Take a photo of a barcode or cover
71 reviews for:
Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time
Michael Shermer
3.72 AVERAGE
71 reviews for:
Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time
Michael Shermer
3.72 AVERAGE
informative
slow-paced
In my head, I've been a skeptic for a while but in my heart, I've always looked at skeptics as a bunch of humorless buzzkills.
Michael Shermer's book didn't completely alleviate that, but he makes a pretty stirring defense of skepticism as both a desirable personal attribute and a worldview. He explains the methodology of science and skepticism and then spends each chapter debunking a particular "weird" belief, pointing out how various inputs and desires can cause thinking to "go wrong," leaving popular deception as the logical output.
I enjoyed the book quite a bit, and bought into Shermer's arguments on the whole--but I don't quite understand why he chose to include the weird beliefs he did. Given that his primary thesis is that skepticism is a valid protection against harmful and manipulative ideologies, it's odd to me that he chose to include basically innocuous beliefs like ESP and alien abductions alongside the more seriously harmful young earth creationism, Holocaust denial, and Ayn Rand's objectivist philosophy. For me, that kind of content-neutral analysis made the tone a little uneven and undercut the book's impact somewhat.
Overall, though, I'm definitely converted to skepticism as a way of life (even if it is still fun to tell ghost stories, talk about urban legends, or hunt for Big Foot in the woods late at night). I'd love to see an update now that we're 20 years further into the Information Age and just lived through a resurgence of fake news, alternatives facts, and willful mistrust.
Michael Shermer's book didn't completely alleviate that, but he makes a pretty stirring defense of skepticism as both a desirable personal attribute and a worldview. He explains the methodology of science and skepticism and then spends each chapter debunking a particular "weird" belief, pointing out how various inputs and desires can cause thinking to "go wrong," leaving popular deception as the logical output.
I enjoyed the book quite a bit, and bought into Shermer's arguments on the whole--but I don't quite understand why he chose to include the weird beliefs he did. Given that his primary thesis is that skepticism is a valid protection against harmful and manipulative ideologies, it's odd to me that he chose to include basically innocuous beliefs like ESP and alien abductions alongside the more seriously harmful young earth creationism, Holocaust denial, and Ayn Rand's objectivist philosophy. For me, that kind of content-neutral analysis made the tone a little uneven and undercut the book's impact somewhat.
Overall, though, I'm definitely converted to skepticism as a way of life (even if it is still fun to tell ghost stories, talk about urban legends, or hunt for Big Foot in the woods late at night). I'd love to see an update now that we're 20 years further into the Information Age and just lived through a resurgence of fake news, alternatives facts, and willful mistrust.
The topuc is interesting and there are good points in the book but overall it didn't read well for me. I'm not sure if it is the structure of the book or the writing style but something bothered me.
I took some issues with the organization of the book, and certain parts I enjoyed more than others. but you can't beat his discussion of evolution and holocaust deniers, and the first section where he discusses the psychological and cultural reasons behind the science/pseudoscience divide is easy to understand and compelling.
A convincing skeptic that avoids patronizing is hard to find, but Shermer delivers with a specific torrent of refutations to all-too-common pseudoscientific nonsense. Yet the book isn't just about disproving that; it also does a good job of explaining why people, even smart critical thinkers, believe some things that simply don't stand up to critical analysis. He delves a bit into the way we're raised and the way we think in our culture, and I think he's pretty damn insightful.
Audiobook - Abridged - 3.5 hours
-- Note this is not the Revised and Expanded edition (if there even is one for audio). I listened to the original audio from '98.
Shermer is the founder of The Skeptics Society and Editor in Chief of its magazine Skeptic. He knows his stuff. In this book, he explores alien abductions, Holocaust denial, the legal history of creationism in science classrooms, and some other things. These are all interesting and covers Shermer's experiences with all of them.
My primary trouble with this book is the title. With that title, I expected more psychology and less logic. Shermer spends a great deal of time talking about the various fallacies the various groups make, but doesn't spend enough time, in my view, on the actual why. You all know I'm a huge proponent of reviewing what was written, not what one wanted to read... but 'Why' is in the title. While the 'what' is interesting, I was promised 'why', and answers are in too short of supply.
-- Note this is not the Revised and Expanded edition (if there even is one for audio). I listened to the original audio from '98.
Shermer is the founder of The Skeptics Society and Editor in Chief of its magazine Skeptic. He knows his stuff. In this book, he explores alien abductions, Holocaust denial, the legal history of creationism in science classrooms, and some other things. These are all interesting and covers Shermer's experiences with all of them.
My primary trouble with this book is the title. With that title, I expected more psychology and less logic. Shermer spends a great deal of time talking about the various fallacies the various groups make, but doesn't spend enough time, in my view, on the actual why. You all know I'm a huge proponent of reviewing what was written, not what one wanted to read... but 'Why' is in the title. While the 'what' is interesting, I was promised 'why', and answers are in too short of supply.
Shermer guides the reader through a history of human erroneous thinking, employing kind humor throughout. He delves into the internal and external causes as he offers example after example, usually comparing each instance of weird thinking with the real information available to the less mystified. An update to this original edition could be thousands of pages long if the compounding nuttiness of the intervening 24 years were to be cataloged. If you must know, visit Shermer's site (link above) or read the back copies of Skeptic Magazine. By the way, Shermer doesn't play favorites. His well-informed skepticism and penetrating logic drop rounds in all camps. If you feel he's hitting your clubhouse more than others, some self-reflection may be in order. :-)
Spent too much time on a few specific cases, not enough time elucidating or developing its thesis. There was very little about why people actually do believe weird things, although the list of logical fallacies was rather quite useful.
Reading this immediately after a book on God & prayer is either the best idea or the worst idea. My brain feels like it's melting.
*
Well, after having read it, I can say that I appreciated the section on pseudoscience & Creationism, especially the author's assurance that science & religion don't have to be mutually exclusive. He states that they fill different niches in the psyche, so there's use for both of them, and that in his opinion, agnosticism is the most scientific approach. So that was cool. And also, he really ripped creation "science" a new one, and documented the 1985 Supreme Court trial to keep creationism out of public schools. There was a similarly relatively-engaging section on pseudohistory and Holocaust deniers. Unfortunately, the book ended with sort of a confusing muddle of physics & cosmology & this guy who is trying to use the eventuality of time travel to prove the existence of God & the Resurrection (I think?). It was waaaay too technical and I just couldn't follow most of it.
The whole book could at times seem just a touch more technical than necessary or enjoyable for the common reader, and I had to dust off the fuzzy old bachelor's degree memories to understand parts of it. I guess I felt like my brain did a bunch of sit-ups, and I feel good about it afterwards, but it wasn't always enjoyable while I was reading. The author was mostly an interesting guy, and mostly an engaging writer, although not completely engaging. Somewhat engaging. 2.5-3 stars.
*
Well, after having read it, I can say that I appreciated the section on pseudoscience & Creationism, especially the author's assurance that science & religion don't have to be mutually exclusive. He states that they fill different niches in the psyche, so there's use for both of them, and that in his opinion, agnosticism is the most scientific approach. So that was cool. And also, he really ripped creation "science" a new one, and documented the 1985 Supreme Court trial to keep creationism out of public schools. There was a similarly relatively-engaging section on pseudohistory and Holocaust deniers. Unfortunately, the book ended with sort of a confusing muddle of physics & cosmology & this guy who is trying to use the eventuality of time travel to prove the existence of God & the Resurrection (I think?). It was waaaay too technical and I just couldn't follow most of it.
The whole book could at times seem just a touch more technical than necessary or enjoyable for the common reader, and I had to dust off the fuzzy old bachelor's degree memories to understand parts of it. I guess I felt like my brain did a bunch of sit-ups, and I feel good about it afterwards, but it wasn't always enjoyable while I was reading. The author was mostly an interesting guy, and mostly an engaging writer, although not completely engaging. Somewhat engaging. 2.5-3 stars.
Great read if you want to know how people who seem normal can believe in alien abductions, therapies promising immortality and that the Holocaust never happened.