The Enemies Of Reason (Part I and II)

September 27, 2011

Video courtesy of Google Videos, Year uploaded: 2007

About Part 1

Dawkins points to some of science’s achievements and describes it as freeing “most of us” from superstition and dogma. Picking up from his superstition-reason distinction in The Root of All Evil? (while recycling some footage from it), he then says reason is facing an “epidemic of superstition” that “impoverishes our culture” and introduces gurus that persuade us “to run away from reality”. He calls the present day “dangerous times”. He returns to science’s achievements, including the fact that, by extending our lifespan, it helps us to better appreciate its ‘other’ achievements. He turns his attention to astrology, which he criticises for stereotyping without evidence, and he tries an experiment in which 20 people of various star signs is asked if the verdict for Capricorn applies to them, while being told it is their ‘own’ star sign. The result was that the one Capricorn person did not believe it, but some of the others did. Dawkins is warned against the experiment by the astrologer Neil Spencer, and Dawkins tells him he is in a no-lose situation. “I hope so, yes”, replies Spencer. Having put astrology to the test and referred to larger-scale experiments, he then talks about the real beauty in astronomy, and then expresses frustration that 50% of the UK population – more than are members of one religion – believe in the paranormal. He then visits a palm reader, Simon Goodfellow, who makes statements Dawkins interprets as referring to retirement – which most people his age would soon be going in for, but not importantly Dawkins himself – and Cornell then finds himself in contradiction over whether or not the “spirit G” is a family member. Cornell next tries suggesting this spirit was in the military – again, typical of deceased relatives of people Dawkins’s age, but not of Dawkins. Cornell finishes with several explanations of why his powers might not always work, but Dawkins insists extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and then talks to the sceptical Derren Brown about cold reading, including misdirective tricks it uses