Bill Nye - In Praise of Reason (and Skepticism)
Posted: 07 November 2011 09:58 PM   [ Ignore ]
Administrator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  170
Joined  2009-06-02

Host: Chris Mooney

Recently in New Orleans, the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry held the very first CSICON—the conference dedicated to scientific inquiry and critical thinking.

The main honoree: Bill Nye the Science Guy, who was given CSI’s premiere “In Praise of Reason” award.

The next day, Point of Inquiry caught up with Nye, a guest who really needs no introduction… at least not to the thousands upon thousands of kids who saw a little show called Bill Nye the Science Guy.

Since then, Nye has has been involved in many other endeavors and television programs to improve science teaching and understanding in our country, including his latest show on Planet Green, “Stuff Happens”.

Nye is an engineer, inventor, author, comedian—a supporter of clean energy, and above all a skeptic.

http://www.pointofinquiry.org/bill_nye_in_praise_of_reason_and_skepticism/

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 November 2011 12:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1201
Joined  2009-05-10

Best interview ever!

 Signature 

“What people do is they confuse cynicism with skepticism. Cynicism is ‘you can’t change anything, everything sucks, there’s no point to anything.’ Skepticism is, ‘well, I’m not so sure.’” -Bill Nye

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 November 2011 09:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1805
Joined  2005-07-20

He’s a good man, and he’s taken an inspiring lead, I think.  Oh those engineers!  It was refreshing to hear him speak candidly, and as himself rather than as “the science guy”.  smile

 Signature 

I saw a happy rainbow recently.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 November 2011 10:53 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2011-09-02

Mooney said that the US congress is divided on climate change. Observing things from Europe it looks like the US is congress is divided on pretty much everything. These same divisions can be seen on discussion boards. Even the media in America is divided along ideological lines.

No doubt this polarization of viewpoints has many reasons and a long history, but I think there is one major cause for it that gets surprisingly little attention. This is the fact that your Congress has only two major political parties. And apparently it’s quite difficult to start a new political party that gets representatives elected. I mean, you don’t even have a serious political representation for the green movement.

Don’t you think that a congress should better represent the existing diversity of political views among the people? The current situation is obviously dumbing down your political discourse, and making it seem as if every question has only two possible solutions, the democratic or the republican.

To an outsider living in a country that has a functioning parliament with many parties from different points of the political spectrum, this system seems peculiar. It’s almost like a system quasi democracy. Am I wrong?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 November 2011 12:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  55
Joined  2008-03-21
Holger - 11 November 2011 10:53 AM

To an outsider living in a country that has a functioning parliament with many parties from different points of the political spectrum, this system seems peculiar. It’s almost like a system quasi democracy. Am I wrong?

It’s an interesting question.  I suspect our two parties include members who fall along a broader political spectrum than the larger number of parties under parliamentary system, so perhaps each might effectively be a coalition;  however, these coalitions have no power to elect the president, so this may work to reduce the power of minority interests.

Whether this is a good thing or bad thing is debatable.  It’s true that our government cripples itself in its ability to implement agendas, but then, we’ve sometimes been grateful that certain radical agendas have been crippled, such as the recent Tea Party initiatives.  Even if our government structure isn’t optimal, I’m still inclined to believe that most of our political problems lie with the dysfunctionality of the American population, rather than the structure of government.  But campaign financing issues could be a big factor too.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 November 2011 04:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1201
Joined  2009-05-10

I think the two party system is encouraged by our voting system - ranked voting. Maybe something like range voting would be better? (see Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem)

 Signature 

“What people do is they confuse cynicism with skepticism. Cynicism is ‘you can’t change anything, everything sucks, there’s no point to anything.’ Skepticism is, ‘well, I’m not so sure.’” -Bill Nye

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 January 2014 10:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2014-01-05

First of all, I love Bill Nye, he’s why I’m on this site!  And there’s a certain irony to loving and trusting the words of a skeptic, but a certain logic too.  Perhaps a discussion for another day…

I just wanted to comment on the American two party system, because people often lament over it, and I have a simple solution, but also a comment on where the problem really lies.

First, my solution: count all votes, for all candidates.  So if there’s 5 people running, and I vote for 3, all three get a +1 to their tally.  I’ll pick all the ones I can live with, and one of them will win.  It’ll never be my first pick, because he’ll be too progressive and crazy for most folks.  Then again, it’ll be someone I can live with, someone the vast majority of voters can live with, not just the favorite of a plurality. 

Meantime, the real problem is in voting primaries.  In the USA, the government pays for primary elections and ballots, but you must be either a democrat or a republican to get that money.  There really are no exceptions to that, so by the time the main election comes around, the “serious” candidates are: the lead democrat, the lead republican, plus any third party candidate who can raise enough money to spend as much as the government just spent (hint: Ross Perot).

Open primaries where no party can control the content of the (single) ballot would go a long way to weakening the 2 parties, which is why they fight this idea every time it’s brought up.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 January 2014 07:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  255
Joined  2012-09-14

I remember watching Bill Nye when I was a kid
Memories smile

While having a democratic republic society has its advantages, I dont think I feel comfortable with it in a country whose citizens are like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE

Granted this may be an extreme case, but suffice it to say, the old days of seriously studying issues (as opposed to watching news by “all-knowing journalists”) are gone.
Neil Postman discussed this briefly in his book Technopoly
http://www.amazon.com/Technopoly-The-Surrender-Culture-Technology/dp/0679745408


May be an education reform is needed. There is an interesting lecture by a scholar who studied over 5 years in traditional West African education, as well as in PhD programs here in the U.S.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUjV0wuUoxU

 Signature 

Say: He is God, the Unique.
God, the Self-Sufficient.
He does not give birth, nor was He born.
And there is none equal to Him.

Quran (112: 1-4)

Profile