• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Indian Skeptics

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.

I'm not saying otherwise. E.g., Africa is sadly underrepresented both here and at TAM. A good step to get more Africans to TAM is to get them to come on the forum. CSI(cop) has an excellent list of skeptical organizations, that's where we could start.

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

Hmmm....which culture does not?

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.

What do you mean, "change in behaviour"?
 
Hmmm....which culture does not?

Those which are individualist.

Sorry, that's not helpful. Basically it's more of a spectrum thing than an absolute polarity. However, some cultures will embrace values which reflect more community-based needs than individual-based values. Many western cultures, such as the US, UK, Canada etc. are more individualist, as the general discourse of the majority supports the rights and values of the individual above those of the wider community. For example, it's considered unfair to differentiate the rights of a customer in your shop based on whether they are your friend or relative. In collectivist cultures, such as many Asian and African communities, it is acceptable (indeed, any alternative would be deemed rude) to give benefits to your friends and family (such as discounts or better service) where you wouldn't to a complete stranger.

This is a very basic and oversimplistic comparison, but it gives you some idea.

What do you mean, "change in behaviour"?

To me, education encourages you in some way to alter your behaviour. I might learn new information, but until I have incorporated it into my belief structure and have acted upon it, having it influence my choices, I wouldn't call it educational.

Athon
 
Those which are individualist.

Sorry, that's not helpful. Basically it's more of a spectrum thing than an absolute polarity. However, some cultures will embrace values which reflect more community-based needs than individual-based values. Many western cultures, such as the US, UK, Canada etc. are more individualist, as the general discourse of the majority supports the rights and values of the individual above those of the wider community. For example, it's considered unfair to differentiate the rights of a customer in your shop based on whether they are your friend or relative. In collectivist cultures, such as many Asian and African communities, it is acceptable (indeed, any alternative would be deemed rude) to give benefits to your friends and family (such as discounts or better service) where you wouldn't to a complete stranger.

This is a very basic and oversimplistic comparison, but it gives you some idea.

We could also argue that widespread unions in the western cultures do exactly the same: Giving benefits to its members only.

To me, education encourages you in some way to alter your behaviour. I might learn new information, but until I have incorporated it into my belief structure and have acted upon it, having it influence my choices, I wouldn't call it educational.

I don't see it that way. New knowledge might enable you to do new things, but it can just as well be merely something new you learn. E.g., learning about rocks will not alter my behavior at all.
 
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.

I think Merko is right -it strains credibility to act like it's uncertain whether or not Colin Powell has any non-African heritage. Furthermore, I think Jamaica recognizes creolized populations.
 
Hi guys

I'm thrilled that this topic has gotten so much traction. I've been very busy catching up at work but here's the latest of where I am:

http://www.masala-skeptic.com/2007/01/latest-progress.html

I've also signed up for the skeptical community forum so I'll probably get the word out there as well.

For any of you who have sites, feel free to link to me and I'll be happy to link to you as well. My email address is masala.skeptic@gmail.com.
 
I see that something ottle said has led to a long conversation. I can relate. When she says "you should feed the dogs," it can lead to a two-hour argument over which of us need to spend 10 minutes feeding our increasingly annoyed dogs. (Species canis aggravatus.)

But unlike those discussions, I'm on her side here :)

When you're talking about reaching out to Indians specifically, you're doing something complex. I see some discussion about dividing people by either race, nationality, or culture. There's a difference in reaching out to, say, black people (race), Canadians (nationality), or Jews (culture). When you're talking about Indians, you're sort of talking about all three at once. Add to that their sheer numbers AND the inroads they are making into the West these days, and I think they deserve special attention.

Indians, in my admittedly limited exposure to them, tend to identify themselves as Indian first, whether they live in Mumbai or New York, whether they are Hindu, Muslim, or Catholic, and whether they wear saris'n'dots or U2 tees and blue jeans. Even ottle, who is the least "Indian" Indian many of you will ever meet, would probably say "Indian" first when asked to describe herself before giving her height or measurements or anything like that. Even before she'd say "skeptic" or "atheist."

I'm not saying Indians are unique in this. I'm saying that just taking a passive "everyone is welcome" approach is not enough to get through all that. They are each part of this vast community from their first breath, and simply inviting them to question something so integral to their self identity is not going to impress them. We have to evangelize a bit, push them into thinking critically about their assumptions, and help them to realize in their own way that they are still Indian (whatever that means to each of them) even if they become critical of homeopathic treatments.

Of course, we do the same thing now among us Westerners, but I think it's a little different. Our cultures aren't as connected to ESP and palm reading and all that other crap -- no one is going to feel like they are betraying fellow caucasians or fellow Midwesterners or fellow Brits by deciding that Tarot cards are no more magical than Uno cards. (With the exception, as usual, of American fundamentalism, but one thing at a time.)

It's not just showing them critical thinking skills and reports from double-blind tests. It's getting them to think that the supernatural crap is not a necessary component of being an Indian. And at this stage, I think the only people who can do that are other Indians. Non-Indians don't have the street cred.

I'm sorry if I'm rambling. My first post here :) And I have made a giant pile of generalizations, to which all of you know some exceptions. Hell, I married one of them ;)

mr. ottle

(P.S. I enjoyed meeting everyone at TAM. When ottle told me about all of you, I assumed you were each insane. I'm thrilled to know my intuition is spot-on ;) )
 
OK, who let him on the board?!

There goes my sanctuary! :)

You may stay, as long as you continue to agree with me about all things !!
 
OK, who let him on the board?!

There goes my sanctuary! :)

You may stay, as long as you continue to agree with me about all things !!

He is your husband. I though agreeing with you was his job? :rolleyes:

mr. ottle said:
I'm sorry if I'm rambling. My first post here :) And I have made a giant pile of generalizations, to which all of you know some exceptions. Hell, I married one of them :wink:

Generalizations are a bad thing. The only valid generalization is that generalizations are, generally speaking, not valid. ;)

Welcome aboard, though.
 
Generalizations are a bad thing. The only valid generalization is that generalizations are, generally speaking, not valid. ;)

Oh, I don't know. I think generalizations are okay when talking about a large population of people. I think they're only bad when they a) false, or b) used to predict the behavior of an individual.

But this is off-topic. I better not hijack ottle's thread, or she'll kill me. You know how Indians are :D
 
Oh, I don't know. I think generalizations are okay when talking about a large population of people. I think they're only bad when they a) false, or b) used to predict the behavior of an individual.

But this is off-topic. I better not hijack ottle's thread, or she'll kill me. You know how Indians are :D

I know. Indian food is murderous. :D
 
Ottle, did you try contacting the guy I mentioned in this thread? I do know that sCAM, especially folk medicine and homeopathy back in India are pet peeves for Prasad since he's done a couple of cartoons about that topic for the North Texas Skeptics newsletter.
 
Ottle, did you try contacting the guy I mentioned in this thread? I do know that sCAM, especially folk medicine and homeopathy back in India are pet peeves for Prasad since he's done a couple of cartoons about that topic for the North Texas Skeptics newsletter.

I haven't but I am planning on it today. Work has gone nuts on me and these people are expecting me to work instead of focus on my important extra-curricular activities. Will let you know how it goes!

Thanks!
 
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.
How do you raise your kids "black"? What the h3ll does that mean? My wife, who is Mexican, asked, "What the hell am I? Chopped liver?" when they asked about minorities. We don't raise our kids "Mexican" or raise them "mutt", we try to raise them to be good human beings. I think Colbert said it best, "They tell me I'm white but I can't see color."

I would venture that a lot of minorities are "under the radar" at TAM. I am sure most people wouldn't have singled out Mrs. Gulliamo as Mexican (unless they tasted her salsa or seen her dance :) ).
 
I would venture that a lot of minorities are "under the radar" at TAM. I am sure most people wouldn't have singled out Mrs. Gulliamo as Mexican (unless they tasted her salsa or seen her dance :) ).

Having attended TAM1-3 and seen the photos from TAM 4 and 5, I can state with confidence that there were few if any blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Indians, Creoles, Mestizos, etc. etc. who flew under the radar there. The mostly northern European nature of most attendees was blatently obvious and I don't think any 6' light brown-haired Steve Ramirez's could have thrown that power curve off by a significant margin.
 
I haven't but I am planning on it today. Work has gone nuts on me and these people are expecting me to work instead of focus on my important extra-curricular activities. Will let you know how it goes!

Thanks!

I e-mailed Prasad the link to this thread. Hopefully I'll have a reply when I go back to work tomorrow night. :)
 
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.

It's not just non-northern European nationalities that are under-represented, different ethnic groups as a whole are under-represented. Considering that TAM is a US-based convention, and the US is very ethnically diverse, why are different ethnic groups under-represented? We have many first generation and later Chinese, Koreans, Vietnamese, Indians, Hispanics,
African Americans, etc (in other words - many non-caucasians of European descent). Why can't these groups be more encouraged to pursue skepticism? They aren't limited by language and they aren't limited by proximity. The reason for their under-representation at TAM is most likely cultural (and for some minorities, financial).
 
I e-mailed Prasad the link to this thread. Hopefully I'll have a reply when I go back to work tomorrow night. :)

I traded emails with him the past couple of days. I've posted some of his links on the site today. Hopefully I can convince him to find some time to guest blog some time!!
 

Back
Top Bottom