Indian Skeptics

[Boo]

Claus,

While I agree there were many other nationalities represented at TAM, they were by and large from the UK, Australia and Northen Europe. Only a small handful were from South America and any travelling from the Middle East or Asia are ex-pats working and living there. Given that I did not meet everyone it is entirely possible that there were nationalities from other parts of the globe in attendance but not in any significant numbers.

This is what needs to change.


Boo

 

[Merko]

Here's some info about Indian skeptics' society Atheist Centre. Founded in 1940, so I think CFLarsen is wrong that this has only been going for a generation.

I'm also having a hard time figuring out about people's ethnicity in the US, btw. Former US Secretary of State Colin Powell was supposed to be 'black', but he doesn't seem darker than my own father. Gray hair too. At least ms Rice, who is as light-skinned as my mother, has black hair. Now I can see mainly from the facial bone structure that these people probably have some partial African ancestry, I'm still kind of puzzled about how ethnicity is assigned in the US.

 

[Dave1001]

Here's some info about Indian skeptics' society Atheist Centre. Founded in 1940, so I think CFLarsen is wrong that this has only been going for a generation.

I'm also having a hard time figuring out about people's ethnicity in the US, btw. Former US Secretary of State Colin Powell was supposed to be 'black', but he doesn't seem darker than my own father. Gray hair too. At least ms Rice, who is as light-skinned as my mother, has black hair. Now I can see mainly from the facial bone structure that these people probably have some partial African ancestry, I'm still kind of puzzled about how ethnicity is assigned in the US.

Merko, I'm guessing you're latino? You're right, the history of racial identity in America is much more complicated, in part because it's changed dramatically a few times in the course of our history, and currently we're in a transitory phase, without national consensus on on how racial identity works. I'm sure latino and other immigrants are contributing to our current confusion (positively, in my opinion).

In the twentieth century, from 1930-1999 people that were called multiracial (or mulatto, since many were white/black/american indian mix) were reassigned to the black category, probably either (1) because of the eugenics movement that peaked in the 1930s, where a large acknowledged miscegenated population was an embarrasment, or (2) to help assimilate the children of southern european, irish, and jewish immigrants into a clearly defined white community, or for both reasons.

So in the 19th century Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice would both have been called mixed race, or mulatto specifically. but 1930-1968 there was little if any public acknowledgement of the history of racial mixing in the USA. Starting with Tiger Wooods, mixed racial categories are again being acknowledged in the USA. On the 2000 census, people were once again able to be identified as mixed race, and about 7 million people (2 1/2 % of the population) did so. For the multigenerational descendants of earlier racial mixing, identity is in a transitory state. Some identify as light-skinned blacks, but others, like DLC chair Harold Ford, Jr. and actor Terrence Howard have embraced a multigenerational, multiracial identity.

I hope this helps.

 

[Merko]

Merko, I'm guessing you're latino?

No, I'm as white as they come, with in-bred ancestors from the north of Sweden for many centuries back (my grandfather was a genealogist). Possibly some great-great-grandmother from the north of Finland, but that's about as much diversity as it gets.

Looking at some more Condoleeza pics it seems she's probably a bit darker than my mom.. but, definitely closer to my mother than to black people from Nigeria, Somalia or other countries where people are, well.. black.

 

[DJ dB]

re: minorities underrepresented at TAM

Personally, I would rather focus on involving ANY people in critical thinking for now, & worry about the equal opportunity act later, once it poses an actual problem.

 

[Merko]

I think it is a problem. Most people aren't caucasian. If most people at TAM are, then this must be because we are bad at attracting people outside of this subgroup.

Of course, there are other skeptic circles than the friends of JREF, such as the one I linked above. But clearly, if we could find out a way to reach more groups, then surely that would be very good. I found it very interesting to see the Korean show that Randi took part in and which we saw clips from at TAM. I think it proves that there's certainly no reluctance on the part of Randi or the JREF to get involved with other ethnicities. Of course, few Koreans know English well so we can't expect a huge crowd of them coming to TAM just because they saw Randi and agreed with his skepticism after seeing that show.

So in the end.. yes, it is a problem, but it's one of those things where it's not much use arguing that there is a problem, unless you have some sort of solution to propose.

 

[ottle]

I apologize in advance for the long post. Work went nuts on me today and I didn't have a chance to reply to all the great commentary on this thread!

I agree that Randi could have handled that question better. Does anyone have any ideas why TAM, and presumably the JREF, is such a largely-white organization? Do whites as a group tend to be more culturally or ethnically prone to skepticism and/or atheism than other groups?

Edit: to follow GG's point, there did seem to be a lot more women, and many younger people, at TAM this year than last year. Not much progress on the racial/ethnic compisition, though.

I think that is what I am hoping to change. I think it's more a question of trying to find other like-minded folks who are of a different ethnic background, rather than try to go out and 'convert' anyone. I just don't think I have that in me

What I do find remarkable among subcontinental communities is the prevalence of acceptance of all manner of supernatural beliefs as matter-of-fact. Not just the strong acceptance of the major religions and some of their arcane and archaic requirements, but also the unquestioning belief in homeopathy, ayervedic, astrology, anti-vaccinationism, evil spirits, etc, etc. So much so that many of the societal ills which beset the region can be sheeted home firmly to these beliefs.

Agreed. I think one of the things I need to do is investigate the Indian community outside of India. I think there are probably a lot of young people who have been born in the US who don't have that really strong tie back to India and who are more likely to be open to critical thinking around the things they believe.

Perhaps instead of trying to convert we need to focus on education. Provide all people with information and acceptance, make them feel welcome, offer them a safe place to examine what they believe and why. If we can do this then we are truly the James Randi Educational Foundation.

I'm rapidly coming to the same conclusion. My initial instinct was to sort of stay away from religion - that's too hard a nut to crack up front. Unfortunately, SO MUCH of the myths and mysticism in India are based around religion, so I am not sure that's possible. So maybe I just need to try to research myths and whatever scientific research has been done to debunk them. Sort of like a desi snopes

At least in the case of black and latino americans, it seems fairly obvious to me: christianity is a way to connect with the majority. Once one is a minority, I don't see much of a natural incentive to further marginalize by publicly embracing atheism. In contrast, white guys probably feel more majoritarian cover to be able to publicly explore unpopular ideas like atheism. That's my theory, anyways.

It's a good theory - it's probably even more true with the Indian community which is really tight (as I've said before... am I beginning to sound bitter?)

Odd. I met you (however briefly), and I didn't think of you as a "non-white". Whatever that means.

Yeah, I get that a lot - I'm 100% non Caucasian, which is what I meant. I hold an Indian passport, even though I've lived here for about 13 years and am married to a big white boy

I'd rather focus on bringing in nationalities than focus on gender or race. Let's create international skepticism, instead of compartmentalize endlessly. Which is focusing on what separates us, instead of focusing on what binds us together.

Personally, I would rather focus on involving ANY people in critical thinking for now, & worry about the equal opportunity act later, once it poses an actual problem.

I would like to think it's the sort of thing that will 'sort itself out' but I'm not convinced. I think that we have to tread lightly but face the issue head on (apply directly to forehead). I am definitely not trying to slice and dice the skeptical community - I am trying to provide an arena where minorities can feel comfortable discussing skepticism. I think all the reasons stated by many people above tend to cause minorities to stay away and if we dig in, we'll find a lot more people than we'd expect who just don't know that there are organizations like this one.

At least that's what I'd like to believe.

I think it is a problem. Most people aren't caucasian. If most people at TAM are, then this must be because we are bad at attracting people outside of this subgroup.

Of course, there are other skeptic circles than the friends of JREF, such as the one I linked above. But clearly, if we could find out a way to reach more groups, then surely that would be very good. I found it very interesting to see the Korean show that Randi took part in and which we saw clips from at TAM. I think it proves that there's certainly no reluctance on the part of Randi or the JREF to get involved with other ethnicities. Of course, few Koreans know English well so we can't expect a huge crowd of them coming to TAM just because they saw Randi and agreed with his skepticism after seeing that show.

So in the end.. yes, it is a problem, but it's one of those things where it's not much use arguing that there is a problem, unless you have some sort of solution to propose.

I don't have a solution. But maybe I can figure it out... that's really what I am trying to do - research the issue and see what I figure out.

 

[ottle]

I second the call to work with Girl_6/Skeptica on this subject. She is heavily dedicated to it, and I hope fervently it pays off for her.

Best of luck with your endeavours.

Great idea, Ottle. You have my full support, and I hope of other forum members too.

Awesome to see you taking some initiative, Ottle! Please let me know how I can help -- you can email me at skepchick@skepchick.org if you need anything.

I also offer any help I can give. It would be interesting to expand this to various indigenous cultures across the globe.

Thank you guys so much for all your support! I will definitely take you up on the offers! Once I have a better idea of what I need, that is.

I think my first step is research. I'll check out all the recommendations you guys have provided and continue with my own research. I just got a mailing list set up on the blog so feel free to sign up or check the blog as I'll be updating that as I learn more.

I've also got a couple of folks to agree to 'guest blog' - which is pretty cool. More to come!!

 

[Geek Goddess]

I'm also having a hard time figuring out about people's ethnicity in the US, btw. Former US Secretary of State Colin Powell was supposed to be 'black', but he doesn't seem darker than my own father. Gray hair too. At least ms Rice, who is as light-skinned as my mother, has black hair. Now I can see mainly from the facial bone structure that these people probably have some partial African ancestry, I'm still kind of puzzled about how ethnicity is assigned in the US.

At one time, it was based supposed blood lines, as there was even a 'one-drop' rule that said if you had any black ancestors you were considered black (although, at the time, you weren't black, you were Negro). I have some friends who are mixed-race, that consider themselves black. I read an interview with Halle Berry, the actress. Her mother, who raised her, is white, and her father is black. She said her mother raised her 'as black' because she felt that Halle would generally be perceived and treated as black.

Many places that ask for racial information (census, or college applications, for example) don't have choice of mixed or other - they force people to choose categories. One of my aforementioned friends told me she wants an option of mixed, and she feels (being mostly part of the black community) that the politicians are forcing her to pick 'black' rather than 'mixed' or 'other' so that she fits into some demographic category for targeting.

I read Colin Powell's autobiography. He's from Jamaica descent, as his parents immigrated when they were fairly young. He never mentioned having any non-African heritage, but again, he may not know.

 

[CFLarsen]

Claus,

While I agree there were many other nationalities represented at TAM, they were by and large from the UK, Australia and Northen Europe. Only a small handful were from South America and any travelling from the Middle East or Asia are ex-pats working and living there. Given that I did not meet everyone it is entirely possible that there were nationalities from other parts of the globe in attendance but not in any significant numbers.

This is what needs to change.

Quite agree. We need to focus on internationality instead of race, color, creed or gender.

Yeah, I get that a lot - I'm 100% non Caucasian, which is what I meant. I hold an Indian passport, even though I've lived here for about 13 years and am married to a big white boy

You're not Russian either??

I would like to think it's the sort of thing that will 'sort itself out' but I'm not convinced. I think that we have to tread lightly but face the issue head on (apply directly to forehead). I am definitely not trying to slice and dice the skeptical community - I am trying to provide an arena where minorities can feel comfortable discussing skepticism. I think all the reasons stated by many people above tend to cause minorities to stay away and if we dig in, we'll find a lot more people than we'd expect who just don't know that there are organizations like this one.

At least that's what I'd like to believe.

The more we focus on what separates us, or look for ways to separate us, the more people will feel unwelcome.

I don't have a solution. But maybe I can figure it out... that's really what I am trying to do - research the issue and see what I figure out.

An easy solution would be to invite them to this forum. Heck, we even allow Swedes!

 

[Margaret K]

Narendra Nayak

I have done some homework and the name of the Indian Skeptic who was at the Aussie skeptics conference is Narendra Nayak.
Go to the Aussie skeptics homepage - I can't tell you what the exact URL is because I am not allowed!!!!!!!.* Hopefully you can work it out from this description. World wide web acronym followed by a full stop, then skeptics followed by a full stop, then com then another full stop then au - click on JOURNAL - 2002 you will find a convention summary which gives you more info about Narendra's presentation.

* Whinge follows. Not happy about this at all! Why is 15 the magic number of posts one needs to submit to JREF before one is granted the privilege of embedding a URL in a posting? Isn't it just a little ironic that the one I was attempting to enter is the url for the Australian skeptics home page?

Obviously JREF (like JC) works in mysterious ways!

 

[H3LL]

I'm not sceptical of Indians.

I think there is good evidence that Indians actually do exist.






I'll get my coat.....

.

 

[AgingYoung]

.... I'm still kind of puzzled about how ethnicity is assigned in the US.

If you don't decide shortly before you're born they arbitrarily make the choice for you.

Gene

 

[SezMe]

I have done some homework and the name of the Indian Skeptic who was at the Aussie skeptics conference is Narendra Nayak.
Go to the Aussie skeptics homepage - I can't tell you what the exact URL is because I am not allowed!!!!!!!.* Hopefully you can work it out from this description. World wide web acronym followed by a full stop, then skeptics followed by a full stop, then com then another full stop then au - click on JOURNAL - 2002 you will find a convention summary which gives you more info about Narendra's presentation.

I couldn't find anything on that site, Margaret, but there is a Wiki page on Narendra Nayak from which you can find additional links. Hope this helps.

If not, enter the url leaving out the http part and use, say, "xxx" instead of "www" and someone will enter the real deal.

 

[fuelair]

I agree that Randi could have handled that question better. Does anyone have any ideas why TAM, and presumably the JREF, is such a largely-white organization? Do whites as a group tend to be more culturally or ethnically prone to skepticism and/or atheism than other groups?

Edit: to follow GG's point, there did seem to be a lot more women, and many younger people, at TAM this year than last year. Not much progress on the racial/ethnic compisition, though.

I am white, middle aged or so(60) and male. I am not a statistician or sociologist. But, I read/research a lot. To distill the material that helps answer this problem takes longer than I have time to write but I suggest starting with the Germs and Steel book, studies of minorities in the Sciences,studies of problem solving practices/procedures invarious cultures, etc. Then, hit the following: Conventions of /for regular people with a common interest (non-political) are relatively new (clubs/meetings no, conventions yes). At the time the move towards such conventions started (arguably the 30's) minorities tended to be, at best, unwelcome IIRC and none were being solicited as general practice to attend. That state existed through the early to mid 60's by which time changes in law and perception led to minorities being accepted - and sometimes even solicited - but ,to the best of my knowledge and observation, never present in the ratio they would be observed outside the conventions. In other words, TAM is running about normal for interest conventions.

Personally, when I am at meetings of interest groups, (for me, that is digital media pro, digital media general, science fiction, film, mystery etc.) and a person who is a minority - or not- shows up new, I do my best to make them welcome so they will be interested in coming back and I do not either hide or push that RIGHT NOW there is an under-representation of minorities in the fields I mentioned (the ones I am familiar with) but I note if they bring their friends and keep coming themselves.......

Part of that may be freely translated as we MA White guys need to work on it - but if you are one of the minority, you need to work on it too - tell your friends about JREF -warn them about flaming (as in posting something here without lurking a while - and getting shot down because you posted without backup or opened with "I'm a Christian and from what I read here you are all going to Hell!" or its' immoral equivalent- but get them in. If they try and like it, it's pretty clear to me they will be welcome.

Beyond that (as I used to say when we would have library meetings where yelling would occur that we needed to increase circulation - which was not reasonably possible based on applicable stats) all you can do is kidnap their first-born unless they show up at the meeting/convention. Not a good solution, but would normally work

 

[jon]

Don't suppose I can be any help, but the title of the topic made me think of Premanand, who comes across really well in this radio documentary.

 

[athon]

Absolutely. That's why it is great to see so many different nationalities at TAM, and here on the forum, too. Wasn't it just great to be able to meet and speak to several Danes at TAM5?

Differences in nationality don't immediately translate into sizeable differences in culture. The truth is, collectivist cultures are vastly underepresented at events such as these.

I don't think that JREF has ever not done that. After all, we've just been to the best TAM ever. If that wasn't educational, I don't know what is.

Claus, sometimes you're one of the most intelligent, clever people I know. Then you say things like this.

Can anybody else see the flaws in equating 'best TAM ever' with it being successful in educating people? Can anybody else see that just because it was entertaining, it does not mean that the JREF made the most of the educational options? Can anybody else see that for all the services the JREF offers, education is one which it can do so much better?

Athon

 

[CFLarsen]

Differences in nationality don't immediately translate into sizeable differences in culture.

That depends on where you come from. You come from a big country, while I come from one of a long line of smaller European countries. There are rather big cultural differences within Europe, so we definitely get a lot of different cultures at TAM, the more European countries we get.

The truth is, collectivist cultures are vastly underepresented at events such as these.

What is a "collectivist culture"?

Claus, sometimes you're one of the most intelligent, clever people I know.

Thank you!

Then you say things like this.

Can anybody else see the flaws in equating 'best TAM ever' with it being successful in educating people? Can anybody else see that just because it was entertaining, it does not mean that the JREF made the most of the educational options?

I don't know about you, but I learned a great deal at TAM5. Yes, it was highly entertaining, but certainly also a learning experience.

Can anybody else see that for all the services the JREF offers, education is one which it can do so much better?

"They do enough! You're wrong!"

Sure, they can always do more.

 

[Geek Goddess]

* Whinge follows. Not happy about this at all! Why is 15 the magic number of posts one needs to submit to JREF before one is granted the privilege of embedding a URL in a posting? Isn't it just a little ironic that the one I was attempting to enter is the url for the Australian skeptics home page?

Obviously JREF (like JC) works in mysterious ways!

It has to do with making sure people are really participating on the forum instead of coming over to post ads, spam, links to ads, links to spam, etc.

 

[athon]

That depends on where you come from. You come from a big country, while I come from one of a long line of smaller European countries. There are rather big cultural differences within Europe, so we definitely get a lot of different cultures at TAM, the more European countries we get.

Precisely. Hence simply evaluating the range of cultures represented at TAM through the range of nationalities is misleading. Having a rang of post-industrial, affluent countries does not equate the fact that there are many cultures under-represented.

What is a "collectivist culture"?

To give the simplistic, short definition; one which values the needs of the community as a whole over those of the individual.

I don't know about you, but I learned a great deal at TAM5. Yes, it was highly entertaining, but certainly also a learning experience.

Again, I wouldn't immediately equate that with 'educational', at least not in a way that I would describe it as being an educational conference. Yes, there are people who learned some new things. It was informative, indeed, but I don't feel this is quite the same as being educational. Maybe this is just another semantics debate, but it's like saying a newspaper is educational. It is informative, in that information is being conveyed, but no real change in behaviour is being emphasised by the paper's expression.

Athon