What Does the JREF Do?

[The Bad Astronomer]

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.

 

[athon]

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

 

[Miss_Kitt]

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.

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

 

[ail]

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 ?

 

[Dunstan]

Phil, thanks for the detailed response. I appreciate it, and I look forward to hearing what's next.

 

[The Professor]

What does the JREF do?
The JREF protects the Million until it is theirs.
Bottom line!

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

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.

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.

 

[The Bad Astronomer]

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?

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.

 

[athon]

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.

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.

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.

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

 

[Ikarus]

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.

 

[athon]

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.

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?

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

 

[Geek Goddess]

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.

 

[The Man]

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.

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.

 

[Typicallucas]

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.