Why Michael Shermer Believes Weird Things...

Michael Shermer on why smart people believe weird things. I agree with his theory, and I would argue that Shermer himself is a perfect example.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Michael
• Shermer
• Weird
• Things
• Smart
• People
• Rationalize
• Skeptic
• Psychology
• Freudian
• Projection

[whitenightf3]

@ar904 You said you were ignorant of Godel. Godel’s incompleteness theorm, which demonstrated the impossibility of proving all True statements. Shows us that at some point logic breaks down and those of us who have studied philosophy are aware of this. I have no idea what other post you are talking about maybe you can send it to my inbox and I will take a peek.

[ar904]

@whitenightf3 I never said I have never heard of Godel. I only said I haven't understood how he completely negates logic. I was hoping you could elucidate. Also, you may have missed my other posts regarding your response. Check the youtube page and please respond. I am anxious to hear what you have to say on the matter.

[whitenightf3]

@ar904 You admitted you had never heard of Godel so it seems I taught you something. And its quite simple Godel's theorem shows us that logic eventually breaks down so although logic is a useful tool like all tools it has its limitations.

[ar904]

5. I accept Richard Feynman's take on QP "If you think you understand Quantum Mechanics, then you do not understand QM". I know very little to nothing on the subject and I suspect the same goes for you. What I won't do is accept the philosophical wanking of people like Deepak Chopra that cherry pick QP data in order to bolster a premise they already believe in. How can you trust such a person? How can you know their intentions are in finding the real truth? Faith does not impress me.

[ar904]

4. I will accept that the atheist to whom you refer is not actually a bag of douche. If that were so then you would be considered insane to be having two-way conversations with inanimate objects. I think this is not the case. That only leaves the possibility that you called a person with whom you disagree a "douchebag" in order to deride his character, and not as a factual statement. This is *the* definition of Ad Hominem.

[ar904]

3. Yes, the universe is mysterious and we don't know everything about it. I agree with you that our senses are limiting. You appeal to neuroscience (and "others", whatever that means) but don't acknowledge the fact that these discoveries are made using the scientific method, and the tools provided by millennia of discovery, and the powerful application of logic and deductive reasoning. It is not fair for you to cry foul only when it suits your needs.

[ar904]

2. My vision has nothing to do with the fact that there are smarter people in the world than I. Everywhere you turn you will find someone with more knowledge than you on any given subject. This does not make a compelling argument as to why this is the problem with being skeptical. If you have the glasses to fix my myopia on this then I am more than willing to wear them.

[ar904]

@whitenightf3 Five points regarding your five points.

1. I never said I learned anything from you. I said I was ignorant of Godel and his deflation of logic and reason. I then asked you to explain what you meant by that. You did not do this so I am still in the dark on this one.

[whitenightf3]

@ar904 1 Its always nice to know others learn something in their interactions with me. "2 You are a little myopic if you cant assimilate the point being made. 3 People appealing to the Cogito are Naive Realist, they believe the world they see out there is as it looks. In effect people are appealing to their senses to create mental maps of the world, but Neuroscientists and others know the senses do lie. Pointing out someone is a douchebag is not an ad hominem 5 QP trumps Newton every time.

[ar904]

@ScootleRoyale What, then, are the most logical and reasonable explanations about 9/11? Shermer's stance is to look at the evidence, not the *lack* of it. In his argument, there is no plausible "inner circle" conspiracy, only a conspiracy of like-minded suicide/homicide airplane hijackers. If there is evidence, other than conjecture, I'd certainly be willing to look at it, as I believe most people would. Skeptics, for lack of a better word, LOVE evidence, solid and concrete. Prove him wrong.