Tag: Skeptic

The Dentith Files – Skeptics Conference Review

Well, that is, I would almost say, that about the Paranormal paper, except the conference version is likely going into the local Skeptic ‘zine, so its story is not yet (completely) told. Still, nice bit of radio; I’m especially pleased with the talk of Primes and Cephalapods; now there’s a Conspiracy Theory for me.

Next time (probably): Anti-semiticism, RadioLive and Conspiracy Theories.

The Dentith Files

Matthew’s just come from hanging out with skeptics, the New Zealand Skeptics, that is.

He presented a paper at their conference and from what he says it didn’t go down too well. In fact he was accused of “letting in the paranormal.”

Matthew runs through what happened and reports on the conference itself.

[mejsaudio mp3 src=”http://www.95bfm.co.nz//assets/sm/189028/3/dentithfiles.mp3″]

Further reading

Part of his presentation as played on the show a couple of weeks ago.

An unofficial Richard Feynman website with links to a whole bunch of stuff.

Richard Feynman playing bongos

10/06/2008

The Conference Presentation

My presentation came with slides and my presentation software, Apple’s `Keynote,’ has a record function, so I recorded the talk as I gave it and thus I have a movie of the talk synced to the slides. Below you will find links to the YouTube clips; due to YouTube not allowing videos of more than ten minutes in length my thirty-two minute talk has been cut up into six `logically’ separated parts that can be enjoyed by all and sundry.

I will admit that this talk is edited. I have removed from the resulting movie file two interruptions. One of the interruptions was someone asking that the projector be lowered so that people at the back could see the slides and the other was someone asking me not to read out any of the quotes; he was voted down on the matter. Neither of the edits remove any content or criticism of the presented material.

The next Dentith Files (Sunday the 5th of October, 11am, 95bFM) will be on my conference experience. Should be interesting.

09/30/2008

Whoop!

Well, the galleys have arrived for my forthcoming Skeptic article and it’s a mighty four pages of the magazine (although half of one of those pages seems to have space set aside for an ad; I wonder what I shall be unwittingly endorsing?). I also have an illustration, apparently. Gods know what that will end up being. Hopefully something nice, like a pony, or a flower.

I’m one step closer to publication proper and, I must admit, it feels a bit weird.

05/16/2008

Finally, it will see the light…

Several thousand years ago (or so it seems) I wrote a paper defending an epistemological position regarding the possible existence of things called ‘paranormal,’ which was submitted to The Skeptic which was accepted for publication and then… Well, nothing happened. About a year ago I started to chase up Dr. Michael Shermer and his promise to publish and now, with some slight revision, the paper has been formally approved for publication in the forthcoming issue (which goes on newstands… Well, I don’t know. Sometime in the next three months; more news as it comes to hand). This is, of course, a very good thing. Publication is king in my world and this is a publication with an interesting readership that I think philosophers should be communicating with, the skeptical community which is often science-literate but not necessarily epistemologically savvy.

An abstract follows. This one is deliberately a little obtuse; it was written as an example of overly technical writing for one of the courses I teach, but it’ll suffice for the time being. I’ll draw attention to the article closer to publication with a better abstract.

‘Saving the Paranormal from the Laws of Science.’

Abstract:

One reason to believe the conclusion that paranormal phenomena should not be taken as be counter-rational is one based upon the reduction of fundamental predicates from observed instances. It is all well and good to be epistemic reductionists and take a Humean worldview but we should not think that this necessitates the controversial thesis that the predicates of epistemic reductionism are indicative of ontological reductionism. Such a move would require some bridging principle which would show that epistemic statements, based upon limited instances of supposed regularities, can generate genuine ontological knowledge.

04/03/2008

Annoucement of non-forthcoming publication

Michael Shermer, editor of ‘The Skeptic’ wrote the other day to tell me that he shan’t be publishing the article he accepted for publication back in 2005. The magazine is backlogged with material and whilst he likes the piece he doesn’t know when it would go into print, so he’s ‘released’ it.

A shame really, since I did all that work on the extensive rewrite he asked for[1].

Still, now it means I can either seek a new home for the article or sling it online here. It also gives me a chance to do another rewrite; I’m fairly sure I can make the article slightly breezier.

The piece is a defense of a certain account of the Paranormal. I suppose it would be better to describe it as a critique of a certain fundamentalist strain of scepticism, the kind that denies that we could ever have evidence of paranormal phenomena. As we know, even idiots and idealogues can be sceptics (as I’ve said in the past, some of the most irrational people I have ever met were atheists and rationalists (the two don’t have to go together, but they often do…)). I run through three reasons why we should be open to the possibility that paranormal phenomena does occur, based upon what we can plausibly say about the methodology of Western Scientific practice.

In other news, someone wants to interview me in re getting the JREF Scholarship.

—

1. This will also come as a bit of a blow to all those people I used as editors whilst writing the first few drafts. Sorry guys.

08/20/2007

Shameless Self-promotion

I’ll preface my words of glory with the caveat that says that ‘I am sure that some of you will find this interesting.’

My day job is that of a Philosopher. I teach (and quite well if student evaluations and ovations are a measure of success) and I research.

And today my research has finally produced fruit.

Some of you will know that my field is Epistemology, and that I have an interest in weird phenomenon. I’m not a Believer in that I am fairly sure that life is chemical and that ghosts are simply misunderstood instances of natural laws oprating in conjunction with particular facts. Still, as an epistemologist I can’t deny that perhaps, just possibly, some of the features of the world as we claim to know it (through the practice of the Natural Sciences) are, in fact, misunderstood.

It’s a pity then that more people aren’t epistemologists.

Last year there was a slight verbal scuffle between Drs. Michael Shermer and Freeman Dyson on the matter of evidence for the existence of the paranormal. I read both tracts and found myself siding with Dyson, who thinks there is reason to think that paranormal phenomenon might be a justified belief, rather than Shermer, one of America’s most prominent Skeptics.

So I wrote a paper on the material, filling out the vague argument I thought Dyson was suggesting, for presentation at a conference.

A version of this paper has now been accepted for publication in ‘The Skeptic,’ edited by Dr. Shermer.

This makes me happy. Happy because finally my interest in weirdness has produced not one but three reasons to think that we should entertain beliefs about paranormal phenomenon, happy because I’ve managed to write a paper on Epistemology that is scientist-friendly (according to Shermer) and happy because the paper is, whilst not overly critical of Skeptics (who I do think should become Epistemologists and also be a little more aware of the History of Science) does point out that garden-variety Skepticism, that which proclaims the Cult of Science, isn’t such a happy place to be after all.

I’m mostly happy, however, because this paper shows that Philosophy is, as it always has been, useful to Science (whose proponents often ridicule their parent discipline).

Whilst I may make enemies tomorrow today I make a friend of the world.

07/19/2005