Freethought Videos

In this month's audio podcast, Jende attends the Atheist Alliance International Convention in Burbank, CA, and hears from an assorted number of conference attendees who make up our movement. Listen in as he talks with an Objectivist-influenced rock band, a leader from a Ethical Culture Society, the founder of a freethought film festival, an Arab atheist, and a Pilates instructor--all who came together in California to take part in AAI's annual conference. Also, Jes interviews one of the founders of Eternal Earth-Bound Pets, a post-rapture pet rescue program run by atheists.

Russell Blackford is an Australian writer, philosopher, and critic, and editor-in-chief of The Journal of Evolution and Technology. His new book, edited with Udo Schuklenk, is 50 Voices of Disbelief: Why We Are Atheists. In this interview with D.J. Grothe, Russell Blackford explains the need for 50 Voices of Disbelief. He argues that there can be no more important question than whether religion and faith deliver on their promises. He explores whether religion will persist. He contends that religious leaders are not our society's moral leaders. He discusses a number of contributed essays in the 50 Voices collection, such as James Randi's, entitled "A Magician Looks at Religion," which explores how a background in magic may inform one's understanding of religion, and Peter Adegoke's essay, which argues that religion is impeding Nigeria's social, economic and scientific progress. He talks about how the book includes contributions from people all over the world and from every continent, except Antarctica. He discusses essays by Sumitra Padmanabhan and Prabir Ghosh that explore the harms that religion cause in India, and alternatives to religion, such as humanism. He talks about how the diversity of views in the essay collection show that there is "no party-line of atheism."Â He comments on essays by psychologist and parapsychologist Susan Blackmore ("Giving Up Ghosts and Gods"), and philosopher Philip Kitcher ("Beyond Disbelief"). He discusses recent controversies over CFI's International Blasphemy Day, and opposing views of Paul Kurtz and Ron Lindsay regarding criticism of religion, and whether "moderate religion" should be criticized or viewed as an ally to advance secular, pro-science values. He talks about the relationship between atheism and progressive social values. And he argues that religion should not be allowed to remain private, and therefore beyond public scrutiny and critique.

Ben Radford is is one of the world's few science-based paranormal investigators, and has done first-hand research into psychics, ghosts and haunted houses, exorcisms, Bigfoot, lake monsters, UFO sightings, crop circles, and other topics. He is managing editor of Skeptical Inquirer magazine and author of Media Mythmakers: How Journalists, Activists, and Advertisers Mislead Us, and Lake Monster Mysteries: Investigating the World's Most Elusive Creatures (with Joe Nickell). He also writes online at LiveScience.com, MediaMythmakers.com and Monsterscience.com. In this discussion with D.J. Grothe, Ben Radford surveys the current issue of Skeptical Inquirer magazine, which is focused on "Skepticism 2.0" and the future of the skeptical movement. He describes various articles by contributors to the issue such as Daniel Loxton, Jeff Wagg, Karen Stollznow, Blake Smith, Heidi Anderson, Reed Esau, Tim Farley and others. He talks about blogging, podcasts and youtube and the opportunities they present for new skeptical outreach. He explores ways national skeptical organizations can collaborate. He talks about why it is important to build on the important work of skeptical luminaries such as Carl Sagan, Ray Hyman, James Randi, Martin Gardner and Joe Nickel, and how to do so. And he also talks about his sacrilegious board game Playing Gods.

Greg Craven is a high school science teacher and climate change activist from Oregon. His new book is What's the Worst That Could Happen? A Rational Response to the Climate Change Debate. In this conversation with D.J. Grothe, Greg Craven discusses the youtube video on global warming he created that now has nearly 8 million views. He talks about applying game theory to the "decision paralysis" people have surrounding the global warming debate, using a "decision grid." He explores misunderstandings most people have about the nature of science, and whether or not science can provide certainty about important questions facing society. He emphasizes as a starting point the acknowledgement, whether one is a skeptic of global warming or a "panicked activist," that one could be wrong about global warming. He argues that the evidence is not what is most important in the climate change debate, because each side has "evidence" to support its conclusions. He talks about "confirmation bias," and how it makes it difficult to find out the truth about global warming. He explains why it is less important to personally live "green," and why others kinds of social environmentalist activism is more important. He details why America's mobilization in World War II and also modern social networking on the internet are the only two things that give him hope regarding responsibly responding to climate change.

J.D. Trout is a professor of philosophy at Loyola University Chicago, and an adjunct professor at the Parmly Sensory Sciences Institute. He writes on the nature of scientific and intellectual progress, as well as on the contribution that social science can make to human well-being. He is the author of Measuring the Intentional World, and co-author of Epistemology and the Psychology of Human Judgment. His most recent book is The Empathy Gap: Building Bridges to the Good Life and the Good Society. In this discussion with D.J. Grothe, J. D. Trout argues for using science to engineer society in ways that help people overcome their natural cognitive biases. He notes that whether or not we know it, we are always participants in the social experiments, often experiments conducted by unqualified elected officials. He details a number of small experiments that have public policy implications, such as using social science to trick people into keeping hospitals more germ-free, public bathrooms cleaner, and prescriptions from being filled erroneously. He explores the tensions between the unfettered free market and governmental regulation in this regard, and argues that in many cases it is an empirical question as to whether the free market can solve a particular problem. He discusses the anti-vax movement, and the best strategies to adopt in order to overcome suspicions public health measures such as widespread vaccination programs. He argues that the evidence is overwhelming that the general public lacks the cognitive resources to consistently make good decisions about its well-being, and he defends this view from charges that it is "Big Brother." He makes a distinction between the public making good decisions about what priorities to pursue, and good decisions about the means to pursue them. He tells why he thinks the U.S. Government should create something like a House Committee on Social Science, and how such a Committee would offer an alternative to failed "Blue Ribbon" panels such as the Meese Commission on Obscenity and Pornography. He contends that the United States Government should have tax-payer funded "well being programs," similar to countries in Europe, as a public health measure (because happy people are healthier people). He he explains how the Obama Administration is allied with such proposals to use science to better engineer society, because Obama is an "Enlightenment President," who believes in the power of science to transform society for the better. And he describes what science activists can do to advance such an agenda.

J.D. Trout is a professor of philosophy at Loyola University Chicago, and an adjunct professor at the Parmly Sensory Sciences Institute. He writes on the nature of scientific and intellectual progress, as well as on the contribution that social science can make to human well-being. He is the author of Measuring the Intentional World, and co-author of Epistemology and the Psychology of Human Judgment. His most recent book is The Empathy Gap: Building Bridges to the Good Life and the Good Society. In this interview with D.J. Grothe, J. D Trout draws distinctions between empathy and sympathy. He talks about the "empathy gap," which is a set of natural, evolved limits on empathy, and how these limits negatively affect society, such as difficulties people experience when trying to empathize with others who are religiously, culturally or psychologically different from themselves. He talks about how the results of empathy can actually be crippling for an individual. He talks about how we should use new research in the social sciences to overcome the empathy gap. He explores if new social science questions basic capitalistic assumptions of the American Dream and also philosophical concepts, such as free-will. He explains how new social science research supports the Enlightenment outlook. He details a number of well-researched cognitive biases that lead people to make bad decisions, such as the base-rate effect, overconfidence bias, the omission bias, the hindsight bias, and the availability bias, among others. He shares his skepticism that education about cognitive biases, or the adoption of "inside strategies," can diminish the negative effect of such biases. He proposes that society adopt "outside strategies," which is the government or institutions adopting policies and strategies to help the public overcome their cognitive biases, because he argues individuals will not be very successful on their own in counteracting them. And he explores to what extent these kind of institutional or governmental strategies and policies are "social engineering."

Jeff Sharlet is a contributing editor for Harper's and Rolling Stone, and a visiting research scholar at New York University's Center for Religion and Media, where he has taught journalism and religious studies. He is the coauther, with Peter Manseau, of Killing the Buddha, and editor of TheRevealer.org. His latest book, a New York Times bestseller, is The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power. In this in-depth interview with D.J. Grothe, Jeff Sharlet explains why secularists should not assume that just because there is a Democrat in the White House it follows that the religious fundamentalists' power has waned. He talks about how a secretive Christian political organization called The Family is founded in a doctrine of "Biblical Capitalism" and the "totalitarianism of Christ" that draws no distinction between religion, economics and politics and he recounts its origins in a supposed revelation from God that attacked organized labor and stated that Christianity has historically been overly focused on the poor, the weak and the suffering. He draws distinctions between the "pulpit pounders and the Bible thumpers" and "the fundamentalist elite," which is exemplified by The Family, which is comprised almost entirely of well-educated, affluent political and business leaders. He describes how The Family organizes Congressman into "private prayer cells," and runs the C Street House, which was made famous through the political sex scandals of Senator John Ensign and Governor Mark Sanford. He contrasts organizations like the Heritage Foundation and Christian leaders such as James Dobson and Pat Robertson with The Family, arguing that at least they are open with their agenda, as opposed to the Family, which unapologetically encourages secrecy by working to be "an invisible organization." He describes how The Family's relationship with the powerful is different than groups like Focus on the Family, and explains how their lack of rigid partisan or religious orthodoxy allows them to be more effective. He argues that The Family literally works to subvert democracy, and how the organization celebrates Hitler, Mao and Stalin as being among the few men the 20th Century who actually "understood the New Testament." He reports that The Family acts consistently as an intermediary between US Politicians and military leaders and businessman on the one hand, and overseas dictators such as the Somali dictator Siyad Barre, Ugandan dictator Museveni, and Indonesia dictator Suharto on the other hand, often with disastrous consequences. He details the history and importance of the National Prayer Breakfast to The Family's agenda. He describes ways that writing his expose has resulted in a backlash against him. He lists ways that secularists and progressives can work to reduce the influence of The Family in government. And he reveals a number of elected officials in high office who have ties to The Family, including Republican United States Senators Chuck Grassley, John Ensign, Jim DeMint, James Inhofe, Sam Brownback, and Lindsey Graham; Democratic United States Senator Mark Pryor; South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, Former United States Attorneys General John Ashcroft and Ed Meese; and Democratic Congressmen Mike McIntyre and Bart Stupak, among others.

William Little is a freelance journalist based in London, England. He has written for the Saturday Telegraph magazine, Weekend Telegraph, the Guardian, The Times and the Financial Times. He has also worked for Arena, Esquire and Cosmopolitan, and contributed articles to the Independent, the Daily Express and the Big Issue, among many others. His recent book is The Psychic Tourist: A Voyage into the Curious World of Predicting the Future. In this interview with D.J. Grothe, William Little recounts his experiences researching The Psychic Tourist, including his seminar with Sylvia Browne, meetings with UK mentalist Derren Browne, scientists Richard Dawkins and Nobel Prize-winning physicist Brian Jospehson, attending a psychic college, and his sister's star chart predicting her death. He reveals his motivations writing the book, and talks about how his journalistic approach is different than the approach of some academic skeptics who write for more of an already skeptical audience. He explores what it might say about society if there is such widespread belief in psychics when there is so little evidence to support psychic claims. He contrasts the harm psychics do with how they may help people. He explains why he thinks of psychic belief as "disorganized religion." And he talks about the skeptics he met who weren't cold-hearted, but instead were interested in helping people. Also in this episode, Jim Underdown recounts his experiences with famous psychics making bad guesses, including John Edward and James Van Praagh.

Paul Kurtz is founder and chair emeritus of the Center for Inquiry and founder of a number of other organizations. A Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, he is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the State University of New York at Buffalo, chairman of the Committee for the Skeptical Inquiry, the Council for Secular Humanism, and Prometheus Books. He is the author or editor of almost fifty books, including The New Skepticism: Inquiry and Reliable Knowledge. Throughout the last four decades, Kurtz has been a leading defender of science and reason against the prevailing cults of irrationality in our society, and has been interviewed widely in the media on a wide range of subjects, including alternative medicine and communication with the dead, to the historicity of Jesus and parapsychology. In this conversation with D.J. Grothe, Paul Kurtz argues against associating secular humanism with atheism and explains whether or not he himself is an atheist. He reviews the history of the word "agnostic," and shows how it "is not a creed but a method." He explains why he is skeptical of the claims of theism. He denies that atheism is a necessary condition of secular humanism. He describes what he considers as the third "categorical imperative." He explains why he considers some atheist activists to be "fundamentalist atheists," arguing that their anti-religious stance stems from "being bruised" by religion. He talks about why he is against CFI's support of the International Blasphemy Day, and why it is "blasphemous to the whole humanist outlook" and is contrary to the "civic virtues of democracy."