Rating: 
Summary: critical but unthinking
Review: A quote from Robert Todd Carroll:
"A delusion held by one person is a mental illness, held by a few is a cult, held by many is a religion."
Source: http://www.skepdic.com/cults.html
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing if not deceiving
Review: At first I was glad to be able to read this book on various subjects. But then, I began to notice in a few subjects where I do have some knowledge, that the author conveniently skipped the information that could vaguely contradict him. And then I saw a couple of times where the author speaks in derogatory terms of things he visibly has no direct experience of. I feel almost deceived by this work. I am really angry. (I won't tell what info and where; I just give my opinion, I am not the skeptic of the skeptic's dictionary.)
Rating: 
Summary: Solid overview, easy to read, not too much depth
Review: Bob Carroll has put together a solid overview of mystical, paranormal, and magical beliefs, deceptions, and hoaxes. He takes a simple point of view in asking simple questions -- what is the truth? What can be proven? Where might the "believers" be deceiving themselves? -- AND, he clearly also is not so biased to think that all beliefs are wrong. What can't be explained away, debunked, or proven wrong is an area of faith, either beyond the realm of science or remaining for science to figure out in the future.I've yet to come up with a topic that Carroll has omitted, though other reviewers have, apparently. His entries are generally enough information for me, though he maintains plenty of references should anyone actually want to read that much more about anthroposophic medicine (or any other topic). Certainly topics like Argument from Design and Creationism are covered ad infinitum, ad nauseum, from various viewpoints elsewhere; thus, the Skeptics Dictionary provides a simply solid overview, definition, and description of these, with plenty of references. All in all, this is an excellent book. I think it's not only for "skeptics", but also for those who want to know if they are being scammed. Scan this book before sending cash to Miss Cleo, Sylvia Browne, John Edward, or any other fortune tellers or psychics.
Rating:
Summary: Solid overview, easy to read, not too much depth
Review: Bob Carroll has put together a solid overview of mystical, paranormal, and magical beliefs, deceptions, and hoaxes. He takes a simple point of view in asking simple questions -- what is the truth? What can be proven? Where might the "believers" be deceiving themselves? -- AND, he clearly also is not so biased to think that all beliefs are wrong. What can't be explained away, debunked, or proven wrong is an area of faith, either beyond the realm of science or remaining for science to figure out in the future. I've yet to come up with a topic that Carroll has omitted, though other reviewers have, apparently. His entries are generally enough information for me, though he maintains plenty of references should anyone actually want to read that much more about anthroposophic medicine (or any other topic). Certainly topics like Argument from Design and Creationism are covered ad infinitum, ad nauseum, from various viewpoints elsewhere; thus, the Skeptics Dictionary provides a simply solid overview, definition, and description of these, with plenty of references. All in all, this is an excellent book. I think it's not only for "skeptics", but also for those who want to know if they are being scammed. Scan this book before sending cash to Miss Cleo, Sylvia Browne, John Edward, or any other fortune tellers or psychics.
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding!
Review: Concise, witty, and thoroughly entertaining. Carroll takes on the vast amount of fantasic nonsense and paranormal flummery in our increasingly credulous society and exposes it for what it is. No doubt the superstitious will brand this work as "closed-minded" (their favorite attack on rational thinking), but no matter. Carroll's addition to the fight against the dumbing down of our culture is welcome and needed!
Rating: 
Summary: Shared Psychotic Disorder or Folie a Deux is missing
Review: Folie a Deux or Shared Psychotic disorder does not appear in
this dictionary. Thus the information on delusions and hallucinations is outdated.
Rating:
Summary: A Masterpiece
Review: Here's something you won't read everyday (actually, you may never read anything like it again!). I'm a psychic healer who thinks Bob Carroll's Skeptic's Dictionary is an absolutely indispensable resource. Indispensable. I first found the Skeptic's Dictionary online as I was searching for responsible information on some of the truly questionable things I see in my New Age/metaphysical culture. Unless you're a part of the culture - or unless you're a skeptic keeping an eye on the New Age culture - you really wouldn't believe the amount of untested theories, urban legends, wild ideas, and just plain irresponsible stuff that's going around. I've often likened the New Age to the Wild West - I mean, it often feels like open season on consumers here. I struggled for years to find responsible dissent literature in my New Age culture, but the fact is that responsible skeptical questioning simply doesn't exist in the New Age. If I want to get a non-sales-pitch or non-dreamy-eyed version of the latest channeler, spiritual leader, divination protocol, personality typing modality, magic herb, megavitamin, healing gadget, or sacred destination, I can only get that information on the q.t. If I want to research things, I have to call friends who might know a friend who knows a guy who went to the healer or took the vitamin or whatever. That's how New Age skepticism works - it's a person to person process of trial and error. If you are in the New Age, but don't know enough people, you won't have access to this underground consumer protection agency, and you'll probably end up wasting time and money chasing after stuff that just doesn't work (or is dangerous). True consumer protection is not a part of my New Age culture. Everything offered is generally agreed to be healing and harmless, because God or Spirit or Faeries or good Atlanteans are involved - so why should anyone question any of it? Questioning in the New Age is only allowed at the level of gossip - anything more open than that is treated as a sign of rudeness, near-paranoia, or betrayal. Real questioning can actually get you expelled from the culture. So when I needed to question the heck out of the things I saw in the New Age, I had no culturally approved way to proceed. Luckily, I have access to the Internet, so instead of making a fuss or shutting off my mind in response to all the pressure I experienced, I just became quiet and navigated around the Web on my own. Thankfully, I ended up on skepdic.com - the site from which the Skeptic's Dictionary was created. I've read stacks of books by skeptical authors, but I haven't respected too many of them. However, I respect Bob Carroll because his debunking and skepticism aren't bad-tempered attempts to denigrate believers or take the magic out of life (real life is magical enough without any mystical crutches, thanks). Instead, his skepticism is a natural function of his intelligence, his concern for people, and his interest in discovering what's true and what isn't. Sure, Carroll's writing sometimes leans toward sarcasm, but honestly, if you had reseached as much strange material as he has, you'd probably get a bit arch yourself. For me, this isn't just a book - it's a clear example of compassionate information gathering and dissemination. It's cool. Here's my suggestion for New Age people or very devout people who need to be able to question what they have been taught. Flip to a topic in the Skeptic's Dictionary that you already KNOW is a hoax (all New Age people and all religious people can identify hoaxes - however, I've noticed that their training generally keeps their hoax-detection behaviors to a minimum). Don't flip to topics that cover your most cherished beliefs. Instead, stay in the safe areas. Take a look at how Bob Carroll handles the things you've already debunked on your own, and see if you agree with his approach and his research (and his humor). Then you'll know if this book is for you - and if it is, perhaps you can then tread into touchier, sacred cow areas with the sense that you'll be treated with respect. As a full-fledged member of the New Age culture for over thirty years, I've seen so many instances of chicanery, half-truths, and exploitation that I'm just heart-sick. If my culture can't be skeptical of itself (and it can't), then someone else has to be. I'm really grateful that a person of Bob Carroll's integrity, scholarship, and humor stepped up to the plate. The Skeptic's Dictionary is an indispensable resource. Bravo, Dr. Carroll.
Rating:
Summary: A Masterpiece
Review: Here's something you won't read everyday (actually, you may never read anything like it again!). I'm a psychic healer who thinks Bob Carroll's Skeptic's Dictionary is an absolutely indispensable resource. Indispensable. I first found the Skeptic's Dictionary online as I was searching for responsible information on some of the truly questionable things I see in my New Age/metaphysical culture. Unless you're a part of the culture - or unless you're a skeptic keeping an eye on the New Age culture - you really wouldn't believe the amount of untested theories, urban legends, wild ideas, and just plain irresponsible stuff that's going around. I've often likened the New Age to the Wild West - I mean, it often feels like open season on consumers here. I struggled for years to find responsible dissent literature in my New Age culture, but the fact is that responsible skeptical questioning simply doesn't exist in the New Age. If I want to get a non-sales-pitch or non-dreamy-eyed version of the latest channeler, spiritual leader, divination protocol, personality typing modality, magic herb, megavitamin, healing gadget, or sacred destination, I can only get that information on the q.t. If I want to research things, I have to call friends who might know a friend who knows a guy who went to the healer or took the vitamin or whatever. That's how New Age skepticism works - it's a person to person process of trial and error. If you are in the New Age, but don't know enough people, you won't have access to this underground consumer protection agency, and you'll probably end up wasting time and money chasing after stuff that just doesn't work (or is dangerous). True consumer protection is not a part of my New Age culture. Everything offered is generally agreed to be healing and harmless, because God or Spirit or Faeries or good Atlanteans are involved - so why should anyone question any of it? Questioning in the New Age is only allowed at the level of gossip - anything more open than that is treated as a sign of rudeness, near-paranoia, or betrayal. Real questioning can actually get you expelled from the culture. So when I needed to question the heck out of the things I saw in the New Age, I had no culturally approved way to proceed. Luckily, I have access to the Internet, so instead of making a fuss or shutting off my mind in response to all the pressure I experienced, I just became quiet and navigated around the Web on my own. Thankfully, I ended up on skepdic.com - the site from which the Skeptic's Dictionary was created. I've read stacks of books by skeptical authors, but I haven't respected too many of them. However, I respect Bob Carroll because his debunking and skepticism aren't bad-tempered attempts to denigrate believers or take the magic out of life (real life is magical enough without any mystical crutches, thanks). Instead, his skepticism is a natural function of his intelligence, his concern for people, and his interest in discovering what's true and what isn't. Sure, Carroll's writing sometimes leans toward sarcasm, but honestly, if you had reseached as much strange material as he has, you'd probably get a bit arch yourself. For me, this isn't just a book - it's a clear example of compassionate information gathering and dissemination. It's cool. Here's my suggestion for New Age people or very devout people who need to be able to question what they have been taught. Flip to a topic in the Skeptic's Dictionary that you already KNOW is a hoax (all New Age people and all religious people can identify hoaxes - however, I've noticed that their training generally keeps their hoax-detection behaviors to a minimum). Don't flip to topics that cover your most cherished beliefs. Instead, stay in the safe areas. Take a look at how Bob Carroll handles the things you've already debunked on your own, and see if you agree with his approach and his research (and his humor). Then you'll know if this book is for you - and if it is, perhaps you can then tread into touchier, sacred cow areas with the sense that you'll be treated with respect. As a full-fledged member of the New Age culture for over thirty years, I've seen so many instances of chicanery, half-truths, and exploitation that I'm just heart-sick. If my culture can't be skeptical of itself (and it can't), then someone else has to be. I'm really grateful that a person of Bob Carroll's integrity, scholarship, and humor stepped up to the plate. The Skeptic's Dictionary is an indispensable resource. Bravo, Dr. Carroll.
Rating:
Summary: "The" Guide to Clear, Level-Headed Thinking!
Review: I think that this wonderful book might be better titled "The Thinking Person's Guide to Level-headed Thinking". I am eager for my son to reach the age where, well, he can read, but also appreciate the sheer beauty of logic and solid research applied to what seems to pass for "common knowledge" in the popular press. My son will not enter jr. high without being able to quote chapter and verse from this book - and I'll beat him too him by a mile! BTW - beside being incredibly valuable, it is a simply wonderful read, which I recommend to readers and thinkers everywhere!
Rating:
Summary: Treat with the utmost skepticism!
Review: If you wanted to teach someone to think for themself, would you: A) Teach them to think concisely and rationally, how to carry out meaningful investigations, and how to keep an open mind till they had sufficient evidence to make their OWN evaluation, pro or con, on a given subject? B) Or would you tell them what to think, implying that they were some kind of gullible fool if they disagreed with YOUR evaluations? If you said "A", well done, there's hope for you yet. If you said "B", you'll probably love this book ...
|
