• 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.

Michael Shermer vs. Michael Shermer

Rodney

Illuminator
R
Joined
Aug 28, 2005
Messages
3,942
According to -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Shermer -- Michael Shermer wrote this in his 2002 book Why People Believe Weird Things: "I became a skeptic on Saturday, August 6, 1983, on the long climbing road to Loveland Pass, Colorado after months of training under the guidance of a 'nutritionist' with an unaccredited Ph.D."

However, according to -- http://www.advunderground.com/interviews/2007/shermer0107.php -- this exchange took place earlier this year between Logan Kaufman and Michael Shermer:

Logan: "When did you first become what you would consider a skeptic? Was there a defining moment or did your general philosophy evolve with time?"

Michael Shermer: "No particular defining moment, but an evolution over time of my critical thinking skills, honed by scientific training, applied to more and more topics."

So, I guess Shermer's "critical thinking skills" have indeed undergone an "evolution over time."
 
Rodney said:
So, I guess Shermer's "critical thinking skills" have indeed undergone an "evolution over time."
Click to expand...
Yet another contradiction about evolution! You see folks, Darwin was wrong. Repent and accept Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour (pbuh) into your hearts!
 
Last edited:
Rodney, This could be the difference between defining has first skeptical action, and the build up of thought process. There are a number of different possible explanations including the possibility he changed his mind as to when he perceives he became "A skeptic".

Regardless, I think it is pretty safe to assume that at some point Michael Shermer became a skeptic.

What I find interesting Rodney, is your hate of any and all things skeptical.
It's as if you have an aversion to the truth.

Skepticism is merely making sure that one only accepts things which are true, and can be shown to be so with reliable, verifiable evidence.

I am not sure why you consider that to be such a bad thing, it is very odd.

Consider the following;

Someone claims:
Drinking a 40 ounce bottle of 100% ethanol is very good for you, it cleanses your liver.

Would it be prudent to be skeptical and ask for verifiable proof of this before proceeding to drink the alcahol?

Yes, because being credulous in this instance would result in death.

If no compelling, repeatable, verifiable evidence for something can be found, the claim should not be accepted.

When a claim does not contain an immediate danger to someone, and offers something which fulfils a desire, people often neglect to apply skepticism and accept the belief because it is appealing and offers comfort. Skeptics merely do not not neglect to apply the same level of skepticism to comforting claims.
 
Last edited:
I've done a similar thing. When people ask me about when I became a skeptic, I have given two sets of answers, both accurate and legit, though superficially they sound like they should contradict each other:

1. When "What the Bleep Do We Know?!" was in a few movie theatures, and I was anxious, at the time, to see it; only to feel like a sucker, after Googling the people interviewed in it.

2. There was no real, specific time. It sorta happened over the course of my life.

Here is how they reconcile:
The second one is true enough, because I did not really transform from a Woo to a Skpetic in one instant. My "BS Radar" actually developed throughout my childhood.
But, by the time the "Bleep" movie was playing, it was sufficiently developed so that I "felt" something was wrong with a lot of the stuff in that movie. Although, at the time, I had a hard time communicating this to the girl I saw it with (Who, at the time, believed a lot of it. Though, I hear she has since altered her mind on the matter, as well).

It was during my research into the "Bleep" characters, that I happened to notice Richard Dawkins, Penn & Teller, Julia Sweeney, etc., were going to be guests at TAM3, and I just had to attend it.

And, though I stuck with the crowd, ever since, it still took a couple of years for my brain to fully develop a scientific/skeptical attitude.

Long story short: You see a discrepency where none might really exist, if you open your mind to how they could both be true.




As a side note: I think it would be fun to see Michael Shermer debate himself. Maybe a former, Creationist version of himself. Or, perhaps two versions of him with different attitudes on Global Warming. Hmmmm....
 
Rodney said:
According to -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Shermer -- Michael Shermer wrote this in his 2002 book Why People Believe Weird Things: "I became a skeptic on Saturday, August 6, 1983, on the long climbing road to Loveland Pass, Colorado after months of training under the guidance of a 'nutritionist' with an unaccredited Ph.D."
Click to expand...

The book was published in 1997. The paperback version was released in 2002. What he wrote is actually "I became a skeptic on Saturday, August 6, 1983, on the long, climbing road to Loveland Pass, Colorado." The rest of the quote is an amalgamation of words from several sentences in the next two paragraphs, plus some made up bits.

I'm still amazed by how often I discover stuff is wrong when I take the effort to double-check it.

However, according to -- http://www.advunderground.com/interviews/2007/shermer0107.php -- this exchange took place earlier this year between Logan Kaufman and Michael Shermer:

Logan: "When did you first become what you would consider a skeptic? Was there a defining moment or did your general philosophy evolve with time?"

Michael Shermer: "No particular defining moment, but an evolution over time of my critical thinking skills, honed by scientific training, applied to more and more topics."

So, I guess Shermer's "critical thinking skills" have indeed undergone an "evolution over time."
Click to expand...

Ah, you have revealed the bogus foundation on which skepticism is built. I suppose that means we'll have to pack up and leave.

Linda
 
fls said:
The book was published in 1997. The paperback version was released in 2002. What he wrote is actually "I became a skeptic on Saturday, August 6, 1983, on the long, climbing road to Loveland Pass, Colorado." The rest of the quote is an amalgamation of words from several sentences in the next two paragraphs, plus some made up bits.

I'm still amazed by how often I discover stuff is wrong when I take the effort to double-check it.
Click to expand...

Thanks for making me feel bad... the actual book is sitting less than 30 feet from here.
 
Rodney said:
Michael Shermer: "No particular defining moment, but an evolution over time of my critical thinking skills, honed by scientific training, applied to more and more topics."

So, I guess Shermer's "critical thinking skills" have indeed undergone an "evolution over time."
Click to expand...
I don't suppose it occurred to you, Rodney, that this version is a hell of a lot easier to fit into a brief interview than recounting the whole 1983 bicycle marathon story. People who are interviewed multiple times about the same subject develop a shorthand to convey their important points. This makes the process easier for interviewer and interviewee.

Could you really not figure this out on your own?
 
Rodney said:
According to -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Shermer -- Michael Shermer wrote this in his 2002 book Why People Believe Weird Things: "I became a skeptic on Saturday, August 6, 1983, on the long climbing road to Loveland Pass, Colorado after months of training under the guidance of a 'nutritionist' with an unaccredited Ph.D."

However, according to -- http://www.advunderground.com/interviews/2007/shermer0107.php -- this exchange took place earlier this year between Logan Kaufman and Michael Shermer:

Logan: "When did you first become what you would consider a skeptic? Was there a defining moment or did your general philosophy evolve with time?"

Michael Shermer: "No particular defining moment, but an evolution over time of my critical thinking skills, honed by scientific training, applied to more and more topics."

So, I guess Shermer's "critical thinking skills" have indeed undergone an "evolution over time."
Click to expand...

Compare with:

Shermer wrote, "I became a skeptic on Saturday, August 6, 1983, on the long climbing road to Loveland Pass, Colorado"[4] after months of training under the guidance of a 'nutritionist' with an unaccredited Ph.D. After years of practicing acupuncture, chiropractic and massage therapy, negative ions, rolfing, pyramid power, fundamentalist Christianity, and "a host of weird things" (with the exception of drugs) to improve his life and training, Shermer stopped rationalizing the failure of these practices.[5]

Shermer began his undergraduate studies at Pepperdine University, initially majoring in Christian theology, later switching to psychology.[6] However, his graduate studies in experimental psychology at California State University, Fullerton led to many after class discussions with professors Bayard Brattstrom and Meg White, which is when his "Christian ichthys got away, and with it my religion."
Source
Click to expand...

Shermer's general philosophy didn't come to him during the "Biker Revelation". It was gradually developed while he was studying.

Isn't it wonderfully easy to understand things the way you want to understand them?

Especially when you leave out the part that proves you wrong?

Rodney? Why did you leave out that part? You thought nobody would check?
 
JoeEllison said:
Thanks for making me feel bad... the actual book is sitting less than 30 feet from here.
Click to expand...

Diagoras said:
Well, mine was only about 10 feet from me. :p
Click to expand...

:( I brought my used and well worn first edition hard cover to TAM3 to have Shermer sign it and maybe auction it off only to find they had 3 or 4 new ones for sale at the Skeptics Society table.

I left it with someone from JREF (probably Linda) for them to do with as they saw fit.
 
Last edited:
CFLarsen said:
Especially when you leave out the part that proves you wrong?
Click to expand...

Linda confirms that Shermer's book states: "I became a skeptic on Saturday, August 6, 1983, on the long, climbing road to Loveland Pass, Colorado." So how have I been proven wrong?

CFLarsen said:
Rodney? Why did you leave out that part? You thought nobody would check?
Click to expand...
No, I knew people would check. The rest of the quote has limited relevance, and Linda says it's not completely accurate anyway. But I'll e-mail Shermer and see what he says.
 
UnrepentantSinner said:
:( I brought my used and well worn first edition hard cover to TAM3 to have Shermer sign it and maybe auction it off only to find they had 3 or 4 new ones for sale at the Skeptics Society table.
Click to expand...


For UK posters: a UK edition was published a couple of months ago by Souvenir Press. A copy is sitting six feet away as I type this.
 
Rodney said:
Linda confirms that Shermer's book states: "I became a skeptic on Saturday, August 6, 1983, on the long, climbing road to Loveland Pass, Colorado." So how have I been proven wrong?


No, I knew people would check. The rest of the quote has limited relevance, and Linda says it's not completely accurate anyway. But I'll e-mail Shermer and see what he says.
Click to expand...

Linda who?
 
Rodney said:
Linda confirms that Shermer's book states: "I became a skeptic on Saturday, August 6, 1983, on the long, climbing road to Loveland Pass, Colorado." So how have I been proven wrong?
Click to expand...

Within the context of that chapter, it becomes clearer that he is referring to his doubt with respect to the various DIM therapies he was using in his training, rather than his appearance as a full-fledged skeptic.

No, I knew people would check. The rest of the quote has limited relevance, and Linda says it's not completely accurate anyway. But I'll e-mail Shermer and see what he says.
Click to expand...

Please let us know his response. I'm on tenterhooks waiting to see whether it will be necessary to entirely revamp my philosophy of truth and beauty.

Linda
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom