Yikes! Skeptic-on-skeptic fight! This linked article you bring Glen begs
an interesting question: When does a skeptic just become just a contrarian?
I mean, what do skeptics publish but skepticism and critiques contrary to
the topic at hand? Are they obliged, as Dr. Steven Novella insists, on
presenting a fair and balanced position ... like with *Fox News*? Is that
the nature of their craft? Or is that left up to the reader?
So, what were they thinking when they invited Horgan to speak at their
convention?! It kind of reminds me of the parable of the *Scorpion and the
Frog* [somethime the *Snake Crossing the River*]:
The Scorpion and the Frog
A scorpion and a frog meet on the bank of a stream and the
scorpion asks the frog to carry him across on its back. The
frog asks, "How do I know you won't sting me?" The scorpion
says, "Because if I do, I will die too."
The frog is satisfied, and they set out, but in midstream,
the scorpion stings the frog. The frog feels the onset of
paralysis and starts to sink, knowing they both will drown,
but has just enough time to gasp "Why?"
Replies the scorpion: "Its my nature..."
Arguably, John Horgan is going to "rain on your parade" if you invite him
to comment on it. That is his nature. We can count on him for that. So
he would make a terrible guest at a cocktail party or to speak at your
daughter's graduation ceremony. 😕 "Daddy, it was just awful ..."
To be sure, "Criticizing ideas is well within the marketplace of ideas."
Eh?
Yes, in some way--reading the range of associated comments--I think they
were both hurt here ... but neither drowned. Didn't Dr. Steven Novella
also boot Richard Dawkins out of the same convention for something he
said? Not sure, but remember something, as I follow Dawkins also. Dawkins
too can be somewhat overbearing in his criticisms--but some say that he
became this way having to constantly defend his positions from the fringe
lunatics. But I always learn something, even in his diatribes, to be
sure. And that is what NeuroLogicablog is supposed to be all about. Yes?
The NeuroLogicaBlog covers news and issues in neuroscience, but also
> general science, scientific skepticism, philosophy of science, critical
> thinking, and the intersection of science with the media and society.
In the context of this discussion of skepticism, I really miss the
continued eloquence and prose of his friend Christopher Hichens. Dawkins
always said that his biggest fear would be to be on the opposite side of a
debate from Hitchens. Hitchens on Horgan would be awesome! But, somehow,
I can.t see them on opposite sides ...
It would be interesting to hear others comment here too about Horgan and
this incident. What do you think? I am not sure what to think, but I am
not surprised at the outcome. The linked article was, for me,
thought-provoking. Thanks!
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 6:34 PM, glen ⛧ <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I'm that way, too. To wit, I really enjoyed this article:
>
>
> http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/john-horgan-is-skeptical-of-skeptics/
>
> On 05/18/2016 05:13 PM, Robert Wall wrote:
>
>> Personally, as an outside observer, I tend to learn more from a critical
>> angle than from one
>> that is promoted from the inside by the promoters, who would be less
>> critical of their own work of course. His writings encourage me to look
>> deeper.
>>
>
> --
> ⛧ glen
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
