Hacker News Reader

Comment by tokenadult | Hacker News Reader

PZ Myers's blog has a good comment on this opinion piece:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/07/solution_blame_sc...

Earlier on his blog he provided detailed criticisms of the book by the same authors.

Actually, that's not really much of a comment. Based on your pitch I was expecting a nice little tear-down, instead it's just drive-by on a book they wrote.

The "nice little tear-down" is in the book review mentioned, but not linked, by the parent (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/07/unscientific_amer...). Apparently these guys aren't very fond of PZ, and he isn't very fond of them either.

Should've linked that one first!

That's because the comment really should have linked to the actual review, which I bothered to dig through the backlog for:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/07/unscientific_amer...

and the followup:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/07/unscientific_amer...

I wish I hadn't upvoted that. He's usually pretty good, but on this score I wish he would engage, engage, and engage some more rather than get defensive and dismissive. Their solutions need criticism, but I agree that scientists have generally been part of the problem. I interpret the anti-science I see in society as a backlash against the lack of humility, and outright arrogance, many scientists use to push their favored field.

The bottom line is we're dependent on public dollars. It's our duty to explain what we do as public servants not as private dictators. We may not be comfortable talking about questions of faith, but that's what the public demands because it's closest to what they believe on a daily basis. I much prefer the Sagan model over the Dawkins version. From a distance it seems Sagan managed to advance science, while Dawkins seems to undermine it. It's all in how you treat people who disagree with you.

I wish he would engage, engage, and engage some more...

Well, isn't that as much a problem with blogs as a problem with PZ? As I found by digging through his archives, he'd already engaged, at some length.

The problem is that it's a hassle for either him or us to dig through his backlog and provide links to the meat of his arguments.

Blogs are great, but there's certainly room for improvement in the way they organize knowledge.

Blogs are great, but there's certainly room for improvement in the way they organize knowledge.

Hear. Hear.

I appreciate the comments here on HN above suggesting that I should have linked to PZ's review of the two authors' book rather than to his post today about the Boston Globe piece. I chose specificity of response to what was submitted here (yes, and personal convenience in slogging through PZ's blog to find the links) over lengthiness of post and point-by-pointness of reply.

I agree to a large extent. That's a big part of the app we're working on.

But in these posts, he comes across as angry and bitter. That's no way to engage the general public (even as it might be a great way to engage his audience).

I much prefer the Sagan model over the Dawkins version.

I think most members of the general public (in the United States) would consider both Dawkins and the late Sagan as rather hard-line critics of religious commitment, which may be part of what is at issue here. I'm still looking for the scientifically trained person with a "friendly atheist" manner who can talk about secular rationality as a view of the world without being dismissive of trust in traditional worldviews.

Sagan never came across that way to me and he described himself as agnostic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com