Jun 14 2013

Brown Out: A Christian Reviews Proving History

My latest book Proving History has been negatively reviewed by Kevin Brown (a Christian book reviewer who confesses he is “not a mathematician or historian by anyone’s standard,” although I must note that one only needs strong primary school math to understand and evaluate the concepts in the book). Although he doesn’t actually have anything bad to say about the overall thesis of the book (the application of Bayes’ Theorem to history generally and Jesus studies specifically, it’s many discussions of method, and so on, beyond vague expressions of uncertainty). His objections are more of a Christian apologetical bent: he doesn’t like certain conclusions about a few random minor points made throughout the book, which he cherry picks because he thinks they are egregiously false, and he uses this to build a comforting narrative for himself that I must not know what I’m talking about, if I don’t agree with him on those few scattered items.

You can get an idea of his bias when he tells you my other book Why I am Not a Christian is “appalling tripe” and “by far the worst book I’ve read on the subject matter of atheism” and other colorful things, all because he despises the most commonsensical of atheist arguments (that a God who wanted x would do what was needed to achieve x). Brown is not a great thinker. And his intemperance and lack of objectivity show here. So when he gets to reviewing Proving History, you can expect a less than objective approach, and a similar sense of hyperbolic contempt. Indeed, for not liking the book (for no actually good reason, as we’ll see), he appears to be more obsessed with attacking it than than with any other book he has ever reviewed (he has so far written six articles on Proving History, where his previous record for any other book is only four, and that only once in twenty or thirty titles). Read the rest of this entry »

Jun 12 2013

Indelible Nirmukta

Two new blogs have launched at FtB over the past few weeks and as usual they are fascinating additions. (FTB’s front page has also been cleaned up a bit–more improvements to come).

The IndelibleAvatar for Tauriq Moosa on FTB Stamp by Tauriq Moosa [that's TAR-rik, not tar-REEK] surveys culture and ethics from an international atheist perspective, touching on all manner of issues in the area of “practical ethics, focusing on subjects like free expression, killing, sex, and religion in public life.” See So It Begins and On the Blog’s Name, and his bio at BigThink. He is currently a tutor in ethics, bioethics and critical thinking at the University of Cape Town, South Africa while pursuing a graduate degree at Stellenbosch University. His bio here says it all:

Tauriq Moosa writes on ethical matters in the news. He writes a regular blog at BigThink.com [Against the New Taboo] on so-called “taboo” issues, like incest, infanticide and cannibalism, examining whether evidence matches outrage. He has tutored bioethics and critical thinking. His writing has appeared in io9, New Humanist, Skeptic, Free Inquiry, and 3QuarksDaily.com. He has been recommended by The New Yorker, The New York Times Opinionator, and the Huffington Post. He debated Desmond Tutu for a BBC documentary, but lost due to a cup-cake interception. He hates dolphins, will never have children and loves good writing – whether as a novel, comic book, or TV series.

Avatar for Nirmukta on FTB.Nirmukta on FTB, meanwhile, is a joint blog for several writers affiliated with the Nirmukta community, which promotes science, freethought and humanism in India and South Asia (see Nirmukta.com). Their objectives include “provid[ing] a platform for the freethought and secular humanist community in India and South Asia,” advancing “a naturalistic life philosophy as a moral and fulfilling alternative to religion and spirituality,” “promot[ing] secular humanism, equality, social justice, communal harmony and human rights” as well as “scientific literacy,” supporting “the fight against pseudo-science,” and “work[ing] towards building a culture of secularism” and “a secular public policy keeping with our constitution [in India].” They explain that “nirmukta” is “a Sanskrit word that means freed [or] liberated” because “we are freed of dogma, orthodoxy and prejudice” and “uphold and celebrate freedom of inquiry and expression, guided by scientific temper and humanistic principles.” Like Moosa, they will be contributing an international perspective on politics, morality, culture, and belief from a perspective of atheistic humanism, and opening another door for FtB readers to hear about the thoughts and issues of South Asian peoples and cultures.

Check them out from time to time!

 

Jun 07 2013

Lindsay and WiS: Time to Be Heard at CFI

The CFI board meets in a week. The Ron Lindsay debacle should not be allowed to fall from the agenda. To make sure they hear all voices, please send your thoughts to board member Tom Flynn [at [email protected]].

I’ve discussed the outrage and disappointment felt in the community, and my own, in What Do Ron Lindsay and an Oklahoma Tornado Have in Common? which has links to several other movement leaders and writers, men and women, who have echoed much the same sentiments (from Dan Finke to Ashley Miller).

My own letter to the board read as follows:

Please forward to the board of directors of CFI.

I have voiced my thoughts on Ron Lindsay matter on my blog:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/3626

Though others have covered the women and feminism angle very well, I saw other problems with the way he handled Atheism+ in particular and my blog explains what I mean.

Both instances indicate Ron Lindsay doesn’t listen, doesn’t learn well, doesn’t stay informed, and doesn’t have a good grasp of how to maintain a positive rallying message for all worthwhile members of the movement. His talk could have been salvaged with diplomacy (though it did demonstrate a pervasive cluelessness), but the way he handled criticism was far worse, and far more indicative of his inability to effectively lead an organization serving the broader secular community.

There have also been several open letters with numerous signatories (and approving upvotes and comments) making the same and further points, so if you want to hear more voices before coming to a conclusion of your own to send to the board of directors of CFI, you can peruse these:

The damage Lindsay’s behavior is doing to CFI is already becoming evident as people talk about abandoning their affiliation with CFI (e.g. here). So I think the board really does need to hear as many voices as possible, so they don’t misjudge the scale of response his behavior has evoked in the atheist, humanist, and skeptic communities.

 

Jun 05 2013

Attack of the Lycanthropic Transsexuals!

Every once and awhile I find myself with enough time to clear the baffles, as it were, and address a silly argument that really needs answering but I’ve been too busy with pressing stuff to get to. This is one of those arguments. About six months ago, a Christian blogger on the Triablogue network (a Calvinist creationist inerrantist by the name of Steve) reacted in horror that I would think noted transsexual Lana Wachowski was “super cute” (see Lana Wachowski Is Awesome). In fact, of course, I said she was “funny, smart, eloquent, and super cute,” but when you’re a repressed sex-obsessed Christian the only thing I guess you would notice me saying about her is that she’s physically attractive (even though those other three attributes I also find sexually attractive in women, and supercuteness is a property of personality as well as appearance, but maybe all that’s a little too advanced for a creationist, way beyond first unit in sexuality 101).

Image from comedy comic How to Fight a WerewolfThis, plus another remark by noted atheist Jeff Lowder (a founder of the Internet Infidels and frequent blogger at the Secular Outpost), got Steve’s goat, prompting him to correct this perversion in the atheist community by claiming we were being illogical cowards in accepting transsexuals (and worse even, actually liking them!) in a post Steve titled Species Dysphoria (in mockery of the condition called Gender Dysphoria…which used to be called Gender Identity Disorder, so I don’t know if Steve meant this title as a double insult, since the condition had just been renamed in diagnostic manuals earlier that year, downgrading its status from a mental disorder in need of cure to a natural condition in need of acceptance, in parallel to homosexuality in that same diagnostic manual decades ago: see APA Revises Manual: Being Transgender Is No Longer a Mental Disorder).

Steve’s principal analogy is lycanthropy. No, seriously. But we have to build up to that.

Here’s Steve’s lead-in: Read the rest of this entry »

May 29 2013

Skeptical Humanities

I’ve found several websites dedicated to applying the principles of rational and evidence-based skepticism to subjects in the humanities. I’m looking for more. I’d like to expand the following list with any website that is worth bookmarking in this area, so everyone, please feel free to make recommendations in comments. I’m only looking for sites that regularly do this, and meet roughly the same criteria of utility and standards as those in the following list, and that are broader than single-issue sites.

Of course everyone knows Snopes.com. You might not think of it as a skeptical humanities site, but what Barbara and David Mikkelson do there is address journalism and urban folklore and history, which are solidly in the humanities.

And everyone knows FactCheck.org. They apply skepticism to journalism and advertising and propaganda, which is again skepticism in the humanities, yet often overlooked because we tend to compartmentalize politics as its own animal.

But fewer know about BadArchaeology.com. Run by archaeologists Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews and James Doeser, they also have an affiliated blog. I don’t consider this a single-issue site, since archaeology is broad enough in scope to make bookmarking the site in general worthwhile.

Similar to that is PaleoBabble, a prolific blog by Mike Heiser (a doctor of Hebrew and Semitic Studies) addressing bogus claims in archaeology and ancient history, mostly in relation to ancient aliens and other conspiracy theories about antiquity, but it ranges widely in that area. [Be aware that Heiser's position on traditional biblical religion might be less skeptical, though he does write skeptically about such fringe subjects as bible codes and apocalypticism.]

And in a different vein is Jourdemayne, by Skeptic magazine UK’s current editor Deborah Hyde, which applies skeptical analysis to folklore and legends (from vampires and werewolves to witches and whatnot).

But even broader is SkepticalHumanities.com. This ranges all over the humanities, from linguistics to art, philosophy, history, literature, rhetoric, aesthetics, literary criticism, pop culture, folklore, and cultural studies. Its many contributors (currently Bob Blaskiewicz, Eve Siebert, Mark Newbrook, and Jenna Marie Griffith) are doctors in English, Linguistics, and Visual Arts (or almost a doctor in that last case).

Are there more out there like this that I’m missing? Let me know!

Since my original post, here are my favorite additions from commenter recommendations:

Slate Star Codex. Applies skepticism to claims in and about “cognitive science, psychology, history, politics, medicine, religion, statistics, transhumanism” but also subjects like feminism and sociology. Which reminds me to also add our own…

Heteronormative Patriarchy for Men. Applies skepticism to both feminist and anti-feminist claims and rhetoric, and to claims about sociology, economics, and other related subjects in the study of gender, culture and justice.

Evidence Based EFL. Applies skepticism to all kinds of claims about language, education and the use of words. (See a recent post there about the reason for the blog. The author remains anonymous, but is clearly an expert in language instruction, and if I were to guess, they are an English teacher in Japan.)

JasonColavito. Applies skepticism to claims in history and folklore, from ancient aliens to psychic history to other fringe claims about the bible (like “Was Noah a Merman?” which is a really good example of the depth of historical context Colavito provides in his analysis of these fringe claims). Colavito is an author and a distinguished double-major in anthropology and journalism, and uses this background expertly to explore “the connections between science, pseudoscience, and speculative fiction.”

The Renaissance Mathematicus. Applies skepticism to claims in the history of science and mathematics (mainly 15th, 16th and 17th centuries, but occasionally ranging more widely). This blog is full of great skeptical writing on a large range of subjects and claims within its purview.

New at LacusCurius & Livius. Applies skepticism to claims about ancient history (principally Western, sometimes biblical). Has a handy list of common errors well worth exploring. But everything there should be used with caution. I found problems with some of the entries I looked at, generally key information is omitted that would qualify what is claimed. For example, on the flat earth myth, it’s true most educated elites in antiquity knew the earth was a sphere, but the masses often did not or even rejected the idea, and some of the most highly educated elites, like Lactantius, outright opposed the idea, calling it ridiculous (and Lactantius was and remained a revered Christian author throughout the Middle Ages). Accordingly, it’s entirely plausible that the illiterate crew of Columbus thought the earth was flat, but not likely that his financial backers did. This is the kind of information this site should be including. But as long as you are aware that its entries might not be complete, they have a lot of useful discussion and sourcing.

 

May 23 2013

Two Bayesian Fallacies

At INR3 in Kamloops I spoke on applying Bayesian logic to the study of Jesus along with the same principles we apply to dead religions (so as to avoid the “don’t offend the Christians” reaction to controversial claims…claims that would not be controversial if Jesus was not the object of worship of billions of loud, influential people). In Q&A philosopher Louise Antony challenged my application of Bayes’ Theorem to historical reasoning with a series of technical complaints, especially two fallacies commonly voiced by opponents of Bayesianism. I was running out of time (and there was one more questioner to get to) so I explained that I answered all her stated objections in my book Proving History (and I do, at considerable length).

But I thought it might be worth talking about those two fallacies specifically here, in case others run into the same arguments and need to know what’s fishy about them. Read the rest of this entry »

May 22 2013

What Do Ron Lindsay and an Oklahoma Tornado Have in Common?

Besides raging over the same weekend? Both are ignorantly destructive blowhards, apparently. At least Lindsay didn’t kill anything (except his own common sense, and maybe his career in secular leadership).

Lots happened while I was away at the fantastic Imagine No Religion conference in Kamloops, BC. I recommend it for next year, it has been by all accounts great every year, and this year was no exception. But while I was nestled safely up there enjoying good scotch and martinis, a tornado ripped apart a community in Oklahoma (I guess by Pat Robertson’s logic, it must have been full of feminists), and charity aid is much needed (atheists can help: please donate to Humanist Crisis Response through the Foundation Beyond Belief, an umbrella charity organization specifically geared for nonreligious donors).

And over the same weekend at the Women in Secularism conference in Washington, DC (where a zillion feminists actually were…evidently your god’s aim sucks, Pat), the president and CEO of the Center for Inquiry, Ron Lindsay (the sole male speaker), opened the conference by complaining about a campaign to ask men to listen to women before complaining about women, by telling women to stop telling men to listen to women before complaining about women…at a conference for women, funded by hundreds of women (since attendees forked over the registration fees, they actually paid for the conference). And then he acted like a stock sexist man and hysterically defamed the woman who criticized him for this rather than responding to her actual (calmly presented) arguments. Thus becoming the poster boy for a man who doesn’t listen.

I couldn’t make this stuff up. It’s stranger than fiction. Anyway, I needn’t blog about the Lindsay Faceplant because that has already been excellently done. If you want to get caught up on this debacle, I highly recommend, first, Jason Thibault’s brief live description of what Lindsay said at the conference and how obviously wrongheaded it was, and then Amanda Marcotte’s Open Letter to the Center for Inquiry, and then An Alternative Universe by Stephanie Zvan, Taking It Personally: Privilege and Women in Secularism by Ashley Miller, and The Silencing of Men by Rebecca Watson (the tone and quality of which has to be compared to the garbage Lindsay wrote in response: Watson’s World and Two Models of Communication…a title whose irony was completely lost on Lindsay, considering that he decided to respond to a reasonable and ultimately correct argument by hysterically accusing its author of “the most intellectually dishonest piece of writing since the last communique issued by North Korea” and then proceeded to pick at irrelevancies in her case and straw man what she said and ignore her every substantive point…nice).

[Since I first published this article, a really excellent analysis has also come from philosopher Dan Finke: Feminism, Civility, and Ron Lindsay’s Welcome to Women in Secularism, which reinforces many of the points well-made earlier by Adam Lee in Some Sadly Necessary Remarks on the #wiscfi Intro. Subsequently, Lindsay has since issued a lawyerly quasi-apology for comparing Watson to North Korea, yet in the very same remark treats her with veiled contempt by referencing the least relevant remark in her article and still ignoring her every substantive point, and all her evidence, and refusing to retract or apologize for any of his more substantive errors. This appears to be a trend with him. See the bemusing analysis of Nancy McClernan in Ron Lindsay's Non-Apology Apology over His Non-Welcome Welcome.]

Lindsay on Atheism+

One thing I’d like to add to these critiques is his equally-ignorant treatment of Atheism+… Read the rest of this entry »

May 14 2013

Appearing in Vegas and DC

This June I’ll be speaking at the SSA conference in Las Vegas and for CFI in Washington D.C.

CFI DC LogoFirst stop is CFI DC (June 9): I’ll be the guest speaker for the Voices of Reason lecture series for the regional CFI affiliate in D.C. from 5-7pm on Sunday, June 9 (2013). Price of admission is reasonable but varies, and can include a purchase of my book Proving History, which I’ll sign afterward. Full details at the CFI DC Website. Event is at Busboys and Poets on 14th & V, in the Langston Room (2021 14th St NW, Washington, DC).

Topic: Why Would We Think Jesus Didn’t Exist? I’ll explain the best case made so far that Jesus might not have been a historical person, and why that might be correct, examining the sources we have and the context of original Christianity, as drawn from my latest book Proving History and its forthcoming sequel On the Historicity of Jesus Christ.

Picture of the UNLV student unionNext stop is SSA Las Vegas (June 21-23): I’ll be one of many great speakers on all manner of awesome topics at the Secular Student Alliance regional leadership conference in Las Vegas, Nevada at the University of Nevada (Las Vegas). The conference is being held in the campus student union. I’ll be speaking in the Philip J. Cohen Theatre at 8pm on Saturday, June 22 (2013). Registration and accommodations vary in price. Full details at the SSA Conference Site. Some of my books will be sold at the venue and I’ll certainly sign anything you bring me. There are going to be three concurrent sessions. But I’m one of the keynote speakers so mine will be in a plenary session (along with Greta Christina, Nate Phelps, and Brian Keith Dalton, aka Mr. Deity; the previous night, there will be plenary session keynotes by David Fitzgerald, Sikivu Hutchinson, and Dan Barker, too).

Topic: Logic and Critical Thought in the 21st Century: What’s New and Why It Matters. I’ll be briefly summarizing new developments in our understanding of critical thinking (including cognitive science and Bayesian reasoning) as important additions to the old standards (logic and fallacies and the axioms of a skeptical stance).

 

May 13 2013

How to Be Skeptical of a Technological Singularity

Chris Hallquist has hosted a guest post on his blog by Luke Muehlhauser, whom some of you might remember as the brilliant and balanced author of Common Sense Atheism and Worldview Naturalism, and who is now executive director of MIRI. As Hallquist describes the post, “Luke does not intend to persuade skeptics that they should believe everything he does about the technological singularity. Rather, he aims to lay out the issues clearly so that skeptics can apply the tools of skepticism to a variety of claims associated with ‘the singularity’ and come to their own conclusions.”

The description is apt. Luke’s article is a bookmarkable cornucopia of references and links and brief discussion of each, for anyone who wants to know what all this “singularity” business is about–or who know at least what it used to be about, but want to know what it has evolved into. Basically, if you were to read only one thing on the subject, it should be this. Luke’s article is “What Should Skeptics Believe about the Singularity?” Go give it a look. It’s fascinating, not only on it’s intended subject, but as a model example of how to approach speculative claims like this generally.

May 09 2013

Two New Awesome Bloggers

FreethoughtBlogs has added two new fascinating bloggers, both from the UK: Ally Fogg and Yemisi Ilesanmi. These will really get the hackles up of the anti-feminist crowd, since one is a card carrying feminist (And black. And a woman. Chicken littles, begin your rant…) while the other is a voice of reason in the same debate, taking no label but soundly and prolifically defending gender equity and exposing and combating sexism of all stripes (from the innocent to the malicious). They both blog well on a variety of interesting topics from an atheist perspective; I’ve often found their articles a good read. And their values are largely on par with mine. For example, Yemisi is a major advocate for sex workers and legalization of sex work, and Ally is a firm believer in applying compassion, skepticism and critical thought to both feminism and the “Men’s Rights Movement,” and he actually practices what he preaches.

Photo of Ally FoggAlly’s blog is Heteronormative Patriarchy for Men (tagline: “splashes of mud from the trenches of the online gender wars”). His introductory post is Hello, Hello, Is This Thing On? And he explains what his blog is all about here, which is a brief but crucial read. His profile description is great:

Ally Fogg is a UK-based freelance writer and journalist, whose day job includes a weekly column on Comment is Free at www.guardian.co.uk and miscellaneous scribbles elsewhere, mostly on issues of UK politics and social justice. This blog is dedicated to exploring gender issues from a male perspective, unshackled from any dogmatic ideology. Ally is often accused of being a feminist lapdog and an anti-feminist quisling; a misogynist and a misandrist; a mangina and a closet MRA, and concludes that the only thing found in pigeonholes is pigeon shit. He can be contacted most easily through www.allyfogg.co.uk or @allyfogg on Twitter.

Photo of Yemisi IlesanmiYemisi’s blog is YEMMYnisting (tagline: “proudly feminist, proudly bisexual, proudly atheist”). She is a Nigerian lawyer and human rights activist and author of Freedom to Love for All: Homosexuality Is Not Un-African. She has a Masters of Law in Gender, Sexuality and Human Rights and is presently based in the UK. Yemisi is also a trade unionist, a poet, a plus size model, and “a passionate campaigner for equal rights, social justice and poverty alleviation.” Not only her blogging but her background exemplifies that: she holds or has held positions in several Nigerian political organizations and international trade unions. To learn more about her you can check out her introductory post, Welcome To My World! (and more on the about-page of her website).

Yemmy also has a YouTube channel and has done some great videos on Atheism+ (e.g. Is the Atheist+ Label Really Confusing? and What Are Anti-Atheists+ Afraid of? — don’t worry, that groovy Nigerian accent might bewilder some at first, but not for long!).

So welcome Ally and Yemmy and check out their blogs from time to time!

 

Older posts «

Switch to our mobile site

:)