Skepticism can lose friends...

Soapy Sam said:
Talking a kid out of mischief is not the same thing as correcting an adult who holds incorrect ideas.
Click to expand...

I would argue that was not entirely true, both are the same it is just the level of tone used is just different. Each person you treat accordingly. I have known many children with an adult understanding and equally many adults who would be out-smarted by a 3 year old.

Whether it's worth the bother (to you or to me) depends on circumstances. For instance, if your boss believes in magnetic fuel enhancers and you work as a garage mechanic, his beliefs might well affect your job. That's the sort of situation where I would consider a move, if the guy would not believe evidence. He's not just dim- he's dangerous.
Click to expand...
How is that dangerous?

But with someone as stubborn as you describe, it likely would be futile to tackle him. I think it would be wrong in such a case to allow him to sread his nonsense to others, without pointing out to them where he was wrong.

I agree that actions speak louder than words, but words are useful too.
Click to expand...
I agree words can work but isn't it more down to how you wield them?

Anyone has both the right and the responsibility to both display and demand honesty and correctness in his dealings with others. Of course there are limits- and the fanatical woo-debunker is as much of a pain as many of those he seeks to debunk.
But to sit quiet and let others spread falsehood through ignorance when one knows the truth- this is (in my opinion) morally wrong.
At the very least, we should point out that sincerity is no guard against error.

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ - think it possible you may be mistaken."-Oliver Cromwell, to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.
Click to expand...

I did not mean to imply to sit and be quiet was the option but sometimes it is. If the counter-part decides to preach, he has a right to do so. So do you by return and this is what should be pointed out.
 
lionking said:
Good theory, but I went back to my room alone while everyone else went out partying.:) Is this the inevitable lot of the skeptic? If so is it worth it?
Click to expand...
Never lecture people. It's no fun doing, it doesn't work well on children, poorly on teens and faills completely with adults.

Tell funny stories instead. You can get a load of ammunition from the JREF archives. Being a sceptic is fun, we get to laugh about all those believer's sillyness. And because most people are semi-sceptic, you can laugh with them about the silly things other people believe.

Things you can talk about: The highschool experiment where people have to match their birthdays with horoscopes. Fragments from Randi's many debunkings of Geller and others. South Park's treatment of scientology, with Tom Cruise in the closet. Or more dramatic subjects, like terminally ill people who were duped by faith healers.

The first person to bring up a subject always has the advantage with the audience, because coming from him it all sounds so reasonable. So most neutrals side with him, and if you proceed to challenge you're automatically in the minority. It is group psychology, not logic that alienates sceptics. Be a comedian instead. Bring up a related subject yourself, with a funny story. If you make fun of scientology it doesn't matter if there are a few scientologists in the audience, as long as the others are laughing with you about Xenu's DC9-like spaceships.
 
Regarding the OP.

I usually weigh it up in this regard:


1.) Does my ongoing relationship with this person matter?

2.) Will this person give me enough respect to listen to, and consider my perspective?

3.) Will i have other chances to talk reasonably with this person?

-If the answer to number 1 is yes, then to proceed with giving my skeptical perspective i will need both 2 and three to be yes.

-If the answer to 1 is yes, 2 no, then 3 is automatically a no, and because of 1 i will not proceed.

-If the answer to 1 is yes, 2 yes, 3 no. You risk number 1. Not worth it.

-If the answer to 1 is no, i have no qualms about sharing my perspective. (although this situation is fairly rare)

If you ever offer information to someone which seems to contradict them, the immediate reaction is a defensive position. Once a person gets into this position is natural for them to try and counter what you are saying, even if it is the truth. It is a pride thing, and a natural instinct. If you have the person's respect, persistence and a lucid explanation may win out, but usually the best you can hope for is to leave them annoyed, but with the seeds of logic planted.
 
Why be friends with a person who puts no thought into another's opinion, or even attempts to try it.
 
AmyWilson said:
Why be friends with a person who puts no thought into another's opinion, or even attempts to try it.
Click to expand...

Exactly, Amy! Why be friends with someone like you who demands respect for their opinions without even asking others if they have any!

Who needs woo. They want freedom of speech for themselves and their woo-- but they sure don't want you to have the same. They want you to defer to whatever platitude-of-the-week they're proffering, but don't expect equal respect for your views.

Woo love to play the offended card when you don't buy into the woo with the same zeal they have. Woo needs others to prop up the delusion. You're no friend of a woo if you can't play along, eh Amy?
 
AmyWilson said:
Why be friends with a person who puts no thought into another's opinion, or even attempts to try it.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I'd rather nail my testicles to the coffee table and then run a marathon than be your friend.

It's true :)


.
 
Last edited:
Just to clarify- would you take the coffee table with you, or leave it where it was?
_____________________________________________________________________
 
You guys are funny. Hysterical even. I still won't forgive you for the image burned into my thoughts, however.
 
Time for the traditional Christmas dinners, let's see if skepticism can lose family also... ^^
 
Last edited:
articulett said:
You guys are funny. Hysterical even. I still won't forgive you for the image burned into my thoughts, however.
Click to expand...

Of the testicals, or the table been carried very carefully? ;)
 
Last edited:
Cardelitre said:
Time for the traditional Christmas dinners, let's see if skepticism can lose family also... ^^
Click to expand...
I spoke about my work Christmas party to friends and realtives at Christmas breakfast and dinner (yes, a long day) and thankfully they sided with me and couldn't believe in the barrage I received. So although my work colleagues are full of woo, my friends aren't.....
 
-Fran- said:
No, your definitely not alone, I guess most here can tell of similar situations. I once had a very similar situation with someone who had totally bought into the Dan Brown da Vinci code stuff. No one thanked me for that either.
Click to expand...

I especially hate that one. I mean come on, it's a fiction book, and not a very good one at that!
 
Drudgewire said:
The trick is to hang out with other smart-@$$ arrogant guys. That way when these situations arise you can just lob a few slurs back and forth at each other then laugh about it and go back to talking about football. :cool:
Click to expand...

unfortunately the slurs me and my mates direct at each other are usually about football...
 
Damien Evans said:
I especially hate that one. I mean come on, it's a fiction book, and not a very good one at that!
Click to expand...

I know! When I finally got around to read it I was totally non-plussed about what the big deal was :boggled: I had heard so much about how people were absolutely into this book that I expected something... I don't know, something people could get into :D I thought I had read the wrong book, or something. But then I saw a documentary about it (debunking its claims) and realized how much people really was buying into it. I thought the following this mediocre book got was way more interesting then the book itself, because it seemed so... unwarranted.
 
I actually enjoyed it, as a book. As a social phenomenon, or a historical theory - meh. But it made quite a reasonable fiction novel. Some of his other books are better though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom