically, and 3. our neurons & hormones play tricks on us (consider SAD).
I wanted more details about either 1. how I can recognize weird thoughts that I'm thinking, and make sure I more carefully analyze them, and discard them if they're too weird, or, 2. how I can help friends who are victimized by irrational agendas, such as the woman I know who believes in the?áNew Age?ápower of crystal energy. ?áI didn't get so much of that. ?áInstead I got in-depth analyses of a few 'case history' examples: UFOlogy, Holocaust denial, and creationism. ?áGreat info. there. ?áIf your friend believes any of those weird things, go ahead and read this so you can discuss those with him and maybe even enlighten him.
Otherwise, I dunno. ?áRead Skeptic magazine, or do what I do and subscribe to The Straight Dope email newsletter. ?áMeanwhile, I do have some bookdart marked passages:
Skepticism is not a position; skepticism is an approach to claims, i[and] science is not a subject but a method."
David Hume is quoted as saying: "A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence."
Baruch Spinoza is quoted: "I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn human actions, but to understand them."
Re teaching the bible?áin schools as 'creation science:" ?á"To try to turn a myth into a science, or a science into a myth, is an insult to myths, and insult to religion, and an insult to science. ?áIn attempting to this, creationists have missed the significance, meaning, and sublime nature of myths. ?áThey took a beautiful story of creation and re-creation and ruined it."
Re evolutionary adaptation: You know the mind puzzle of the infinite number of monkeys on typewriters randomly coming up with Shakespeare's plays? ?áWhat if it's not random, but operates under the principle of Natural Selection? ?á "Richard Hardison (1988) wrote a computer program in which letters were 'selected' for or against, and it took an average of only 335.2 trials to produce the sequence of letters TOBEORNOTTOBE. ?áIt takes the computer less than ninety seconds. ?áThe entire play can done in about 4.5 days."
(Ok, if you understand evolution & natural selection better than most folks, you say 'um, no, natural selection is random, it doesn't have a goal...' ?áBut consider, that is a selective process, and there is a goal, in the sense that a creature better suited to its current situation is a goal. ?áSo, I believe that Hardison wrote this algorithm as if 'Hamlet' is the sequence of letters, aka creature, best suited to its current environmental situation.)
So, I dunno about recommending this to you. ?áGood book if you feel you either need to argue with believers or be more skeptical yourself, especially if you've not read much on the subject yet. ?áI'm sure there are better books available, however, if you want to hunt for them."
Show More
say that it feels more like articles from Skeptic magazine (which is not surprising, as Shermer is editor there) than it actually answers the question the title seems to be promising to address.I mean, I already know the basic idea, from neuroscience and evolutionary psychology. ?áTo simplify, we hold beliefs because 1. finding patterns (including causation and sequence, etc.) is a survival trait and 2. peer pressure, fads, the need for comfort and/or for adventure, are more influential than our ability to think scientifically and logically, and 3. our neurons & hormones play tricks on us (consider SAD).
I wanted more details about either 1. how I can recognize weird thoughts that I'm thinking, and make sure I more carefully analyze them, and discard them if they're too weird, or, 2. how I can help friends who are victimized by irrational agendas, such as the woman I know who believes in the?áNew Age?ápower of crystal energy. ?áI didn't get so much of that. ?áInstead I got in-depth analyses of a few 'case history' examples: UFOlogy, Holocaust denial, and creationism. ?áGreat info. there. ?áIf your friend believes any of those weird things, go ahead and read this so you can discuss those with him and maybe even enlighten him.
Otherwise, I dunno. ?áRead Skeptic magazine, or do what I do and subscribe to The Straight Dope email newsletter. ?áMeanwhile, I do have some bookdart marked passages:
Skepticism is not a position; skepticism is an approach to claims, i[and] science is not a subject but a method."
David Hume is quoted as saying: "A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence."
Baruch Spinoza is quoted: "I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn human actions, but to understand them."
Re teaching the bible?áin schools as 'creation science:" ?á"To try to turn a myth into a science, or a science into a myth, is an insult to myths, and insult to religion, and an insult to science. ?áIn attempting to this, creationists have missed the significance, meaning, and sublime nature of myths. ?áThey took a beautiful story of creation and re-creation and ruined it."
Re evolutionary adaptation: You know the mind puzzle of the infinite number of monkeys on typewriters randomly coming up with Shakespeare's plays? ?áWhat if it's not random, but operates under the principle of Natural Selection? ?á "Richard Hardison (1988) wrote a computer program in which letters were 'selected' for or against, and it took an average of only 335.2 trials to produce the sequence of letters TOBEORNOTTOBE. ?áIt takes the computer less than ninety seconds. ?áThe entire play can done in about 4.5 days."
(Ok, if you understand evolution & natural selection better than most folks, you say 'um, no, natural selection is random, it doesn't have a goal...' ?áBut consider, that is a selective process, and there is a goal, in the sense that a creature better suited to its current situation is a goal. ?áSo, I believe that Hardison wrote this algorithm as if 'Hamlet' is the sequence of letters, aka creature, best suited to its current environmental situation.)
So, I dunno about recommending this to you. ?áGood book if you feel you either need to argue with believers or be more skeptical yourself, especially if you've not read much on the subject yet. ?áI'm sure there are better books available, however, if you want to hunt for them."
Show Less
LibraryThing member Razinha
I wonder if Michael Shermer’s book should have been titled “Why Do People Believe Weird Things” because it is more an exploration than an exposition. Well-researched and documented, the extensive bibliography alone is worth a look. There is no one answer for all in these pages, because the
I am always amazed at Shermer’s prodigious reading capacity and diagnostic skills. Shermer distills tremendous amounts of information into usable bites. In one chapter, he describes preparing for a debate with Duane Gish (of creationist movement fame) by reading all of Gish’s published material as well as re-reading the entire Bible. I don’t know that I could stomach more than one of Gish’s books. It is interesting to note Dawkins and Gould both would have tried to dissuade Shermer from agreeing to the debate, not because they were afraid he’d lose, but they refuse to put non-science on the same stage as science. By debating, they feel that at least one someone in the audience would take away from the event the idea that creationists and IDers actually had a right to sit at the table of science. Shermer debated many of the "weird" in the late 80s and early 90s; I'm not sure if he still does.
The book opens with a discussion of the importance of science and skepticism and provides a list of 25 reasons {why we may be wrong about things}. Subsequent sections and chapters address specific “weird” beliefs. [list]. The Holocaust denial discussion is a good example of how to refute that which most of us feel shouldn’t need refutation. History is a particularly challenging body of knowledge, for rarely, if ever, is it recorded without prejudice. Still, rational reasoning can be applied. He explains the principle arguments posed by the deniers, and spends an entire chapter illustrating convergence of data to support the commonly understood accounting of the events of the Holocaust.
Another good section addresses the most common creationist/IDer counter-arguments to evolution and the fallacies… While neither exhaustive nor particularly detailed, it nonetheless does give cocktail party talking points.
Shermer’s original conclusion as to why people believe weird things was in itself unsatisfying to me. He gives four broad reasons, and the one that makes the most sense, yet is the least defensible is “because they want to”. In the second edition of the book (the one I read), Shermer adds a chapter on why smart people believe weird things. I don’t think he really answers that question. He does explain that smart people are better at defending the beliefs they arrived at in a non-standard fashion. Further, smart people view their own beliefs as being based in logic and reason, yet they attribute the same beliefs in others to emotion. Telling. It is amusing to see and hear pedigreed scientists decry the pseudosciences and yet not see their own errors.
Shermer continues his study in two follow on books: How We Belive and The Science of Good and Evil.
Show More
range of weird beliefs encompasses the gamut of paranormal, alien abduction, religion, etc., each of which must be addressed in a different way. It is important to understand two things about Shermer’s approach in this book: he defines a “weird thing” as “(1) a claim unaccepted by most people in that particular field of study, (2) a claim that is either logically impossible or highly unlikely, and/or (3) a claim for which the evidence is largely anecdotal and uncorroborated”, and he pointedly writes in several places that he is not trying to belittle the person or beliefs, but trying to understand. Shermer is an accomplished skeptic, but more important than that, he is a scientist and science historian and brings that research background to the matter at hand.I am always amazed at Shermer’s prodigious reading capacity and diagnostic skills. Shermer distills tremendous amounts of information into usable bites. In one chapter, he describes preparing for a debate with Duane Gish (of creationist movement fame) by reading all of Gish’s published material as well as re-reading the entire Bible. I don’t know that I could stomach more than one of Gish’s books. It is interesting to note Dawkins and Gould both would have tried to dissuade Shermer from agreeing to the debate, not because they were afraid he’d lose, but they refuse to put non-science on the same stage as science. By debating, they feel that at least one someone in the audience would take away from the event the idea that creationists and IDers actually had a right to sit at the table of science. Shermer debated many of the "weird" in the late 80s and early 90s; I'm not sure if he still does.
The book opens with a discussion of the importance of science and skepticism and provides a list of 25 reasons {why we may be wrong about things}. Subsequent sections and chapters address specific “weird” beliefs. [list]. The Holocaust denial discussion is a good example of how to refute that which most of us feel shouldn’t need refutation. History is a particularly challenging body of knowledge, for rarely, if ever, is it recorded without prejudice. Still, rational reasoning can be applied. He explains the principle arguments posed by the deniers, and spends an entire chapter illustrating convergence of data to support the commonly understood accounting of the events of the Holocaust.
Another good section addresses the most common creationist/IDer counter-arguments to evolution and the fallacies… While neither exhaustive nor particularly detailed, it nonetheless does give cocktail party talking points.
Shermer’s original conclusion as to why people believe weird things was in itself unsatisfying to me. He gives four broad reasons, and the one that makes the most sense, yet is the least defensible is “because they want to”. In the second edition of the book (the one I read), Shermer adds a chapter on why smart people believe weird things. I don’t think he really answers that question. He does explain that smart people are better at defending the beliefs they arrived at in a non-standard fashion. Further, smart people view their own beliefs as being based in logic and reason, yet they attribute the same beliefs in others to emotion. Telling. It is amusing to see and hear pedigreed scientists decry the pseudosciences and yet not see their own errors.
Shermer continues his study in two follow on books: How We Belive and The Science of Good and Evil.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Tatoosh
This book includes a wide-ranging series of topics that touch on individuals’ and groups’ unusual beliefs. The summaries address issues such as philosophy of science, social-cognitive psychology, and popular psychology, but with several hard-to-classify outliers. My interest in the topics
Show More
varied, and I could seldom read more than a few pages at a time before turning to something else. Show Less
LibraryThing member ritaer
Started to reread this. But the author asserts rather than proves, especially annoying in a book that purports to teach that one needs reliable proof to believe something. On page 27 one finds the following sentence. "Shouldn't we know by now that the laws of science prove that ghosts cannot
Show More
exist?" I followed up by reading every other reference to ghosts in the index. On 28-29 the author compares ghosts to mental abstractions such as the law of gravity. I didn't find this especially convincing since it only addressed the false proposition that the law of gravity didn't exist before Newton named it. Page 33 continues this false dichotomy with an assertion that ghosts have never been confirmed to any extent. But to make this statement one should explain what would constitute confirmation. For example, if I am trying to prove that Vitamin D is essential to mammalian life, I need to assert something like "the rate of illness in the experimental group will be significantly higher than that in the control group." Or, if I am trying to establish that an endangered species has made a comeback, I could specify what evidence: den sites, evidence of feeding, excrement, actual sightings or photographs from trail cameras, dead specimens in the excrement or stomach contents of prey animals, I would expect to find. On page 55 the author notes that mundane explanations for odd noises should be ruled out before concluding that the noises are evidence of ghosts. Well, I don't know of any reputable paranormal investigator who doesn't do just that. Is there a highway or train track nearby that would explain noises or lights? is there an ill-fitting window to explain cold spots? is there a likelihood of a person faking evidence? But what, pray tell, is the scientific law that rules out the existence of unknown types of energy or substances? If we grant that radio waves existed before we developed radios what makes it _impossible_ for ghosts to exist in the absence of an ectoplasmeter? I suppose there may be such a law, but the author expects us to take it on faith. Ironic. Show Less
LibraryThing member aketzle
Fascinating stuff! Interesting thing this book taught me today - according to a 1990 Gallup poll, 19% of adult Americans claim to believe in witches. Witches! WTF?!
LibraryThing member BruceAir
Of course, Shermer knows that he's fighting ages of tradition. A good example of that persistence of irrational belief and behavior is Extraordinary Popular Delusions & the Madness of Crowds, originally published in 1841. And television continues to tout mountebanks offering old conjuring tricks.
Show More
But after reading Shermer you can wink back them. Show Less
Subjects
Awards
Language
Original language
English
Original publication date
1997
Physical description
384 p.; 5.29 inches
ISBN
0805070893 / 9780805070897
Local notes
library read {W}