The Future of Skepticism
This week the SF Weekly ran a cover story on James Randi and the Amazing Meeting, as pictured below. The article, by Michael Mooney, provides a favorable synopsis on the history of Randi, the skeptical movement, and a glimpse into the Amazing Meeting 7, which was attended by Mooney back in July. Although the SF Weekly is a local San Francisco alternative newspaper, it’s great to see that skepticism is obtaining positive coverage. The full article (6 pages) can be found here.
One of the more provocative questions raised by the article was what will happen to the skeptical movement with the loss of Randi, who is now 81 years old and no longer in the greatest of health. During the Amazing Meeting 7, Randi revealed that he recently had an operation to remove a small cancer and was valiantly putting his best foot forward, however, it was evident that he was not at full strength.
Although many skeptics value Randi immensely, for his vast contributions and experience, I would suggest that the skeptical movement will continue to progress after he has gone. Randi has been a strong foundation, and continues to be a tremendous force in the modern skeptical movement, but skepticism does not depend on him. With the movement picking up steam, in what is increasingly becoming a pro-intellectual landscape, there are many prominent skeptics that will build on his work and contribute to the refinement of the methodology and scope of skepticism. The number of adherents to the community have reached such a threshold that there will undoubtedly be members to fill Randi’s shoes and to maintain the work of the James Randi Educational Foundation.
With the recent growth in the popularity of the Amazing Meeting and the number of people who identify as skeptics, the movement appears to be going through some growing pains which must be addressed as we move forward; these include:
- People from vastly different lifestyles will incorporate under the banner of skepticism, which currently is primarily stereotyped as educated libertarian white male; how this diversity will be enveloped, I think, remains to be truly seen.
- There were few minorities represented at the Amazing Meeting 7, therefore obtaining greater diversity must be made a priority.
- Politics has entered into the scope of skeptical inquiry, which appears to be developing a rift in the community.
Although, anecdotally, my experience has been that skeptics are a very welcoming bunch, the above bullet points will test that accommodation. Under the banner of skepticism is a wide and diverse spectrum of attitudes, approaches and degrees. In looking at these potential instruments for internal quarrel, it is my opinion that a central organization be adopted in order to maintain the commonality and direction of the movement; without such there appears the potential for fragmentation.
If such a disintegration were to occur, the method of skeptical inquiry would continue and remain relatively unchanged as it is embedded in science and philosophy. However, such a dissolution would have a negative impact on the community and our ability to lobby at the state and federal levels. Currently, the community to composed of a series of local groups that see modest attendance and work to progress the movement in accordance with their resources. As membership increases in these associations, the organizational structures will be challenged. In light of this, I think that it is imperative that a large organization, such as the JREF or CFI, take the initiative in becoming the cohesive body of the skeptical community in order to establish objectives and to provide infrastructure for these local affiliates.
In consort with the scientific method, skepticism, is an approach to inquiry, a thought process, that can be adopted and implemented by anyone. It does not require any specific education or degree, holds little value in authoritarianism and is subjected to constant self-correcting criticism. Like the scientific method, which continued to be refined after being established by the great minds of Alhazen, Bacon, Descartes, and Peirce, so too will skepticism.
