Topic: Podcast Interview suggestions

[cedric86]

And Gary Taubes might actually be up for it. He was on Skepticality so discussing his work on a skeptical podcast is not a foreign concept to him, and on that show he talked about an antagonistic appearance he had on Dr. Oz's show. So he and Steve has something in common, and Taubes is willing to discuss his work with people who disagree with him. The more I think about it, the more I think this could be a good show.

[Alex0030]

I know my suggestion has already been mentioned, and that he's most likely a very busy man, but I would like to see Prof. Brian Cox on the show at some point. It would be nice to hear the Rogues have a good long conversation about him with many things; cern, large hadron collider, physics in general, his Wonders of The Solar System/Universe and upcoming Life series, his love of Carl Sagan and Cosmos.
I think there's fertile ground for a good and interesting conversation there.

[D^2]

I suggest you interview Margaret Wertheim, a science writer who just came out with a book about scientific cranks called "Physics on the Fringe: Smoke Rings, Circlons, and Alternative Theories of Everything".  She spends much of the book talking about one guy in particular, Jim Carter, who has been working on his mechanistic Theory of Everything for almost 50 years, publishing numerous books but zero peer-reviewed articles.

[LaPalida]

Don't know if he has already been suggested or has been interviewed... but David Suzuki... he's awesome!

[seaotter]

Don't know if he has already been suggested or has been interviewed... but David Suzuki... he's awesome!

Love him

[ufo]

Sam Harris.   I would love to hear Dr. Steve and the Rogues discuss the two recent articles on Sam's website:  The Mystery of Consciousness (parts 1 and 2).  Sam seems to be tippy toe-ing around the edge of mysticism by his assertion that the emergence of consciousness from physical processes must remain forever almost as mysterious as the creation of the universe from "nothing".  Sounds like he's getting very close to Eric Kvaalen's idea that there are some questions that just can't be answered by science.  Eric is a frequent kibbitzer on NewScientist articles' comments section.

[ufo]

Jonathan Weiler

Weiler is co-author, with Marc Hetherington of Vanderbilt, of the book Authoritarianism and Polarization in American Politics.

He was interviewed on a recent SGI Point of Inquiry podcast and his comments there were the best exposition of the scientific worldview which I've heard in quite a while.

It raised an interesting question for me which I’ve not seen explored scientifically anywhere yet.

Why are Christians mostly not running amok?

Catholics can always confess their sins and be absolved of anything from theft to child rape and murder, so what stops most of them doing this on a regular basis…. i.e. give in to whatever base impulses they may have and then confess and be absolved?  I know one person who is in some weird religious fundamentalist sect which holds that the one and only thing which is required to get into heaven is to accept Jesus as your lord and saviour.  I flat out asked him if Hitler could have availed himself of this get out of hell free card and his answer was “yes”.  I didn’t ask him why he didn’t kill his wife and kids for the insurance money when he tired of living with them since he could still go to heaven by judicious use of that card in the last minutes of a completely amoral, hedonistic life—for fear of endangering his family, but it remains a question for me.  I know there are some Christian terrorists who take the bible too literally and do act on what they believe it instructs them to do, but these are in a small minority.

Why is that?  More to the point, how do they explain that to themselves? As Weiler points out, there is nothing special about human pro-social behaviour. It is present in all social animals, but how do the self-proclaimed believers in the holy books explain it in terms of their beliefs?

Obviously, Christian dogma, (and perhaps even less so Muslim dogma), does not really provide much of a push toward a moral life.  The biggest crime to a muslim or a devout christian is to question their respective religious dogma.  Murder, torture, genocide, human sacrifice are all minor pecadillos compared to that and are easily forgiven and in some cases even encouraged.

[GodSlayer]

It raised an interesting question for me which I’ve not seen explored scientifically anywhere yet.

Why are Christians mostly not running amok?

Catholics can always confess their sins and be absolved of anything from theft to child rape and murder, so what stops most of them doing this on a regular basis…. i.e. give in to whatever base impulses they may have and then confess and be absolved?

what would science offer to that question?

police exist; they're not smart enough to avoid being caught; prison sucks.
I don't see why my amoral atheist reasons can't work for them.

Why is that?  More to the point, how do they explain that to themselves? As Weiler points out, there is nothing special about human pro-social behaviour. It is present in all social animals, but how do the self-proclaimed believers in the holy books explain it in terms of their beliefs?

if they don't want to do something, they can say they're good
if they want to, but don't do it, they can say their religion helps them
if they want to, and do, they can say the flesh is weak and man is fallen.

but what does their delusion about why they do what they do matter?

[cedric86]

if they want to, but don't do it, they can say their religion helps them

But this doesn't explain the behavior of people who believe the only thing that matters is accepting Jesus as one's savior, and only partially explains good behavior by people who believe they can simply repent and be forgiven. As for why it's a scientific question, I think social scientists, as well as biologists studying sociality in non-humans, could offer heaps of non-religious explanations.

[GodSlayer]

if they want to, but don't do it, they can say their religion helps them

But this doesn't explain the behavior of people who believe the only thing that matters is accepting Jesus as one's savior, and only partially explains good behavior by people who believe they can simply repent and be forgiven. As for why it's a scientific question, I think social scientists, as well as biologists studying sociality in non-humans, could offer heaps of non-religious explanations.

are you sure such people exist? (in other words, are you sure they don't believe they have to ask for god's grace, to actually repent their fallen ways, that, rather, they can be idolatrise and sinful without restraint or asking for strength to resist, and God having no choice but to give them the salvation they want?)

[cedric86]

are you sure such people exist?

I'm not sure that any significant number of people with such an extreme view exist, but I do think there are people who believe asking for forgiveness and salvation is by far the most important moral imperative, and that sin is in fact unavoidable. But to be honest, I have trouble making sense of anything that these people believe. It simply doesn't make sense to me and never has.

[ufo]

are you sure such people exist?

I'm not sure that any significant number of people with such an extreme view exist, but I do think there are people who believe asking for forgiveness and salvation is by far the most important moral imperative, and that sin is in fact unavoidable. But to be honest, I have trouble making sense of anything that these people believe. It simply doesn't make sense to me and never has.

I know one person who is in some weird religious cult -- I presume he's not the only member since he has bible study sessions with them.  I suspect from some of his comments that it is some variant on prosperity theology. He says that the only thing that matters is accepting Jesus as your savior.   I did ask him about the case of Hitler.  If he accepted Jesus just before he shot himself, would he go to heaven?  The answer was "Yes". 

I suspect a significant fraction of the religious right in the US hold this belief -- based on how they keep bloviating about the need to accept Jesus as your savior.

[ufo]

Massimo Pigliucci 

It would be fascinating to hear how the SGU crew's insights into the latest neuroscience compares with Massimo's latest comments in his Rationally Speaking Blog on the subject of free will.

[seaotter]

We are meat machines!

[GodSlayer]

I know one person who is in some weird religious cult -- I presume he's not the only member since he has bible study sessions with them.  I suspect from some of his comments that it is some variant on prosperity theology. He says that the only thing that matters is accepting Jesus as your savior.

if that's all that matters, why the need for private religious culty goodness?