• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories

What Does the JREF Do?

Dunstan

Illuminator
D
Joined
Jan 6, 2005
Messages
4,289
Seriously. I'm trying not to be a jerk about this.

But the recent server problems, and the predictable "let's raise some money for the Forum!" threads, have me thinking.

I've been bothered for a while about the way the JREF seems, in my opinion, to regard the Forum as a poor stepchild and a burden to the foundation rather than a means of carrying out its mission.

Evidence? Well, I wasn't around for the whole Bidlack/"95%" (or whatever the number was) brouhaha, but that at least hints that the JREF wasn't exactly embracing the idea of an internet community. More recently, there was the whole "naughty words" fiasco, where Randi appeared to go ballistic because of a couple of email complaints and impose an ill-thought-out rule on the Forum. And now, we have the Forum becoming borderline unusable, and the reaction isn't "we're going to figure out the problem and fix it!" but rather, "well, here's hoping the JREF decides it's worth spending the money to fix it."

It just seems odd to me that one of the recurring themes in all the "how do we promote skepticism" discussions -- whether here, or at TAMs, or elsewhere -- is "let's build communities!" And yet, here's a ready-made community, and it seems to be regarded more as a nuisance than an asset. If you want to promote anything in the 21st century, you need a web presence, and preferable an interactive one.

So if the Forum isn't a priority for the JREF, what is? The Challenge is coming to an end, supposedly because the JREF had bigger and better plans in the works that -- as far as I know -- have yet to be announced. Phil Plait's appointment seemed like a positive step, and I figured it would take a few months for Phil to get his feet wet and start providing some direction, but it's been quite a few months now. I can't remember the last time I heard Randi or the JREF mentioned in the media. TAM is fun and worthwhile, but it's also a fundraising event itself, so where is the money going?

Here's the JREF Calendar from the website, going back to November (as far as it lets me):
-- announcement of next year's TAM
-- Phil Plait book promotion
-- Skeptics in the Pub announcement (hey, there's that community thing again!)
-- Amazing Adventure announcement (another fundraiser)
-- another TAM announcement
-- promo for a Banacek performance (fine, but not something the JREF is putting on)
-- National Science Foundation event on creationism (again, not a JREF event)
-- Drinking Skeptically event (more community)
-- Houston Skeptics meeting (ditto)
-- James Randi lecture at UBC (at last!)

The "Support Us" page doesn't provide a ton of information, either.

So what, exactly, is the JREF doing? Operating a library in Fort Lauderdale? Running the SWIFT blog? Issuing a couple of scholarships a year?

Again, I'm not trying to start a "bash the JREF" thread. I'd be delighted to learn that the JREF is doing all sorts of things I don't know about. Maybe I haven't looked in the right places. Maybe the JREF is doing lots of stuff but not bragging about it enough.
 
While the forum issues are important I hope we don't just focus on that as Dunstan has raised an important question. "What does the JREF do?"

I haven't been tremendously impressed with what they have done recently and no longer give to them. I give to the Freedom From Religion Foundation, The Skeptics Society and the American Humanist Association because they seem more actively involved with church/state issues, organizing frequent lectures, actively lobbying, producing magazines and DVDs, etc.

I was a member of JREF for three years and honestly didn't have a great idea what they did. I would gladly give them money though but only if I knew it would go to run the forum as I certainly use it enough.
 
Before this descends into a techie vs. users squabble Dunstan did raise the important question of what does the JREF do?

Other than the forum issues, his list did seem to be pretty comprehensive from what has filtered through to me and on reflection it is rather feeble.

Randi's new YouTube video's were missing from the list and they are a great new addition - Is this Phil's influence? Promo' a bit weak though and hardly justifies "what JREF do". People such as Thunderf00t do better on a tighter budget.

The new SWIFT format isn't working well for me (Friday was SWIFT day) but that's more to do with me changing habits than a bad decision by JREF.

I covered (rather badly) Randi's lack of appearance in the forums in another thread and really got no further than speculation that he wants to spend more time on other things. It does seem to appear that he reads comments on his new videos though.

It's clear what is going or gone but less so where JREF are going.

If existing supporters, fans and forumites are asking the question something has gone awry somewhere.

Casual visitors won't bother to ask.
 
Last edited:
I will add to H3LL's comment about the new youtube stuff: JREF has spread its wings internationally with the launch of TAM London. Yes, I know it's more event stuff, but I think it's a clear indication that things are happening and the JREF is trying to reach a larger audience.

It is still really early days for the new leadership and it's often better to make small changes and experiments than overhaul everything and possibly upset the apple cart, so perhaps that's what's happening here. Were there not forum performance issues then the question probably wouldn't have come up, but having said that I do think it's important for those who are invested in JREF (whether that's time or money) to ask questions. I'm sure the answers are positive, too, it's just a case of communication.
 
tkingdoll said:
I will add to H3LL's comment about the new youtube stuff: JREF has spread its wings internationally with the launch of TAM London. Yes, I know it's more event stuff, but I think it's a clear indication that things are happening and the JREF is trying to reach a larger audience.

It is still really early days for the new leadership and it's often better to make small changes and experiments than overhaul everything and possibly upset the apple cart, so perhaps that's what's happening here. Were there not forum performance issues then the question probably wouldn't have come up, but having said that I do think it's important for those who are invested in JREF (whether that's time or money) to ask questions. I'm sure the answers are positive, too, it's just a case of communication.
Click to expand...

I'm really gald there's a TAM London - I'll be there - but isn't that just more preaching to the converted?

In other words, where's the 'E'?
 
Darat said:
Why is a TAM not part of the "E"?
Click to expand...

Surely everyone coming to TAM is more or less already aware of the issues it aims to discuss? It's preaching to the converted. I can see its benefit (and am not knocking it at all), but it's hardly "Educational" in terms of actually educating people about scepticism; not really.

The people that go to TAMs and similar events are already sceptics. What does the JREF do to educate those who aren't?
 
volatile said:
I'm really gald there's a TAM London - I'll be there - but isn't that just more preaching to the converted?

In other words, where's the 'E'?
Click to expand...

No, I don't believe it is preaching to the converted, I think it's about bringing together communities for a shared experience who will all come away having learned something.

Everyone at TAM learns something, unless you've hacked into all the speakers' computers beforehand and read their talks.

Now, there is a pricetag to TAM, which does mean some people are going to be excluded. That's why there is always a DVD of TAMs available afterwards. Yes, the social aspect is missing, but the education part is available to all. There is even some TAM content that is given away free via YouTube and such, and as pointed out, Randi has started video blogging. Could more be done to promote that? Yes, and given a little investment of time, planning and money, I am sure it will be.

The 'not preaching to the converted' ambition is also reflected in the choice of speakers. TAMs are not 'skeptic' conferences where the speakers all talk about fringe topics like ghosts or telepathy. They are Nobel-prize winning scientists (Murray Gell-Mann, Neil Degrasse Tyson, etc), they are entertainers (James Randi, Penn & Teller, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, etc), they are scientists with exceptional presentation skills or media experience (Richard Wiseman, Phil Plait), they are the centrepieces of popular culture (Rebecca Watson, who reaches hundreds of thousands of people via SGU and Skepchick), they are often household names (Richard Dawkins, Adam Savage) or people with whom 'organised skepticism' is not the first association you'd make (Ed Lu).

I can't reveal any of the line-up of TAM London yet, but it's more of the same philosophy. Speakers chosen not just for their achievements in their fields but also for their mass appeal. Skepticism goes pop, as it should. It's not an ivory tower, and I think the huge increase in TAM attendance over the years reflects that (TAM6 attracting somewhere near 1000 people).

Further, the PR coverage that TAMs attract reaches a much wider audience than those who plan to attend. This is 'stealth education' as it raises awareness of the existence of JREF and skepticism to the general public, who will then recognise the name when they Google for Sylvia Browne and find James Randi instead.

Go and look at the 360 people who have joined the TAM London Facebook group in the past 2 days. Then compare that to the 'average skeptic' in your mind of, say, ten years ago before TAM was started. This is a whole new generation of people, there's no way it can just be preaching to the converted because then where would all these new, young people have come from? They're not hardcore Skeptics-with-a-capital-S, they're the new ambassadors who will communicate to the general public that critical thinking is not a dogma, and thinking-before-you-believe is the way forward. And thus it'll spread. It might not please the diehard skeptics who don't accept compromise, but skepticism is spreading and it's due in much part to events like TAMs and the buzz they generate.

So yes, TAM is Education. I couldn't list what I've learned from TAMs. The people I've met, the books I've bought, the speakers I've heard, the friends I've made, the resources I've discovered, the opportunities I've gained - nope, this forum would crash if I gave you details of all of those things.
 
Last edited:
I certainly don't know everything and at the one TAM I went to I learnt a lot so I would say that TAMs are educational (as well as other things). Whilst I don't think the JREF should only help educate those already using scepticism I think it should be part of the JREF's goals to provide people interested in what its goals are (sceptics) the tools to help achieve the goals.
 
tkingdoll said:
...snip...

So yes, TAM is Education. I couldn't list what I've learned from TAMs. The people I've met, the books I've bought, the speakers I've heard, the friends I've made, the resources I've discovered, the opportunities I've gained - nope, this forum would crash if I gave you details of all of those things.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't have to be a long list to do that.....

Seriously well put, I think part of the problem "scepticism" and "critical thinking" and science in general has had in the past is that for a long time it was regarded as the domain of bearded men in white coats. That is changing and I really do think the likes of TAMs have helped that change along by providing different packaging for the same-old message.
 
Darat said:
I certainly don't know everything and at the one TAM I went to I learnt a lot so I would say that TAMs are educational (as well as other things). Whilst I don't think the JREF should only help educate those already using scepticism I think it should be part of the JREF's goals to provide people interested in what its goals are (sceptics) the tools to help achieve the goals.
Click to expand...

Exactly!! JREF gives tools via things like TAM to the people who already have some interest, and those people go spread it to everyone else. You start with the people you know will listen, they become, as I say, ambassadors.

Yes, more can be done. I truly believe it will be.

And I'd really like to see JREF doing stuff in schools but that really does take a huge investment of time and money and so may well not be on the cards for the immediate future.
 
Teek, are you helping with TAM London?

I seem to recall you helped Richard Wiseman IIRC with some promo' stuff and it would be some comfort to know you were on-board, so to speak.

Meanwhile, how have I missed that such a thing is happening? :jaw-dropp

.
 
H3LL said:
Teek, are you helping with TAM London?

I seem to recall you helped Richard Wiseman IIRC with some promo' stuff and it would be some comfort to know you were on-board, so to speak.

Meanwhile, how have I missed that such a thing is happening? :jaw-dropp

.
Click to expand...

Hey, you forgot that world record spoonbend I organised at TAM6 :D

Off-topic for this thread so will keep brief: yes, I'm organising TAM London from the UK end as it's rather tricky for JREF to do from the USA! There's a news thread in the 'TAM' section of the forum, or search Facebook for TAM London.

Back to the topic, I meant to say that the hiring of Phil Plait is itself huge progress, because not only does that secure a future for JREF with a trusted figurehead (Randi not getting any younger, sadly), it brings in new audience. And only a few weeks ago JREF announced that A Kovacs has joined them as Director of Operations, so we need to give her some time before we see stuff happening. Rome in a day and all that.
 
tkingdoll said:
Back to the topic, I meant to say that the hiring of Phil Plait is itself huge progress, because not only does that secure a future for JREF with a trusted figurehead (Randi not getting any younger, sadly), it brings in new audience. And only a few weeks ago JREF announced that A Kovacs has joined them as Director of Operations, so we need to give her some time before we see stuff happening. Rome in a day and all that.
Click to expand...

Yes, I suspect that this issue is partly the JREF being in a transition period, partly the JREF not communicating the things it does as well as it maybe should, and partly me just forgetting things I already knew about.

I agree that TAMs have been a great success and do promote the mission (though that still leaves the question of where JREF contributions go, since my understanding is that TAM is a net money-maker), and I think Phil Plait was a great choice -- and someone who obviously appreciates the importance of internet communities.
 
tkingdoll said:
So yes, TAM is Education. I couldn't list what I've learned from TAMs. The people I've met, the books I've bought, the speakers I've heard, the friends I've made, the resources I've discovered, the opportunities I've gained - nope, this forum would crash if I gave you details of all of those things.
Click to expand...

Oh, that's all well and good. And it is good. I don't doubt that everyone who attends TAM picks up some valuable knowledge.

But it doesn't feel enough to me. It doesn't feel like outreach. It doesn't feel like it reaches people who aren't already of a somewhat sceptical bent, if you see what I mean.

I love the whole TAM concept. It's bold and exciting and fantastically interesting. But is it really educating the general public and bringing scepticism to the people?
 
volatile said:
Oh, that's all well and good. And it is good. I don't doubt that everyone who attends TAM picks up some valuable knowledge.

But it doesn't feel enough to me. It doesn't feel like outreach. It doesn't feel like it reaches people who aren't already of a somewhat sceptical bent, if you see what I mean.

I love the whole TAM concept. It's bold and exciting and fantastically interesting. But is it really educating the general public and bringing scepticism to the people?
Click to expand...

Well, I think it does reach the general public, indirectly, as per mine and Darat's comments, but yes, there are loads and loads of other things that could be done as well. I hope they are done, and I don't expect that the future plans of JREF will be reduced to 'events organising' but it is early days for Phil so I'm OK with giving them chance to formulate and communicate their plans. What's cost-effective must also be considered. For example, if you have to roll out a new database system across a company of 500 people which has 50 managers, do you pay for training for all 500 people? Nope, you pay for training for the 50 managers, who then go and train their teams. OK, stretched analogy, but you get my point. JREF can't afford to reach a million people, but it can afford to reach a thousand, etc.

However, there are bigger questions that your post raises, for example "what is skepticism and is it in a format that the public want anyway?". My opinion is that most people neither want nor care about this concept of 'skepticism' as a thing. But they do want to not get conned or ripped off. They don't want to be made to feel gullible, but they do want reliable information when they choose to look for it. They don't want to be lectured or nannied, but they do expect that frauds will be exposed. They need, perhaps, a watered-down version of the baloney detection kit. Not all of it, because the fringe stuff (psychics and such) doesn't actually affect the majority of the population.

To my mind, such education starts in schools, which is why I would love to see JREF doing stuff in that arena. Equally, the media needs good, balanced resources, and things like this forum are invaluable to people googling for their pet topic and for students.

You have to start with small battles. Reaching a captive audience is a start, and now that's gone international you could look at it as giving something to the community which makes the existence of JREF and this forum possible. But as to whether it's enough, I agree, it's not enough. No amount of money could be enough, a team of ten million people wouldn't be enough, worldwide, to counter all the stuff that actually harms society (anti-evolution, alt meds, holocaust denial etc). It is small steps but TAM is growing which means there's some foundation for the next step, whatever that may be.
 
Dunstan said:
I agree that TAMs have been a great success and do promote the mission (though that still leaves the question of where JREF contributions go, since my understanding is that TAM is a net money-maker), and I think Phil Plait was a great choice -- and someone who obviously appreciates the importance of internet communities.
Click to expand...

I am in no way party to any financial information about previous TAMs, but I do know that Las Vegas conference costs have gone through the roof in the past two years, so (just speculating here), it's entirely possible that the profitability of TAMs is not what it was. As to where the money goes, JREF posts annual accounts online which can be read by all. I haven't got a link but I think there are threads about it. I have no idea how many JREF members there are so no idea how much revenue that scheme brings in, so maybe it's just a case of operational costs eating up what resources there are?
 
Darat said:
Why is a TAM not part of the "E"?
Click to expand...

Good question, and I think it depends on what is meant by 'educational'.

The common thing I hear much of the time in response to this is 'I learned a few things at TAM'. Sure, I picked up a few bits of interesting trivia, and some fascinating snippets of information, and I guess by that I've also 'learned' a few things. However, to feel this equates it being educational, IMO, is stretching a long bow. It's no different to the continued approach amongst many teachers to view transmission communication as 'education', when time and time again it's been shown to near ineffective.

It seems to be a rather constant cry from skeptics that education needs to be addressed. Yet when I ask what this means precisely, I don't get much of an informed response. Strange how skeptics blow the horn on evidence-based decisions and scientific evaluation, and yet when I inquire about educational goals and communication methods I get classic comments that boldly state education and communication are the same thing.

I had a great chat with Randi at last TAM as I interviewed him for a radio documentary here. A lot of what he had to say was quite inspirational, but it was disappointing to hear some of his views on education, which sounded more like rhetoric than informed opinions on pedagogy or educational strategies. He has a number of advisors on matters of science, yet I couldn't seem to get him to tell me who (or even whether) he had anybody advising him on matters of education strategies. It felt almost as if education was one of things which didn't need evidence to form an opinion on.

I'm sure I'm seen as pedantic in this regard, however having been in a science communication / education field for a number of years, I can tell you it's far from a simple duck-feed of trivia that equates scientific or critical literacy. Considering I'm part of a rather influential research organisation that takes science education damned seriously, and relies on being informed on how people learn and how to communicate effectively with the public on matters of science and science literacy, I can't help but see the JREF's efforts as somewhat amateurish. It will be interesting to see how seriously Phil takes this charge, however so far there's not much to go on. I guess it's a case of 'watch this space'.

Athon
 
Folks--

You ask what the JREF does. That's a fair question.

I understand your feelings and the reasons you ask this. The JREF is important to all of us, of course, and we all have opinions. Right now the JREF is in a bit of flux, as you all know, and so sometimes it's not clear what's going on. I've been President for a few months now, and there has been a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes where you don't see it. But change is happening, and I look ahead to see the JREF doing a lot more good stuff in the years to come. So let me step in and give you a little bit of info on what the JREF is doing, and what we plan to do.

Continue to build community

First and foremost, the website in general and the forum in particular are very highly valued by the JREF. We get support from you, we get feedback from you, we get people coming to TAM from you, and we get ideas from you. I live my whole life online these days, and I know just how important this series of tubes is.

Also, if there is one thing that sets the JREF apart from every other skeptical group -- besides having Randi! -- it's our community. That means you, and that means here. Please read the announcement in this subforum about the server, but to synopsize: getting the website running smoothly and quickly is a very high priority for us. I know how aggravating it is to get an "access denied" message or to wait for a page to load. We've been working on this a long time with the help of our web host, and we're approaching a solution.

The other major way we build community is through the TAMs. The TAMs have multiple purposes: education, motivation, and community-building.

We invite speakers from different fields, and they all have different things to offer. At every TAM I sit in the audience and learn about biology, psychology, magic, history, politics, and sometimes even a little astronomy. Better yet, I see how leaders in the field apply their skepticism, and that helps me be a better skeptic. We can all learn from each other at TAM.

Is TAM preaching to the choir? YES. As it should be: we need a periodic motivational kick in the seat of our complacency, to get us up and out and doing something. Robert Lancaster's paper presentation motivated me to go out and do more personal skeptical acts, and to target what I do when it's needed. Tim Farley, a TAM presenter, started up whatstheharm.net, and I've sent countless people there. I could give you a dozen more examples, easily. Preaching to the choir is a good thing, because the choir then goes out and preaches to others. Teach a man to fish...

And TAM is a chance to meet old friends, and make new ones. I love TAMs because I get to see people I otherwise never would, people I count as excellent friends. How many people do you know here on the Forum whom you can't wait to get a chance to meet IRL? I love seeing all the people at TAM, and seeing how they stick together long after the meeting is over. That sense of community is not to be trivialized, and TAM is a serious force multiplier. There's no bigger skeptical conference on the planet. That's community.

I'll note we also donate money to Skepticamp, and have supported other such efforts over the years. All of this goes toward building that which we need so desperately: a planetary community of critical thinkers.

Educate

The JREF has been doing educational work for years. The Swift newsletter, Randi's "radio" show, talking to the media, and talking to the public are all ways that's been done. One of my overarching goals as the new president is to strengthen this effort considerably. I have lots of ideas, as does the staff, on how to do this. I won't go into too many details here, as I'd prefer to roll them out as they're ready. But I have a lot of experience in the educational community, and a lot of contacts there. I plan on fully leveraging these.

Remember too we offer $10,000 in scholarships every year, and I'd love to see that number go way up. That money has, over the years, helped many intelligent and hard-working people in their research pursuits.

Chase down antiscience wherever it lies

The JREF has used the Million Dollar Challenge for years as a tool against antiscience, and we have plans for the future to continue dogging those who think they know more about the laws of nature than the Universe itself does. We still get applications for the Challenge, and the list of potential applicants is essentially endless.

The Swift blog/newsletter is where we attack antiscience in print. A new effort is Randi's weekly video, which is doing quite well on YouTube, and he contributes audio to The Skeptics Guide to the Universe as well. We are also a resource for the media, a place where they can get information about thew way things really work.

I plan on increasing the impact of all those efforts. A lot. But we have to try things first and see how they go. Can we do better with Randi's videos? Make them simpler, or add to them, do interviews, have a weekly live chat? Can Swift be made better, easier to read, more effective? Sure, we can try any or all of that. But those take time, and thought, and careful work. We need to get our toehold first... but once we do, our grip will be firm.

Cost

All this costs money. Even though we are a small group, the operational costs are staggering... and don't forget we just hired two new people! We make up some of those costs with TAMs, the Amaz!ng Adventures, and straight donations. But the forum costs a lot to run, salaries have to be paid, utilities add up. The $1M can't be touched for this, and right now, you may note, the economy isn't exactly unicorns and sunshine.

So we need to raise more funds. We have some plans to do this, including revamping the membership scheme, seeking out larger gifts from charitable donors, and continuing the TAMs and other events. This takes a lot of effort -- remember, there are only a handful of us pulling all this off!

If I were prone to think that way, I'd say it was a miracle that the JREF has done so well. But I know it's actually plain old hard work.

Conclusion

OK, that was a lot of verbiage. Let me summarize:

JREF builds community through TAMs, the forum, and sponsorships.

JREF educates people, again through TAMs, as well as online and in person.

JREF fights for reality.

What of the future? I want to expand our reach. I want to expand our footprint in the educational community, in the media, and in the public. I want people to look to the JREF as a place where they can get information about reality.

My wife once told me, "You know what I want to see as the JREF's future? Whenever some scam artist comes up with some scheme to bilk people out of money, their first thought should be, 'What if the JREF comes after me?'"

That would rock. But even more, I want to minimize that crook in the first place. I want an educated public, one that understands how to think skeptically, think critically, so that scam artists fade away. They'll never disappear totally; they're a virus. But we can damn well make sure they hurt as few people as possible.

That's why we're here, and that's what we'll do.

Note: I'll drop by here when I can to see how this conversation is going. I can't promise how often -- there's so much to do! -- but I will read what everyone says.
 
Quite a comprehensive explanation there Phil. Thanks for taking the time to write it. For the most part, I couldn't agree more. The community Randi has formed via the JREF is its greatest strength and its most significant legacy. However, let me see if I can address the 'education' part a little more clearly.

Skepticism is a difficult thing to pin down in terms of being something to educate people in. It's not difficult to communicate a conclusion that we support, such as the inefficacy of homeopathy or to outline why the moon landing was not a hoax. It is necessary to have these views out in the community to oppose the views of those who promote pseudoscience. However, accepting these conclusions does not equate skepticism.

If we accept that skepticism is a philosophical epistemology that says nothing can be known with certainty, we need to understand how to influence a person's epistemology. Unfortunately many skeptics believe skepticism is set apart by its demand for evidence in belief formation, which is an approach doomed to fail given that you'd be hard pressed to find somebody - skeptic or non - who doesn't feel they rely on evidence to arrive at their beliefs. It's the value placed on a set of values regarding that evidence which distinguishes skeptics from the community, and educating people in these values requires more than good marketing or simply communicating opposing beliefs.

One thing we can therefore all agree on is that skepticism - whatever it is - is linked intimately with thinking critically. This is not something that can be taught with transmission- based communication, unfortunately. It relies on teaching people how to think about their world, in effect changing their values in regards to information. Doing this is a complicated thing.

Stating that radio shows and TAM is educational in this effect is therefore misleading. They might communicate skeptical concepts and conclusions, but do they really educate people in such a way that is important in promoting a set of thinking skills? Do they give people the capacity to change how others think, or just reinforce the conclusions we've already arrived at? These are important questions which should be addressed by a foundation that calls themselves educators. That might well be the case, however we need good evidence of that, which is unfortunately absent. Relying on anecdotes and good feelings is not something we'd accept from others, so why do we accept it ourselves when it comes to answering the question 'are we effective?'

Imagine a church calling itself an educational foundation simply because it teaches its faithful a-priori conclusions. They might say the very same thing as us; a gathering could be described as educational because it taught them some new facts or reinforced their faith. Yet considering the JREF stands for thinking critically, it isn't enough to have people come away feeling they've got some new content - the word 'education' needs to be evaluated with view of the ultimate goals of the foundation.

I agree that there is no problem preaching to the converted. However, the JREF needs to descide if it is merely a beacon for the converted who already exist, where 'education' refers to the provision of preformed conclusions, or if it is interested in educating people who lay outside the fold in a better way of thinking.

Athon
 
Last edited:
Darat said:
I certainly don't know everything and at the one TAM I went to I learnt a lot so I would say that TAMs are educational (as well as other things). Whilst I don't think the JREF should only help educate those already using scepticism I think it should be part of the JREF's goals to provide people interested in what its goals are (sceptics) the tools to help achieve the goals.
Click to expand...

What he said!! (bolding mine)

Seriously, there are a number of paths out there that the curious and skeptically-inclined can follow to learn more. But a lot of it seems to be much more about debunking specific claims than about teaching skeptical thinking, good test methodology, etc.

I am in the unusual postion of having attended a TAM without having done more than dip my toes into the Forum; it was only after having a lot of entertainment and education blasted into my being for 3 days down in Las Vegas that I started to look into the online information.

I still regret missing the "how to investigate a haunted house' workshop due to travel schedule. That's what I think is one of the more valuable things the JREF can provide. So, yes, provide some Education to the confused layman; but also, please, provide growth and learning opportunities to the skeptical.

Will anyone forget the ballistics guy--the same day he lectured on some methods he used for devising and running tests in connection with a specific crime--correcting Penn Gillette on stage, and refusing to rush to a conclusion?! That's what kind of education I'm paying for...

Just my thoughts, as usual, Miss Kitt
 
Last edited:
Let's not forget the people James Randi, the JREF and the Forum have inspired in to positive action for skepticism. Robert Lancaster and Rebecca Watson for example.

Who knows who may be inspired next ?
 
Phil, thanks for the detailed response. I appreciate it, and I look forward to hearing what's next.
 
tkingdoll said:
So yes, TAM is Education. I couldn't list what I've learned from TAMs. The people I've met, the books I've bought, the speakers I've heard, the friends I've made, the resources I've discovered, the opportunities I've gained - nope, this forum would crash if I gave you details of all of those things.
Click to expand...

Should we start calling it TAME? :)

We learn everyday. If you asked the average person what they learned today, most would probably say "nothing". But that is clearly false. We learn everytime we read the newspaper or watch CNN. As you saiud, we learn at TAM too. It's just hard to quantify what exactly.

Had Rebecca never attended a TAM, would their be a Skepchick.org? Hard to say, but I suspect the people she met at TAM might have inspired her to do it.
 
athon said:
Stating that radio shows and TAM is educational in this effect is therefore misleading. They might communicate skeptical concepts and conclusions, but do they really educate people in such a way that is important in promoting a set of thinking skills? Do they give people the capacity to change how others think, or just reinforce the conclusions we've already arrived at?
Click to expand...

I disagree with you here. Teaching people how to be skeptical is only one thing we teach them. You can be a good critical thinker, but if you don't have evidence you can't convince anyone, so getting that data from speakers (like Ben Goldacre, for example) is important.

Also, Richard Wiseman has talked several times on how to think, not just what to think. So have many other speakers. We also have workshops about skepticism, including how to spread the word. The paper presentations do this as well, by example -- Robert Lancaster is a shining example of that, and many more are readily available.

So yes, I have no problem at all calling TAMs educational.
 
The Bad Astronomer said:
I disagree with you here. Teaching people how to be skeptical is only one thing we teach them. You can be a good critical thinker, but if you don't have evidence you can't convince anyone, so getting that data from speakers (like Ben Goldacre, for example) is important.
Click to expand...

I totally agree, and said as much in my post. Supplying the content is essential, and there have been good examples of that at TAM. What I'm questioning is the efficiency of this when it comes to changing how people think. Skeptic groups have a hard task on their hands when it comes to that - if teaching people critical thinking resulted merely from the transmission of information, I'd have no problem with calling it educational. For example, if the foundation's goal was to provide the population with a list of facts and conclusions as educational resources, then sure. But educating a new generation in how to think critically is a different matter.

Also, Richard Wiseman has talked several times on how to think, not just what to think. So have many other speakers.
Click to expand...

Wiseman's talks have been important pieces of the puzzle, that's for certain. In order to understand why one needs to think critically, they need to see the fallibility in the mind. At no point am I saying that TAM offers nothing - I just question how well it achieves the JREF's goal on education.

We also have workshops about skepticism, including how to spread the word. The paper presentations do this as well, by example -- Robert Lancaster is a shining example of that, and many more are readily available.
Click to expand...

Ah, interesting point. I totally agree that TAM informs people on ways of 'spreading the word'. In many cases, 'the word' (as necessary as it is) consists of more information. I love Robert's work, and would never suggest it's unimportant. However it alone will not create a critically minded generation. I'd even question just how effective some of these modes of communication being promoted are in leading to good thinkers, rather than simply reinforcing the skeptic stereotype.

In the end, what evidence do we have that we're educating people outside of the skeptical community to be good thinkers? It's easy to suggest that those who already possess such an epistemology have their conclusions reinforced at events such as TAM, or point out some anecdotes, yet we wouldn't accept this from others.

To say people learned some things at TAM, therefore it's educational, is like an event being referred to as concerned with fitness because you get to walk around. It's not false, but seeing as this is a skeptic group concerned with educating people in how to think critically, I would have hoped it was founded with a little more research and understanding in pedagogy.

Athon
 
Let me start off this quick reply by stating that I haven't visited any TAMs and I'm a relatively new member on this forum. Ofcourse, that doesn't stop me from asking to myself "what do I gain from spending time at this forum". It is the natural question for anything you're newly involved with.

I regularly use this website to see if a certain topic has come up here, to find links to resources and useful pieces of evidence. That is - to learn stuff.

It is also an excellent place to discuss events or occurances with people who have a certain way of thinking. A way that appeals to me because it is often civilized and well-argumented. Which has to do directly with critical thinking and skepticism. You can learn a lot from the methodology that is used by these people; by examining their mode of thought when they deal with scammers and frauds etc. Education by example, as it were.

But that method requires a lot of effort and dedication and time and perhaps some enthusiasm from my side. Which means some spark must have been ignited in me already. Otherwise, why would I bother, right? And I think the same goes for the TAM meeting, as far as I have an impression of it. These are people who are interested in skepticism and dedicated enough to spend a few days out of town to be among the likeminded. And it's wonderful that they get motivated to want go out and 'spread the word', so to speak.

However, I think the issue Athon raised holds some weight. I see the forum as a great place to discuss and gather resources. TAM for building a firm offline community and motivating the members. Radio and SWIFT is often about reinforcing what we have going. But I'm not sure that the "education" part is sufficiently present throughout the activities that the JREF seems to undertake; that is, the path starting at someone being mildly interested in skepticism and turning this interest into a new critical thinker and eventually an ambassador.

I must stress that I have no real knowledge about educating people, except that I'm a student, myself, which is something else. I probably have no place at all in this thread, if I'm honest. But when I think of the JREF as being an "educational" platform, I'd like to see answers to questions like: How do you convey skepticism and critical thinking? How do you explain it to other folk? How does it work? How do you integrate it into your thinking patterns?

Och, what am I rambling... I quite like it here as it is.. The issue interests me from a theoretical-conceptual point of view, I suppose.
 
Ikarus said:
I must stress that I have no real knowledge about educating people, except that I'm a student, myself, which is something else. I probably have no place at all in this thread, if I'm honest.
Click to expand...

I think your views are well appreciated. If by nobody else, then by me. I tend to feel somewhat alone in these views sometimes. :)

I really want to stress that I don't think the work that's done is a waste or time, or has no role to play in education. I work in a field where there are people who do exactly the same thing, from a slightly different angle - I work with science educators and communicators. There is constant discussion and evaluation on how effective they're being, researching methods and processes, and asking how to reach beyond those who are already scientifically literate. In talking to them about 'skeptics', there are often smirks, uncomfortable looks or downright offensive remarks. In other words, skeptics simply aren't taken seriously. And it's easy to see why.

But when I think of the JREF as being an "educational" platform, I'd like to see answers to questions like: How do you convey skepticism and critical thinking? How do you explain it to other folk? How does it work? How do you integrate it into your thinking patterns?
Click to expand...

That's it. And, importantly, how do you evaluate your success? So far it seems to be in anecdotes and web hits, with little else. Yet if anecdotes are something to go on, I have a few where the 'spread the word' approach of some skeptic sites has done more harm than good.

Athon
 
Although I have been a skeptic most of my life, I didn't know it until I stumbled across JREF by way of some Shermer books. I starting reading the web site, signed up for a cruise to the Bermuda Triangle, and then joined the forum. I found a resource to help me articulate to others what I already knew. I brought four people with me to my first TAM. Those four, and two more (my sons) to the next. Those six, and two more, to the next.

One of those, a college undergraduate, was able to obtain a small scholarship through JREF. She comes from a family who views all alternative medicines as equal to medicine, and who thinks science education is a waste of time (especially for girls) when they could be out getting a 'real' job.

One of my good friends, like me, has subscribed to a number of skeptical publications, and we leave them not only in our business office reception area, but in various doctor and vet waiting rooms (stealth skepticism).

I used links I found here to talk my aunt out of using 'colonic cleansing' and a very healthy, athletic engineering student out of participating in a 'detox' diet of lemon juice and cayenne.

I started the Houston Skeptic Society in August 2008, and I'm up to 132 members. I've gotten large enough I'm having trouble finding free places to meet. Some of the people showing up had no idea why Intelligent Design wasn't valid science, or why chiropractic doesn't work for strep throat. I got a call from a local PBR station, wanting to talk to me about the recent Texas Board of Education vote on teaching evolution.

Now, I could have done all these things without JREF, and I've not made any huge impacts and changed the world, but I can see the ripples from my pebble.
 
Last edited:
The Bad Astronomer said:
Educate

The JREF has been doing educational work for years. The Swift newsletter, Randi's "radio" show, talking to the media, and talking to the public are all ways that's been done. One of my overarching goals as the new president is to strengthen this effort considerably. I have lots of ideas, as does the staff, on how to do this. I won't go into too many details here, as I'd prefer to roll them out as they're ready. But I have a lot of experience in the educational community, and a lot of contacts there. I plan on fully leveraging these.

Remember too we offer $10,000 in scholarships every year, and I'd love to see that number go way up. That money has, over the years, helped many intelligent and hard-working people in their research pursuits.
Click to expand...

An excellent post TBA, but what should one expect from the president of the JREF. However, I will focus on the internet, the educational considerations of this foundation and specifically the forum. While growing up the only means I had to learn anything, other then just personal experience, was from books or the teachings of others. We now live in an age where the amount of information available to any individual is so extent that it can boggle the mind. I never thought (though I hoped in my youth) that in my life time I might have direct accesses to the research papers, new ideas and new concepts in physics that are the latest developments currently available, without being at least some research student or on staff in some university. Not only is it the access to those research projects but the almost instantaneously available access to someone who could perhaps help you make some sense of that abundant information. Indeed, the public presence of the JREF needs to be expanded and that is now Phil’s responsibility (sorry dude). However, the web presence of this foundation and specifically the forums falls on us all involved. As its stated intent is primarily educational our primary goal on the forums should be to educate or be educated (hopefully both), well certain categories are not given to education so much as just relevant input, which should be educational in that regard. However, as a whole it is not just in some particular regard, as some forum on classic Mustangs or left handed threaded wing nuts might be, but a forum dedicated to critical and skeptical thinking. So let’s all give Phil a hand not just in taking over the president’s job of the JREF but also help make this age of almost unlimited instantaneous information more educational.

What does the JREF do? Only what we all make or enable it to do.
 
Last edited:
I'm really new here, but if I may add my $0.02. The JREF does for me what Penn & Teller's Bullsh!t, Banachek's demonstrations, Skeptoid, Skeptical Inquirer, Hitchins talks, Dawkins' books, Sam Harris' debates, and Randi on the Carson Show can't do.

The forum: It hosts a vibrant community of skeptics of all stripes where I can go to participate in discussions about things I think are interesting and important. I can't do this with some of my closest loved ones as feelings invariable end up being hurt.

TAM: It organizes TAM which, if it lives up to it's reputation, is worth every penny they make in profit. Not everyone who wants to make a profit can put together a conference like TAM.

Herding: When I realized what it means to say that "organizing atheists is like herding cats" it was a depressing moment. I know JREF isn't about theism/atheism necessarily I feel that to make large social changes you need organization. Having the JREF as a potential organizing force is tremendously valuable to me. (ETA: for example the "Dilute the Poll" effort from a couple of days ago. Loved it! Put me to work!)

I would love to see the day when the JREF becomes synonymous with reason and is a household name and the nightmare of every charlatan scamming people with lost loved ones / terrible diseases / etc.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom