I really do miss the old days. Early to mid 2000s when being a skeptic was purely about taking on paranormal claims.
The "enemy" was clear. The solution was exposure and education.
I feel in some ways we won the battle and in others we lost.
I may now be a cynical has-been in the skeptical community (does that even exist now??) But I still keep an eye, almost like I'm in hibernation, waiting and watching incase I need to be reactivated.
Nice not getting death threats though.
I miss the old days
Re: I miss the old days
and there was I thinking the peace and quiet of late was because you'd experienced some sort of revelation and finally seen the light... 
~ Today is the Tomorrow you worried about Yesterday ~
Re: I miss the old days
Hi Jon,
I see skepticism as a way of thinking, quality control for ideas. Paranormal was always crying out for that approach as was alternative medicine. Plenty of overlap in that venn diagram. Taking on creationist trolls was always a good proving ground for the skeptical muscles.
Exposure an education was the offered solution but never really took down any proponents or true believers. Homeopathy no longer being offered by the NHS is probably the biggest skeptical success I can think of right now. Getting dowsing rod bomb detectors discredited and their purveyors put in jail might be the only other vaguely major one.
However in many cases, those expounding nonsense ideas don't do so because they've arrived at that idea through a process that can be challenged through debate and reason. Those that aren't simply in it for the grift, wear their belief as tribal totems. They're as much part of their group identity as a mod's moped or an emo kid's tattoos.
The only benefit in engaging in these debates is to sharpen your own critical thinking skills. Convincing a creationist to accept evolution is as rare as convincing a casual to dress from a charity shop.
Skepticism too exists as a set of beliefs that can be as tribal in nature for some as grounded in critical thinking in others. The same forms of argument, the universality of doubt can be adopted and worn as a mantle by all sorts of so called skeptics. The biggest affront from the creationists was not when they denied science but when they parodied it in "intelligent design." Same goes for the the climate skeptics, antivaxxers and all manner of other denialists.
Skepticism is a broad church. All sorts are attracted to its appeal. Like many walks of life, politics springs to the front of my mind here, there is a breed of person who can't just subscribe to an idea, they have to own it, make it their identity. Speak on behalf of others to define the ideas and gatekeep the boundaries.
Jon Ronson's book the "psychopath test" suggests that a surprising number of our businesses, organisations and institutions are lead by high functioning and charismatic psychopaths. The skeptical and atheist communities have had their share. Factionalism and infighting have prevailed.
I gave up on JREF, now ISK when it started drowning in liberarians and hardcore wokescolds. I don't think the community I knew ever recovered from Atheism +
I don't know if there is much a skeptical community but here's a group of loose friends who know each other from what there used to be. I like it here.
I see skepticism as a way of thinking, quality control for ideas. Paranormal was always crying out for that approach as was alternative medicine. Plenty of overlap in that venn diagram. Taking on creationist trolls was always a good proving ground for the skeptical muscles.
Exposure an education was the offered solution but never really took down any proponents or true believers. Homeopathy no longer being offered by the NHS is probably the biggest skeptical success I can think of right now. Getting dowsing rod bomb detectors discredited and their purveyors put in jail might be the only other vaguely major one.
However in many cases, those expounding nonsense ideas don't do so because they've arrived at that idea through a process that can be challenged through debate and reason. Those that aren't simply in it for the grift, wear their belief as tribal totems. They're as much part of their group identity as a mod's moped or an emo kid's tattoos.
The only benefit in engaging in these debates is to sharpen your own critical thinking skills. Convincing a creationist to accept evolution is as rare as convincing a casual to dress from a charity shop.
Skepticism too exists as a set of beliefs that can be as tribal in nature for some as grounded in critical thinking in others. The same forms of argument, the universality of doubt can be adopted and worn as a mantle by all sorts of so called skeptics. The biggest affront from the creationists was not when they denied science but when they parodied it in "intelligent design." Same goes for the the climate skeptics, antivaxxers and all manner of other denialists.
Skepticism is a broad church. All sorts are attracted to its appeal. Like many walks of life, politics springs to the front of my mind here, there is a breed of person who can't just subscribe to an idea, they have to own it, make it their identity. Speak on behalf of others to define the ideas and gatekeep the boundaries.
Jon Ronson's book the "psychopath test" suggests that a surprising number of our businesses, organisations and institutions are lead by high functioning and charismatic psychopaths. The skeptical and atheist communities have had their share. Factionalism and infighting have prevailed.
I gave up on JREF, now ISK when it started drowning in liberarians and hardcore wokescolds. I don't think the community I knew ever recovered from Atheism +
I don't know if there is much a skeptical community but here's a group of loose friends who know each other from what there used to be. I like it here.