In October last year I reported that one of the world's most
renowned skeptics was having doubts about his position. Michael Shermer became
interested in the paranormal when he had a mystical experience while taking
part in a bicycle race. This led him into the study of anomalous psychology,
and in 1992 he founded the Skeptics Society, an international organization
which today has over 55,000 members across the world. It publishes the
quarterly journal
Skeptic which
Shermer edits and it has featured columns by Richard Dawkins, James Randi and
many other heroes of Skepticism. Shermer has organized conferences, outings and
activism. He has written seventeen books, including
Why People Believe Weird Things,
The Skeptic Encyclopaedia of Pseudoscience and
The Believing Brain. He's one of the most regular lecturers at skeptic
events and is a sought after media pundit on all skeptic matters. He is among
the last people on Earth I thought would ever question the House of Skeptic.
However, he did. Exactly a year ago, on
the
16th of September 2014, Michael Shermer published an article in the
magazine
Scientific American
entitled:
Anomalous Events That Can Shake
One’s Skepticism to the Core, and it was subtitled:
I just witnessed an event so mysterious that it shook my skepticism.
Two months earlier he had married his German sweetheart Jennifer Graf at his
home in
Beverly Hills, California
USA. Several months
before that Jennifer moved into his house and had her luggage shipped over from
her previous home in
Cologne, Germany.
Her father had died when she was very young and so her mother had brought her
up with Jennifer's grandfather Walter. However when she was sixteen Walter died
leaving her devastated. For this reason she deeply treasured an old transistor
radio that Walter had owned. It was a Philips 070, made in 1978, and it didn't
work; but Michael decided he'd have a tinker with it to see if he could get it
going. He failed, so the couple put the old radio in a desk drawer in Michael's
study and forgot all about it. Then a few months later it was "The Big Day"
of their wedding and just before the ceremony began Jennifer told Michael how
badly she was missing her family and friends back in
Germany.
She lamented that her grandfather was dead and so couldn't give her away. The
ceremony began and just at the moment when they said their wows and exchanged
rings the sound of music made everybody stop and look around them. Everybody
checked their mobile devices, but they had politely turned them all off. Then
they realized the music was coming from Michael's study, specifically a drawer
in his desk. It was the old radio, the one that wouldn't work. It was not only
working, and had started working at the very climax of the wedding ceremony,
but it was playing a romantic love song that Jennifer's grandfather really
liked. After that the radio broke down again and has never played since. Shermer
says in his article that if he'd heard it from somebody else he'd never have
believed it; and he
has heard it from
other people and
hasn't believed them,
many many times. More than anybody else, he knows the implications of
questioning a "rational explanation" for an anomalous event. His new
wife was as much a skeptic as he is (how could she put up with him otherwise?),
but she feels the same way he does about what happened. Shermer goes on to say:
"I have to admit, it rocked me back
on my heels and shook my Skepticism to its core... The emotional
interpretations of such anomalous events grant them significance regardless of
their causal account. And if we are to take seriously the scientific credo to
keep an open mind and remain agnostic when the evidence is indecisive or the
riddle unsolved, we should not shut the doors of perception when they may be
opened to us to marvel in the mysterious". See here for the full
article:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/anomalous-events-that-can-shake-one-s-skepticism-to-the-core/.
This is an extraordinary statement for a skeptic to make. What if Michael Shermer
has actually ceased to be a skeptic?
I decided I would monitor Michael Shermer's activities
closely to see if there was any change in his behaviour to suggest that he was
integrating his mysterious experience. He has a website which he doesn't do
much with except post links to his
Scientific
American column, see:
http://www.michaelshermer.com/.
This column is the best source for his ongoing thought narrative. In the
following issue, November 2014, Shermer published an article which predictably
stuck a bell with me:
Why Do People
Believe in Conspiracy Theories? He said therein:
"Encouragingly, Uscinski and Parent (psychological researchers)
found that education makes a difference in reducing conspiratorial thinking...
Even so, that means more than one in five Americans with postgraduate degrees
show a high predisposition for conspiratorial belief. As an educator, I find
this disturbing." This must mean he has not begun thinking
alternatively, at least on a conspiratorial level. Then in February of this
year he asked:
What Can Be Done about
Pseudoskepticism? in which he riles against "climate change
deniers!" and how the tobacco industry used to tell people smoking wasn't
really unhealthy. His latest article, put online only yesterday, is the cherry
on the cake as far as I'm concerned, and it has been given an almost textbook
title for Shermer:
The Difference between
Science and Pseudoscience. Here he critiques Wal Thornhill's electric
universe theory, 9/11 conspiracy theories and, most relevantly, Prof. Gary
Schwartz and his work on afterlife communications.
"(Prof. Schwartz) explained that the brain is like a television
set and consciousness is like the signals coming into the brain. 'You need a
brain to be conscious, but consciousness exists elsewhere. But TV studios
generate and broadcast signals.' 'Where', I inquired, 'is the consciousness
equivalent to such production facilities?' No answer." This must mean
that Shermer has not entertained the possibility that the incident at his
wedding with the radio was a genuine supernatural contact with his dead
grandfather-in-law. See here for Michael Shermer's
SA column links:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/author/michael-shermer/.
Shermer's focus has changed somewhat during the last year. His latest book is
called
The Moral Arc and is a
departure from his previous writings. It is more a work of philosophical ethics
and has clearly been inspired by Stephen Pinker. Pinker himself described it as
a "sequel" to his own book
The
Better Angels of our Nature. It paints an optimistic and philanthropic view
of mankind as becoming a kinder and less aggressive species as time moves on.
Human rights of all varieties are now better regarded than they used to be. (I
don't completely agree with either Shermer or Pinker, see:
http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/savages.html,
but that's beside the point right now.) This shift in attitude began before his
wedding experience though. The book was published just six months after the
radio came to life. As somebody who has written books myself, I know that means
he had to have been writing or editing it at the time. Shermer has also made a
few video appearances and he has posted links to some on his website. He spoke
at TEDx Ghent, see:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qP0xUNYzXc.
He's also done a dialogue with a rather battered-looking Richard Dawkins, see:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bkDgmqrvg0
(Maybe Dawkins was beaten up by some Indian street-cleaners, see:
http://hpanwo-hpwa.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/richard-dawkins-patronizing-git.html)
In conclusion, I'm afraid it looks as if Shermer has
not changed his mind about the skeptic worldview. In fact after his
"anomalous event" which "shook his skepticism to the core",
he has simply picked himself up, dusted himself off and carried on walking down
Skeptic Avenue without even
breaking his stride. Does this mean all hope has gone? No. Very rarely do
people change their minds overnight about something very fundamental to their
worldview. Sometimes it can take even longer than a whole year. As I say in the
background posts above, I never expected Shermer to have a road to
Damascus
conversion. He's a man who had an amazing experience at his wedding that might have
begun a process in his mind. If so then the process could be a long one, with
fits and starts, doubts and wrong turns. He may still yet become a
"buh-leeva". There will be many obstacles in his wake, and not all of
them will be internal. The defection of one of their top superstars will be a
massive blow to the skeptic community and they will not let Shermer out of the
gate with goodwill; and he knows this very well. Will Jennifer join him in his
transformation, and if she won't could that spoil their marriage? As before, I
can only say that time will tell. I once again wish Michael Shermer all the
best and will defend him against his potential detractors to the fullest extent
of my abilities.
