|
|
|
Maglev
Skeptic Friend
Canada
65 Posts |
 Posted - 08/23/2004 : 11:37:36
|
Hi all,
Last night I had my very first official "skeptic VS believer" discussion, which I'd like to share with you. I was the skeptic and my SO's cousin was the believer. I must say here that I dearly love her cousin; she's smart and well learned, and considering all the health problems she's had in her life, very courageous as well.
We were talking about Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code", specifically the parts about the origins of the bible (I haven't read the book btw). The discussion then moved to a classic "do you believe in God?" which then evolved into a "what do you believe in anyway?".
At this time, I must point out that we just had a really good meal and some even better bottles of wine.
"So Nathalie (that's her name btw), what do you believe in?" "Well, I'm really into crystals, naturopathy and homeopathy". At that point, nobody really knew that I was a skeptic; I usually try to keep my mouth shut about those things, especially when dealing with family. But crystals? Sugar pills? Come on!
Of these subjects three, homeopathy is the one I know best. I tried to explain how Samuel Hahnemann came up with the idea, how some parts of his theory are pretty much the exact opposite of modern pharmacology, how there is no complete scientific explanation for how (and if) it works, etc. In all those cases, I never managed to actually finish an argument. The supper ended with her giving me two kisses for my birthday (hint hint) and a third one "for my soul"  . I don't think I've managed to change her opinion (or belief if you prefer), but I may have planted a very small seed of skepticism in her mind... I guess I'll have to wait and see if it grows...
I learned a few things about her during the exchange; she sees (and pays for) a naturopath, an osteopath, an homeopath, and a shrink... as well as a "real" doctor. She does not know what a skeptic is (I tried to explain, I really did!). She does not really appreciate the difference between "knowing" and "believing". She listens to her body, which apparently is something no skeptics can ever do. She "knows" that all of this stuff really works because she can feel it deep down inside her. And, strangely enough, she does not believe in acupuncture.
I noticed two things during our exchange; she gave me a lot of classic "believer" arguments, such as "I used to be skeptical, but then...", "skeptics are too closed minded to get it", "some things cannot be understood", "some things can't be tested in labs", "I used to be very sick, but since I've started taking homeopathic medicine, I feel better", etc... All of which I had heard/read about before. Many, many times in fact. To hear then first hand was kind of nice.
The second thing is that I managed to keep my cool during the entire discussion. She was pretty pissed at one point (I was told later by my SO that she really hates it when someone knows more about something than she does, in this case, homeopathy). But I managed to bring her down easily. I'm actually pretty proud of myself with that one .
I was wondering if your "first time" was similar in any way? Also, where should I go with this? How should I approach her next time we meet?
Any comments would be appreciated!
|
Maglev
"The awe it inspired in me made the awe that people talk about in respect of religious experience seem, frankly, silly beside it. I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day."
--Douglas Adams, on evolutionary biology. |
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2004 : 12:08:23 [Permalink]
|
Money seems to get through to some people, you could try to show her that all of these things (include more things from the claims list if you want) share one important quality, they require you to pay for things (books, crystals, therapy etc.)
Also James Randi's videos (cough hypocracy on my part) are good visual aids to show how these types decieve, have her rent the BullShit! season 1 DVD as well. I find people are more convinced by TV than they are of my assertions.
Or you could do a bunch of research and thwart every claim she makes in a cool and non-threatening manner. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
 |
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2004 : 12:24:17 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I learned a few things about her during the exchange; she sees (and pays for) a naturopath, an osteopath, an homeopath, and a shrink...
Ummm.... |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2004 : 13:43:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Ricky said:
I find that the easiest way to trip up a person who believes in homeopathic medicine is how it works and why, as well as how water has "memory".
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And, strangely enough, she does not believe in acupuncture.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Haha, thats really funny as it is the only one that has passed some scientific tests, and its the only one where a possible bioloigical explaination has been found.
Huh? Biological evidence for acupuncture? Passed scientific tests??
Sources, please.
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2004 : 14:30:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Modern studies have revealed that acupuncture stimulates one or more of the signaling systems, which can, under certain circumstances, increase the rate of healing response. This may be sufficient to cure a disease, or it might only reduce its impact (alleviate some symptoms). These findings can explain most of the clinical effects of acupuncture therapy.
quote:
In a review article, Acupuncture and the Nervous System (American Journal of Chinese Medicine 1992; 20(3–4): 331–337), Cai Wuying at the Department of Neurology, Loyola University of Chicago, describes some of the studies that implicate nervous system involvement. According to a report of the Shanghai Medical University, cranial nerves, spinal nerves, and their terminals were dispersed in the area surrounding the acupuncture points for about 5 millimeters. They also found that the nervous distribution of the Bladder Meridian points (which run along the spine) was in the same area of the spine as that of the corresponding viscera. In Japanese research, it was reported that when acupuncture points were needled, certain neurotransmitters appeared at the site. In laboratory-animal acupuncture studies, it was reported that two such transmitters, substance P and calcitonin gene-related peptide, were released from primary sensory neurons. Acupuncture analgesia appears to be mediated by release of enkephalin and beta-endorphins, with regulation of prostaglandin synthesis: all these have an effect on pain perception. One of the dominant areas of research into acupuncture mechanisms has been its effect on endorphins. Endorphins are one of several neuropeptides; these have been shown to alleviate pain, and have been described as the body's own “opiates.” One reason for the focus on these biochemicals is that they were identified in 1977, just as acupuncture was becoming popular in the West, and they are involved in two areas that have been the focus of acupuncture therapy in the West: treatment of chronic pain and treatment of drug addiction.
http://www.itmonline.org/arts/acuintro.htm
Of course, I was talking about acupuncture as in the sense that sticking needles into a person at certian places can help them, nothing to do with the traditional sense that there is a qi. |
Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov |
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2004 : 19:12:36 [Permalink]
|
Maglev:
Q. How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb?
A. One, but only if the light bulb wants to change.
Same principle here. People who believe are hard to change unless they want to examine their beliefs and challenge them.
Given that, you could ask her leading questions to guide her down the ridiculous path that some of these beliefs logically follow. For instance, on the homeopathy thing, it once she admits to a belief that the water "remembers", it logically follows that in any given month, she is drinking something that remembers any or all of:
fish poop
bear urine
crude oil
garbage from cruise ships
upchuck from who knows how many drunken fisherman and other seasickness victims
afterbirths and other stuff from whale and dolphin births
a great deal of the sewage generated in the world
This may or may not convince her of the complete inanity of the homeopathic theory, but it sure will make going out for drinks more interesting.
Happy hunting. |
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 08/23/2004 : 19:51:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Maglev I noticed two things during our exchange; she gave me a lot of classic "believer" arguments, such as... "skeptics are too closed minded to get it..."
I for one think this is probably the #1 accusation I see leveled at skeptics. Either that we're too close-minded to admit such things are possible, or we reject the claims because they scare or frighten us, or that we smugly think we already have everything figured out through "science" and reject out-of-hand anything that conflicts with our current world view.
I think it's important to emphasize that many skeptics initially explored some of these very same claims at some point in their own history, sometimes out of a genuine hope they were true. (At least this is so in my own case. I initially became interested in learning all I could about ghosts. Many years later, here I am at skeptics friends. ) I think people tend to assume a skeptical attitude comes from not having any knowledge on a given subject. In fact, many people are actually amazed to learn that skeptics most often actually know more about the topic then they do! (Such as in your own experience).
Just as she can claim, "You know, I was skeptical until..." Sometimes its useful to reply in kind: "I initially explored homeopathy because of all the promising things I heard about it. Boy, was I disillusioned." That way you don't sound like someone who is poo-pooing a subject new and exciting (to them), but more like someone who's been there, done that, and who only wishes to save them a bit of grief.
As others have said, ultimately you won't change someone's mind who doesn't want to. But you can plant the seed. Tell them about claims which deteriorate upon further examination, flawed studies or outright fraud in the holistic healing industry. Some would say that its more important to teach skeptical thinking, and allow other people to draw their own appropriate conclusions. I agree with that to a large extent, but the fact of the matter is that some people simply aren't ready to make a seachange in the way they view the world. In those instances, it might be better to simply attempt to cast doubt only on the one subject at hand. They might be more inclined to question their assumptions if you don't come off as a skeptic who doubts everything, which they will see as close-minded.
But again, its all a judgment call, and these are only my opinions, which are subject to change.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 08/23/2004 19:53:18 |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2004 : 00:07:20 [Permalink]
|
I have been trying to find ways to reach people who buy into bad medicine for a while. I have been using the approach of not going for the specific, but instead trying to teach how to evaluate evidence. So you could start by asking the person to tell you how they know what they know.
When they answer with some anecdotal evidence, which is the most common case, either give another possible explanation for the coincidence or use an analogy. My standard is, "If I wear my hat backward at the ballgame and the team wins, did my hat cause it?"
For other answers, like a reference or web citation, I start with research on the source rather than the content.
Of course some people listen to this logic and then go right back to where they were. I guess some folks just don't get it.
If I keep interacting with them, (I teach a lot of annual review stuff), quite often other examples will come up and I point out the relevance to the original misconception. I figure some folks are on the 5 and 10 year plans for change so I don't give up. |
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 08/24/2004 00:10:06 |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2004 : 07:54:23 [Permalink]
|
Ricky,
Thanks for the source on acupuncture. I am going to have to look at this more closely. I have assumed it was BS, because of the mumbo-jumbo that goes along with it.
Interesting....
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2004 : 09:06:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Maglev
Also, where should I go with this? How should I approach her next time we meet?
Hi, Maglev.
I've always found that the best way to approach someone after this sort of encounter is to play it cool. When you see her next, bring up her therapy in a neutral way, like "how's that X going?" After her reply, never bring it up again that evening. If the seed you 'planted' didn't take, then the topic is effectiely dead and you shouldn't harp on it for fear of looking like an ass.
But if you really did plant those seeds of doubt, she'll bring it up on her own. She might ask "about that conversation we had the other night..." or just bluntly "I don't see what you have against X..." or some such.
In that case, I'd keep playing it cool. You want to assure her that you aren't out to change her mind (it's true-- you can't change her mind; all you can do is give her the information and thinking skills she needs to change her own mind!). Instead, you just want to let her know that you're concerned about her, and that you have doubts about remedy X.
You should be prepared to deal with the stock answers (you mentioned them in your original post-- things like "X can't be tested in labs" or "I just feel that it's working").
They key isn't to be antagonistic, but rather to be instructive.
Perhaps you may be able to sway her away from these "alternative medicine" money-sucking jerks and towards some more sound approaches to therapy.
And finally, I am not convinced that there's nothing to the idea of valid alternative remedies. It's just that without sound testing it's impossible to know, and since this indistry is so loathe to such testing, it's better to avoid them and save your money for something you can be more sure about... |
|
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2004 : 09:58:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I was just contemplating the immortal words of Socrates, who said, "I drank what?"
Spoken by Val Kilmer in the 1985 Film - Real Genius |
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 08/24/2004 : 15:07:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by astropin
quote:
I was just contemplating the immortal words of Socrates, who said, "I drank what?"
Spoken by Val Kilmer in the 1985 Film - Real Genius
Give the man a prize!
Yeah, the movie was just on Comedy Central last weekend. It has some nice quotes, but that one has always stuck with me. |
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
