• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

dent skeptical efforts (blogs like Pharyngula or podcasts like The Paradoxical The Skeptics Guide to the Universe). From there they branch off to other online sources (other podcasts, especially) and com- munities (such as the James Randi Educational Foundation Future [JREF] Forum or the skeptical presence within social networks like Facebook or Twitter). For these skeptics, traditional print sources (like Skeptic or of Skepticism the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER) are not the automatic flagships of skepticism but rather afterthoughts—perhaps welcome as fur- ther reading but frequently off the radar altogether. Explosive DANIEL LOXTON grassroots growth thus comes at a cost. New skeptics may have little-to-no knowledge of the decades-long literature and hard- won lessons of skepticism. Some may not even be interested in ike many skeptics, I’m preoccupied by one question: learning about it. Nonetheless, communication technologies “How do we take this thing to the next level?” I have an allow anyone to mouth off in the name of “skepticism,” even L answer to propose. If skepticism is truly to come of age, with minimal experience or expertise. This can lower the bar for to move forward—if skepticism is really to help—we must quality, tarnish our public face, and offer further cover for fringe embrace a kind of paradox. In my opinion, the road ahead is pseudo-skeptical elements (such as climate change deniers). both more amateur and more professional. That’s the bad news; an amateur movement is necessarily bur- In the early days, skepticism was like a trail through the deep dened with some degree of amateurism. woods. Traditional skeptics’ organizations were the only guides; But the good news is so good that it’s worth almost any by publishing skeptical magazines and books, organizations cost: thousands of people are actively taking up the call to effectively were skepticism. As skepticism attracted more peo- skeptical activism in a distributed-yet-networked fashion that ple, an oxymoron began to emerge: skepticism became a sort of is qualitatively different from all that has come before. Many centrally controlled popular movement. This situation was tied are young (astonishingly, given the traditional demographics to technology, and it was destined to change. of skepticism), and many are women. Some are natural, pow- It takes funded organizations to promote skepticism through erful new leaders who might never have discovered skepticism expensive, high-risk means such as magazines and printed books. without the new digital tools. All bring their ideas—some of By contrast, the past decade (and the past five years in particular) which are spectacularly good ideas—to the table. have brought digital communication tools that make publishing and networking easy and cheap for grassroots skeptics every- The Change Is Upon Us where. No longer re stricted to specialist organizations, the trail This change has already happened. How can traditional groups is now shared by the thousands of amateur enthusiasts, social come to grips with this new distributed grassroots skepticism? networks, and independent projects that make up the popular For some, an essential step must be to give up on the dream movement of skepticism. of a unified, centralized rationalist movement—and to give This changes everything. It’s true that digital outreach may up the hard feelings and sense of schism that was so often the bring new grassroots support to traditional skeptical organiza- result. Personally, I don’t believe that unification was ever tions, but realizing that potential requires facing up to a more particularly desirable, but in any event, that ship has sailed. fundamental shift: traditional skeptical organizations are no Or, rather, ships: the reality we are faced with is a flotilla of longer the default leaders of the popular movement. Indeed, national, regional, and local skeptical organizations (plus all new skeptics may not even realize the traditional skeptical manner of humanist, atheist, and rationalist groups) moving groups exist. independently and chaotically yet roughly in parallel. Some The new wave of skeptics is comprised of children of the groups are larger and more influential than others, of course— Internet who find skepticism first through online sources there are aircraft carriers as well as rowboats—but the variety (such as iTunes or Google) where they happen across indepen- of organizations, efforts, projects, and mandates is dizzying. Traveling with those groups, variously leading or following Daniel Loxton is a writer, illustrator, and skeptic. He is the editor of Junior Skeptic magazine, a kids’ science section in their wake, are many thousands of individual grassroots bound into the Skeptics Society’s Skeptic magazine. skeptics tethered by an ever-shifting maze of networking tools (from Skep tics in the Pub to Twitter). How can this ragtag fleet accomplish anything? How can 24 Volume 33, Issue 6 Skeptical Inquirer existing skeptics’ groups help it to do so? I think there are several answers to this. First, skeptics must set aside the conceit that our goal is a cultural revolution or the dawning of a new Enlightenment. That concept resonates with me as powerfully as it does with anyone, but it is a dream with a bitter price: exhaustion and disappointment. After decades of labor, the horizon is just as far away as ever. When we focus on that distant, receding, and perhaps illusory goal, we fail to see the practical good we can do, the harm-reduction opportunities right in front of us. The long view subverts our understanding of the scale and hazard of paranormal beliefs,1 leading to sentiments that the paranormal is “trivial” or “played out.” By contrast, the immediate, local, human view—the view that asks “Will this help someone?”— sees obvious op portunities for every local group and grassroots skeptic to make a meaningful difference. Second, we should recognize that the long-standing iso- lation-versus-unification conundrum is a false dichotomy. There are practically infinite opportunities for skeptical orga- nizations to help each other toward our common goals, even as we diverge on areas of specialty or points of policy. Skeptics, like other groups, have their huffy schisms, but there is good news on this front, too: buoyed by grassroots enthusiasm and innovative independent projects, skeptical groups are more cooperative now than ever before. Old wounds are healing; new connections are being forged. There’s something in the air: a hopefulness and sense of purpose that wasn’t there even five years ago. (And I have to say that it feels wonderful.) This brings us to the third point. It’s not just that there are more grassroots skeptics. Here I must borrow a slogan from crowd-sourcing guru Clay Shirky: “More is different.”2 Yes, more supporters widen the net for the discovery of new activist leaders and breakthrough ideas, but the real untapped power of the new grassroots skepticism is its vast global distribution and its potential for collective action. In the past, skeptical groups have been overwhelmed by the sheer number of paranormal industries and pseudoscientific claims. The few skeptics were all required to know something about everything, with the result that general remarks were often the best we could manage in response to specific claims. Now, suddenly, the community of skeptics is large enough for many independent skeptics to specialize to a wholly new degree and to engage thousands of regional or particular claims. This is a profound change. When skeptics in every town and nation are networked globally, our resolution increases by an order of mag- nitude. This trend is already visible in watchdog projects so spe- cific that they can monitor single paranormal claimants (Robert Lancas ter’s Stopsylvia.com is a wonderful example) and blogs that focus on the skeptical challenges of a single industry (like skepticism in nursing) or avocation (consider Skepticdad.word- press.com or Rationalmoms.com). This distributed, specialized, individual action should be assisted and celebrated.3 Different again is the power of thousands of grassroots skeptics to act collectively. This is the power of the “long tail of skepticism” concept promoted by SkeptiCamp4 pioneer Reed Esau.5 Not every skeptic can be an expert, even regarding SKEPTICAL INQUIRER November / December 2009 25 a small, local mystery. Few grassroots skeptics are qualified amateurs take up more of the burden of skeptical activism, to be investigators or spokespeople and fewer still wish to be. organizations are increasingly free to focus on those things But most skeptics are sufficiently interested to take some small that only groups can accomplish. This is the paradox: the action if barriers to participation are low enough. Taken col- rise of the amateur skeptical movement makes professional lectively, thousands of tiny actions can have enormous effect. skepticism a more important and more reachable goal than The classic example is Wikipedia. By making it push-button ever before. easy for millions of users to take occasional tiny actions, Many tasks require dedicated organizations.7 In this article, Wikipedia has become one of humanity’s greatest resources. I’ll concentrate on just one, a task that is among the most This is unquestionably one of the key tasks for skepticism in crucial: professional journalism. This is one undertaking in the coming years: discovering ways to harness that long tail. which traditional large skeptical organizations can and should To these ends—practical goals, cooperation, and grassroots remain the leaders of the skeptical movement—and in which activism—I re cently had the honor of presiding over the pro- they must dramatically improve if they are to remain relevant. duction of What Do I Do Next? Leading Skeptics Discuss 105 For decades, skeptical magazines have been rare sources for Practical Ways to Promote Science and Advance Skepticism.6 This skeptical news items, opinion pieces, critical articles, and book reviews.

Load more

  4

Copy Link