2008 Woodie Awards
Vote Absentee
Illini Media
WPGU
buzz
Illio
TechnographJames Randi: Our skeptical angel
By Justin Doran
Posted: 3/12/08 Section: Opinion Columns
This past Monday, the Atheists, Agnostics, and Freethinkers hosted two complementary avatars of modern skepticism; a meeting which proved to be microcosmical to the broader Atheist dialogue in America. Also, there were magic tricks. In fact, as far as godless functions go, it was downright festive. This could easily have been because one of the speakers was professional entertainer James Randi, renowned debunker of the paranormal, exposer of grift and mythical Gnome-king. Even the other speaker, Nobel Prize-winning chemist Richard J. Roberts, told at least two jokes. For comparison: The average chemist makes 6.02214179 jokes in his or her entire lifetime.
The titular subject being addressed by Roberts and Randi was "Science, Magic, and Belief." That was about right, provided that we include organized religion somewhere at the nexus of magic and belief. What was most interesting to me about this lecture was the recapitulation of certain topics that arise over and over again in atheist discussions. How should we think of religion and religious people? How should we feel about being evangelized? How many quantum dots fit on the head of a pin? Although I have misgivings about how qualified we are to answer these questions, this event acutely captured the plethora of beliefs atheists tend toward.
The first act was billed as the story of Richard J. Roberts' journey from a passive Christian to an active skeptic and atheist. In actuality, Professor Roberts seemed more interested in discussing how his conception of science and religion leads naturally to atheism, which is a similar project I suppose. And although his understanding of the history and methods of science was impeccable, his idea of religion was a little peculiar. In fact, the source of his theories on the origin and evolution of religion was so unclear that the audience may have come away with the mistaken belief that he was speaking from a scientific consensus.
As far as I could tell, everything he said was the product of his own speculation. Which included a rather unusual description of how schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and a low IQ could have contributed to the formation of religious beliefs about nature. It's not worth repeating, mostly because it's unsubstantiated, but this marks one unfortunate trend among atheists: they like to believe they know what religion is all about. It was especially telling when an audience member asked the (reasonable) question, "What is your level of education regarding religions?" To which Professor Roberts listed his years in comparative religion in the British educational system. That's like me saying I'm a constitutional scholar because I passed civics in high school.
The titular subject being addressed by Roberts and Randi was "Science, Magic, and Belief." That was about right, provided that we include organized religion somewhere at the nexus of magic and belief. What was most interesting to me about this lecture was the recapitulation of certain topics that arise over and over again in atheist discussions. How should we think of religion and religious people? How should we feel about being evangelized? How many quantum dots fit on the head of a pin? Although I have misgivings about how qualified we are to answer these questions, this event acutely captured the plethora of beliefs atheists tend toward.
The first act was billed as the story of Richard J. Roberts' journey from a passive Christian to an active skeptic and atheist. In actuality, Professor Roberts seemed more interested in discussing how his conception of science and religion leads naturally to atheism, which is a similar project I suppose. And although his understanding of the history and methods of science was impeccable, his idea of religion was a little peculiar. In fact, the source of his theories on the origin and evolution of religion was so unclear that the audience may have come away with the mistaken belief that he was speaking from a scientific consensus.
As far as I could tell, everything he said was the product of his own speculation. Which included a rather unusual description of how schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and a low IQ could have contributed to the formation of religious beliefs about nature. It's not worth repeating, mostly because it's unsubstantiated, but this marks one unfortunate trend among atheists: they like to believe they know what religion is all about. It was especially telling when an audience member asked the (reasonable) question, "What is your level of education regarding religions?" To which Professor Roberts listed his years in comparative religion in the British educational system. That's like me saying I'm a constitutional scholar because I passed civics in high school.
The Daily Illini encourages on-topic discussion through article commenting on its articles and blogs. It is our policy not to delete any comments based upon political or ideological point of view. However, we reserve the right to remove comments that are abusive, off-topic or use excessive foul language.
The posting of copyrighted material, including any and all content for which you are not the author, is illegal under Federal intellectual property laws. Such activity will not be tolerated. Comments containing copyrighted material will be removed, and continued violation of copyright law is grounds for being banned completely from commenting on DailyIllini.com.
If you feel any post meets these conditions or merits review, please e-mail our editors at meonline@dailyillini.com.
Viewing Comments 1 - 8 of 12
Freebird
posted 3/12/08 @ 2:13 PM CST
Wow, another well written article from Doran!
To speak tangentially, I am repeatedly surprised at the assumption that scientific methodology and religion are mutually exclusive. (Continued…)
kalia's little brother
posted 3/12/08 @ 3:48 PM CST
"He has spent much of his adult life seeking out the supernatural and throwing it under the merciless wheels of scientific investigation."
The dude can write!
jeff
posted 3/13/08 @ 11:01 AM CST
I've heard that Mr. Randi is canceling the million dollar challenge.
Drew
posted 3/13/08 @ 11:21 AM CST
Justin,
You write that a common mistake of atheists is to say they know where religion comes from; I'd like to know a little more about what you mean when you say this. (Continued…)
Drew
posted 3/13/08 @ 11:24 AM CST
By the way, Justin, I assume you already read this site, but you got quoted on one of my favorite blogs.
http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/03/13/james-randi-at-university-of-illinois/
Freebird -- note response
posted 3/14/08 @ 4:26 PM CST
Please note response
Phil Ferguson
posted 3/15/08 @ 10:53 PM CST
Great show organized by the students. If you would like to join other freethinkers check out Champaign Urbana Freethinkers www.cufree.net
skylights
posted 3/29/08 @ 4:42 PM CST
I have to laugh when people say atheists like Dawkins or Professor Roberts are not qualified to argue against religion because they are not theologically "educated. (Continued…)
Post a Comment