Rating: 
Summary: Critical thinking or alien propaganda?
Review: A 1990 Gallup poll revealed that 52% of adult Americans believe in astrology, 42% believe in extrasensory perception, 22% believe aliens have visted the Earth, 41% believe that dinosaurs and humans walked the Earth simultaneously, 42% believe in communication with the dead, 35% believe in ghosts, and 67% have had a psychic experience (p. 26). Still others believe that Paul McCartney died and was replaced by a look-alike, that giant alligators inhabit the sewers of New York, that George Washington had wooden teeth, and that the Air Force kept the bodies of aliens in a secret warehouse following a New Mexico flying saucer crash. Michael Shermer wonders why these people believe such things.Shermer became a born-again skeptic on August 6, 1983, while bicycling up Loveland Pass, Colorado, following an intense training program of megavitamins, colonics, iridology, Rolfing, and other alternative, New Age therapies (p. 15). For those unfamiliar with his work, Shermer is the editor in chief of Skeptic magazine, a frequent contributor to Scientific American, and author of HOW WE BELIEVE and THE SCIENCE OF GOOD AND EVIL. In his first book, WHY PEOPLE BELIEVE WEIRD THINGS, he takes on subjects including Holocaust denial, psychics, creationism, alien abductions, Satanism, Afrocentrism, near-death experiences, recovered memories, Ayn Rand, and astrology. The result will either be interesting and entertaining for readers who share Shermer's love for critical thinking, or antagonizing for readers who instead identify with creationists, fundamentalists, New Age gurus or paranormal preachers. Most of the material included here was originally published in Skeptic magazine, and the 2002 revised edition of Shermer's book includes a new Introduction as well as an additional chapter on why smart people believe weird things. Shermer not only writes from personal experience, inasmuch as he previously believed in fundamentalist Christianity, alien encounters, Ayn Rand's philosophy, and megavitamin therapy, but he also examines his subject matter using the tools of scientific reasoning. "Most believers in miracles, monsters, and mysteries are not hoaxers, flimflam artists, or lunatics," he observes; "most are normal people whose normal thinking has gone wrong in some way" (p. 45). People fall into "fuzzy" thinking for reasons of consolation, immediate gratification, simplicity, moral meaning, and wishful thinking. In Chapter Three, "How Thinking Goes Wrong," he carefully examines the kinds of logical fallacies that allow people to believe weird (scientifically unsubstantiated) "nonsense," and concludes that when it comes to recognizing other people's fallacious reasoning, Spinoza said it best: "I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn human actions, but to understand them" (p 61). G. Merritt
Rating: 
Summary: A Call to Arms for Intellectuals
Review: After reading most of the reviews here, I came to wonder what people were expecting from this book. People seem have expected either 1) an in depth scientific or sociological explication of "why" people believe certain phenomenon; or 2) an academic paper, complete with lengthy citation, thesis statement, and that "in-your-face" style that one can only find in a paper in the CV of a PhD. Ladies and Gentlemen, you cannot do either of the above in 300 pages. But fear not. Shermer does you all one better: he reasons, presents, charts out, explains, and does so *without* that condescending in-your-face style one can only find in the CV of a Professor of History In Why People Believe Weird Things, Michael Shermer takes us through a well reasoned, insightful analysis of many of the social phenomena -- superstition, UFOs, Cult, Holocaust Denial -- which perplex and at times plague contemporary western society. But he does so in a way that is neither blatant nor condescending. He does not argue that people who deny Evolution, see UFOS, or propagate pseudo-science are suffering from neuropathological condition (as some people seem to have expected Shermer to argue in this book). He also argues that "rationalist" philosophers are always subject to their own errors in reasoning (see the chapter on Ayn Rand and her "cult"). Hence, Shermer attributes such beliefs to problems in people's reasoning and way of seeing the world -- eg., their "baloney detection kits" -- which can be understood in lieu of various flawed assumptions, logical errors and methods of argumentation. (See Chapter 3's "25 Fallacies"). Shermer is thorough, but clear in his style and presentation, as seen in his illustration of Creationist arguments and their proper responses. And for those philosophers of science out there, Shermer even deals with some of the problems raised for the "culture" of science -- a la Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions -- in way that is satisfying to the scientist and casual critical thinker alike. In the end, this book will not pass as an academic polemic against pseudo-thought. But it is here where the book finds its proper place. "Why People Believe..." is a clear policy statement for critical thinkers and intellectuals: To cleave with Occham's Razor, but at the same time *understand* and not bewail as Baruch Spinoza did so long ago.
Rating: 
Summary: Provisional Truth?
Review: Although the book was somewhat insightful, it seemed to have some illogical inconsistencies. The main inconsistency I found was Shermer's alleged "provisional truth" claim. The idea that things are either proved or considered provisionally true (as if truth were whimsical) or provisionally false is ludicrous.
If all things which I would call certain are only provisionally certain in Shermen's world, then his method of ascribing provisional certainty is only provisionally certain as well--So how can the author be provisionally certain that his provisonal method of ascertaining those things which are provisionally true, is provisionally correct?
Hopefully I've illustrated how rediculously absurd his idea of "provisional truth" is.
Furthermore, I was disappointed by the deceptive title of the book. His title would be more appropriate if he took out the word "Why," because his book simply shows that people believe weird things.
On a more positive note, Shermer does tackle many fallacies involved with superstition and pseudosciences. So if you're looking for a book that delves into the fallacies of such--especially those involving mind reading, I'd recommend this one.
Rating:
Summary: Thin in the why, but great on the what
Review: As a born-again Christian cum born-again skeptic, Shermer leads us through an astonishing range of bizzare and often frightening cults, fads, intellectual trends, and religion-based nonsense dressed up as science. Using a logical approach and simple common sense, he rips the veneer off of Holocost-deniers, creation scientists, UFO researchers, and other purveyors of bovine scatology. But he is a bit weak on exactly why people try to peddle these ideologies. After explaining the Holocost-denial fringe, he fails to delve into exactly why anyone would want to believe such things or, more important, why they would want to convince someone else. Though he does touch on the motives of the creation scientists, witch hunters and UFO researchers, he doesn't approach the possibility that these purveyors of nonsense are often opportunistic grifters who often don't even believe what they're trying to sell. Although he does explore opportunism briefly (as in the kind of "strike when the iron is hot" sort of activity especially common among creationists who are the first to pounce on any news of a new evolutionary theory that may contradict older ideas), Shermer does not expand on the fact that many of these "sciences" are indeed just repackaged religion or racism. Explanation of motives nothwithstanding, Shermer has presented a marvelous thesis with a fantastic grasp of what many of us would consider the obvious, and indeed is a bit sympathetic to the many who are taken in by these pseudointellectuals. He faults no one for any religious belief, and indeed encourages fait in many ways, but he decries dressing up pure faith as an excuse to repudiate what someone may or may not believe in. Especially enlightening for the non-scientist is the story of the scientific community's battle with the creation scientists in Louisiana, as a window into the world of scientific reasoning. Shermer has produced a wonderful balance of skepticism and tolerance, highly recommended to all lovers of truth.
Rating: 
Summary: merely a catalogue of fringe beliefs in America
Review: Despite the trouble Shermer takes to show how thinking can go wrong [emotive words, the ad hominem attack, etc.], and to berate hypocrites and people with faith in science, he seems completely unaware of these same traits in himself. What's particularly telling is that he mentions several times that he had previously been a "sucker" for numerous pseudoscientific claims, new age nonsense, and the like. He describes his change to skepticism as occuring suddenly, on a single day in 1983. Whether or not this is "artistic license", I couldn't say, but it certainly didn't encourage me to think highly of his capacity for logical thinking. It seems to me that he has simply exchanged other faiths for a new one: Science [as much as he protests that science isn't a subject but a method; it certainly should be only a method, but is unfortunately deified by many -- apparently Shemer included]. The book should more appropriately be titled "Weird Things People Believe", since there is very little information about the psychological, historical, sociological and socio-economic factors that cause or facilitate the belief or need for religion, myth/fairy tale, urban legend, etc. In fact, he seems more to gloat over his imagined intellectually superior position than to offer any useful information -- and in the case of Holocaust deniers, any actual evidence. He produces no references [though he does include a bibliography], and leans heavily on emotive words and a congratulatory "aren't you so smart not to believe this bunk?" attitude. I did enjoy several anecdotal passages, and the explanation of ESP and the law of averages was very educational. His "I Was Abducted By Aliens" anecdote in particular is quite funny and certainly worth a read. I find myself quite skeptical of many things, and having an interest in sociology I was hoping for something a little more scholarly and thought-out. "Why People Believe.." just didn't deliver. I quit reading about 2/3 the way through, after I decided the frustration I was experiencing and the lack of any real substance didn't warrant completion of the book.
Rating:
Summary: A collection of essays
Review: I admit that I have read works by Michael Shermer for quite a while and enjoy them very much. However I tends to agree with most of the reviewers here that many of the facts he presents are a bit dubious and that many of the arguments are weak too.
Sometimes his arguments are silly too. For example when discussing Dr Tipler, suddenly he goes on at length that as Dr Tipler is a first born so his thoughts are tainted.
Often when one debates with people for a long time you tend to fall into a trap of trying to score points, keep on going on with points that are dubious but you got away with, bypassing your opponents good points rather then considering the facts on their merit. This what I suspect has happened with the author.
Rating:
Summary: this book has issues
Review: I grew increasingly annoyed with this book towards the latter pages. Of course, I agree with Shermer's skeptical and scientific method of thought wholeheartedly, and the initial chapters were quite interesting as he explores what skepticism and the scientific method is, and why it's important. The chapters debunking things like alien abductions, E.S.P. and contact with the dead were interesting but felt too much like a usual-suspects list. This could be my fault however because I did have a subscription to Skeptical Enquire and maybe I'm too familiar with these subjects. The usual creationism-evolution debate is here, including 25 philosophical and scientific answers to creationist arguments against evolution, which is informative and would be helpful if you ever find yourself in a debate with a creationist. The section on the "recovered memory" movement was very good, and pretty frightening actually. It still amazes me the things people will allow themselves to believe, without any evidence at all, and that gets into what annoyed me about this book: I still don't really know. The "why" part of people believing weirds things is not adequately addressed. Another annoyance, where I became skeptical of Shermer himself as an unbiased skeptic, is the chapter about the Ayn Rand cult. Now, I've never read any of Rand's books, and am only slightly familiar with her Objectivist philosphy, but he devotes maybe a few sentences to why the philosophy is weird in the first place. Hey maybe it is weird, but I'm not going to take his word for it without a better explanation. Shermer himself used to be an Objectivist and an "enthusiastic follower of Ayn Rand", but now that he's seen the light all of a sudden it's weird. The chapter that made me close the book in frustration was "Pigeonholes and Continuums", which is an attempt to debunk the sensitive subject of differences in race and I.Q., and if there are indeed "races" at all. He touches on the Bell Curve, and mentions Phillipe J. Rushton as well, who has written very controversial things about Race and I.Q., and Shermer promptly dismisses him with a wave of the hand because some of Rushton's research is backed by a group called the "Pioneer fund", who supposedly has connections to Holocaust denial among other shady business. That's all nice, but what about Rushton's arguments, and why is Rushton weird? He mentions a controversial article by Rushton published in the "prestiguous" (his words) science journal 'Intelligence', which we know anything published is peer-reviewed, but then does very little to refute anything specific in this article. He handpicks a select few scholars on race who enforce the "safe" and acceptable view of genetic racial differences; that their really are none. They could be right and this has nothing to do with what I believe, but the chapter is presented in a way that strongly contradicts what Shermer preaches about and I could no longer take the book too seriously. 3 stars however because there are otherwise redeeming sections in this book.
Rating:
Summary: The People who should read this book, won't.
Review: If you've ever marveled at the absolute nonsense that some people believe, then this book should be fascinating reading for you. I found the sections on Creation Science and Holocaust denial to be the most interesting and informative. On rare occasion, Shermer let his personal feelings get in the way of the relentless rationality of most of the work, but it was all entertaining. I certainly found much food for thought. Unfortunately, the people who most need to read it probably won't.
Charles Gramlich
author of "Cold in the Light"
Rating:
Summary: good primer on critical thinking
Review: In the public library where I live I found four shelves of floor to ceiling books on astrology, out-of-body experiences, the emotional lives of plants, alien abductions, ESP, Atlantis, and similar nonsense. The same library had only three books on skepticism and critical thinking: Sagan's Demon-Haunted World, this book, and Wendy Kaminer's Sleeping with Extraterrestrials. (That ratio of nonsense to sense is probably a pretty good picture of the mind of the American public. We live in a world where cable networks present haunted houses -- there is not a single instance where it has ever checked out in the real world when actually investigated -- as serious nonfiction.) They each had a somewhat different emphasis, but they all deal with the problem in this society that few people understand what evidence is or what to do with it if you manage to acquire some. Ms Kaminer was better on the social dynamics of New Age folks, and Dr. Sagan was a better writer, but this is a solid introduction to developing mental antibodies to the crap constantly being fed us. Worth handing to a relative paying psychics for advice.
Rating:
Summary: The weird things people believe.
Review: My first impression upon finishing this book is that the title is wrong. Though Dr. Shermer addresses some issues about why people believe weird things, for the most part this book is more about the weird things people believe, and not so much about the reasons they believe them. For a better discussion about why people believe weird things, I suggest Thomas Gilovich's book "How we know what isn't so." Shermer devotes all of chapter one to expanding on the definition and characteristics of a skeptic, and all of chapter two to describing science. This lays the bedrock for his future discussions about pseudosciences such as creationism, and helps to make clear the reasons these pseudosciences and superstitions fail to meet the demanding requirements of science. He explains that a skeptic is not synonymous with a cynic. Instead, a skeptic is someone who questions the validity of a particular claim by calling for evidence to prove or disprove it. As such, skepticism is an essential part of the scientific method. Chapter 3 is a jewel. It describes 25 ways in which thinking goes wrong. Reading this chapter left me wondering if these rules for fallacious reasoning are not encoded somewhere as the rules for participation in some of the more notorious Internet newsgroups devoted to various mythologies. The second part of the book examines claims of the paranormal, near-death experiences, alien abductions, witch crazes, and cults. Although these stories make interesting reading, they are same examples of debunking we have seen for years. I, for one, would appreciate a fresher skeptical approach that is not so (apparently) reluctant to challenge the claims of institutionalized religions. Is transubstantiation any more credible than claims of the paranormal? Are alien abduction stories any less credible than the Book of Mormon's claims about a large, literate Hebrew society in America 2,000 years ago, that used horse-drawn chariots and steel swords? Are witch crazes any more significant than some Christians who let their children die rather than bringing them proper medical treatment? I think not, and I believe it is time for skeptics to broaden their portfolio beyond the usual array of paranormal activities and alien abductions. Shermer devotes chapters 9 through 11 to the conflict between creationism and evolution. This section of the book has a wonderful summary of the legal battles fought to keep the religion of creationism out of public schools. Chapter 10 has an excellent description of what is evolution, and a very brief summary of 25 arguments used by creationists against evolution, along with counter arguments used by scientists. Interestingly enough, Shermer offers very little in the way of direct evidence against creationism - of which there is a tremendous amount - and focuses mostly on how to defend evolution. Unfortunately, he has truncated his 25 arguments so much that they are of little practical use - especially against more polished debaters. Shermer admits this at the beginning of the chapter, and does offer an excellent bibliography of more detailed references for the reader. Shermer's defense of evolution bogs down when he encroaches on the idea that evolution is not a threat to religion. [This is how I interpreted Shermer, though he is not entirely clear about his personal feelings regarding this matter.] Science most certainly is a threat to some religions - creationism, for example (and Shermer argues throughout his book that creationism is a religion - which is why it should not be taught in public schools). It seems obvious to me that sometimes science does threaten religion (more some than others) - but that is religion's problem, not science'. Scientists should stop apologizing for that fact. In trying to sooth the potential conflict between science and religion, Shermer quotes Stephen J. Gould (one of my favorite authors). Interestingly, Gould (uncharacteristically) offers a spectacular example of some of the bogus reasoning Shermer discredits in chapter 3. Gould says (page 132): "Unless at least half my colleagues are dunces, there can be - on the most raw and empirical grounds - no conflict between science and religion." Here, Gould violates Shermer's rule 19 (overreliance on authorities - Gould's colleagues in this case). Then, Gould leaves us wondering if, instead, we are to consider the other half of Gould's colleagues (the half that apparently do not agree with him) as dunces. To his credit, Shermer provides a definition of religion on page 145 (though he offers no definition of God). I am not sure he makes the matter any clearer by doing so, however, since his definition of religion (as a method) places it as the antithesis of science (also defined as a method). Yet, I got the impression from his book that Shermer agrees (on a fundamental level) that there need not be any disagreement between science and religion. Part 4 discusses racism and pseudohistory in the case of holocaust deniers. This part seemed out of place in the book primarily because Shermer spends comparatively little time discussing the weirdness of the opposing camp, instead focusing mostly on his perceptions. Though I agree with him on most points, I could no shake the feeling the chapters belong in a different book with a different title. In the last section (section 5) Shermer gets back on track and finishes with an interesting view of the societal role science plays, and the roll it will play in the future. Shermer holds hope for the human race, in spite of its sometimes-overbearing tendency toward mysticism. He also gives a wonderful summary of why people believe weird things: because it feels good. Though I would like to know more about why it feels good, I cannot argue with his conclusion. Overall, this was an excellent book. Dr. Shermer is a clear thinker. His ability to focus on the central issues and facts makes this book refreshingly illuminating. His personal touch, brought through stories of actual life experiences, adds to the pleasure of reading his book. Duwayne Anderson
|
