Customer Reviews

The Skeptic's Dictionary: A Collection of Strange Beliefs, Amusing Deceptions, and Dangerous Delusions

5 star:		(22)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(15)

 

 

Let's get the quibble out of the way first. I don't like the
words "skeptic" and "dictionary" in the title (the "the" is
ok!). The tone is not skeptical, it is simply fact-oriented.
And the book is in encylopedia format, not dictionary format.

Now as to content. The author is a professor of philosophy, and
he tends to discuss the various topics from the standpoint
of logical and factual consistency, rather than from a scientific
standpoint. Since the topics under discussion generally have
no scientific aspects whatsoever, despite their pretenses, this
is hardly a defect. Entries tend to be a bit brief and terse,
as might be expected since most of the material appeared first
on the author's very useful website. I teach a course in
pseudoscience, and it covers a very, very wide range of topics
in this nearly bottomless field. I found accurate entries
on almost every one of those topics here, with very few
exceptions.

Discussion of medical quackery is always problematical in a book
of this kind, because of the tendency of quacks to sue authors,
not on the issue of false claims about the quack, but rather
on the narrow legal issue of "restraint of trade"--- in other
words, factual discussion of quacks and alternative healers
makes it harder for those quacks and alternative healers to find
paying suckers, or so their lawyers claim. But the author has
managed to discuss many common forms of quackery, and a number
of prominent quacks, nonetheless. More power to him and to
his publisher.

I don't know of another book exactly like this, with the same
broad sweep of content. I recommend it highly to anyone who is
interested in the facts, if any, behind some of the most
familiar myths of our time.

Robert Carroll has compiled an impressive collection of short articles defining and explaining ideas that warrant careful critical examination; that is, ideas deserving a thorough going over by a thoroughgoing skeptic. Carroll pulls no punches in his criticism of whacky cultish ideas, yet he does not brazenly skewer all sacred cows. Rather, he sets out to expose a wide range of ideas to the light of healthy skepticism, exposing blatant charades for what they are, explicating ideas that are often misconstrued or irrationally rejected, and casting doubt where doubt is due. I believe he largely succeeds in these endeavors.

The book is organized like a dictionary with an alphabetical listing of various words that Carroll sets out to explore in depth. I think the book is better described as an encyclopedia, however, because of the length and style of the articles, which are not terse definitions, but mini-essays. Here is a sampling of the "A" words to give you an idea of the range of topics that Carroll addresses: acupuncture, agnosticism, alien abductions, ancient astronauts, angel therapy, anthroposophy, argument from design, argument to ignorance, aromatherapy, astral projection, astrology, atheism, automatic writing, and avatar. (This is roughly one third of the entries under "A"). Even within this short list there are some whacky ideas (angel therapy and alien abductions), some borderline ideas (acupuncture and anthroposophy), and some words that are simply in want of a careful definition (agnosticism, atheism, and avatar). Carroll deals with them all rather even-handedly, at least from the perspective of a naturalistic worldview. Other topics covered in the book include Bible codes, Bigfoot, chiropractic, confirmation bias, crystal power, ESP, holistic medicine, karma, levitation, magnet therapy, miracles, Noah's Ark, etc. I think Carroll did a rather good job in selecting his topics as they cover such a panoply of beliefs; he is just as likely to find fault with one cult as any other.

With respect to Carroll's intentions, as he states in the introduction, "this book is a Davidian counterbalance to the Goliath of occult literature. I hope that an occasional missile hits its mark." Thus, Carroll apparently intends to instill a bit of healthy skepticism into those minds willing to accept it. And who might that be? Carroll identifies his intended audience as those uncommitted to occult claims (open-minded seekers), those who believe in them but have doubts (believing doubters), those who are more prone toward doubt than belief (soft-skeptics), and those who strongly disbelieve in occult ideas (hardened-skeptics). But, "The one group this book is not aimed at is the 'true believer' in the occult. If you have no skepticism in you, this book is not for you." I suspect that Carroll is quite right in his assessment; if you are an ardent believer in any of the cultish ideas that Carroll debunks, then you are unlikely to find his arguments compelling; The reason for that, of course, remains open to debate.

Here are a few short snippets from Carroll's entries. Under "acupuncture," Carroll first describes the history of the technique, its variants, and the types of claims made for it. His brief analysis suggests that there is little reason to believe that the anecdotal successes of the technique amount to anything more than regression toward the mean. In Carroll's words, "An alternative treatment such as acupuncture is sought only when the pain is near its most severe level. Natural regression will lead to the pain becoming less once it has reached its maximum level of severity." Under "agnostic," Carroll carefully defines the often-misunderstood word, explaining that "The agnostic holds that human knowledge is limited to the natural world, that the mind is incapable of knowledge of the supernatural. Understood this way, an agnostic could be either a theist or an atheist." Under "numerology," Carroll explores the idea of ascertaining a person's characteristics from numerical data based on name and birth date, and exposes it as a total sham. He links the perceived success of numerology to the "Forer effect", which he defines in another entry as "The tendency to accept vague and general personality descriptions as uniquely applicable to oneself without realizing that the same description could be applied to just about anyone."

This is a fun book to read, both because of its wide range of topics, and because of Carroll's no-nonsense pragmatic approach. I hope that the book will cajole at least a small minority of readers into critically examining some of the outlandish beliefs that surround us, and to wisely insist on something more than anecdotal evidence, wishful thinking, or arguments from ignorance before accepting them.

First off, this book is not impartial. It is opinionated, and honest about its intentions. Carroll declares, right off the bat, he is a hardened skeptic writing for a general audience. He isn't trying to appeal to devotees of the groups he sets out to rebuke, and he isn't trying to be objective or academic. Carroll gives occasional credit where credit's due to topics such as chiropractics, which are on the fence in terms of scientific merit and not over it, but most of the articles are curt. He aims to either provide ammunition to the already skeptical, or tilt an undecided person a notch more towards skepticism.

Provided you buy this understanding its honest intentions, and not expecting total objectivity or gentleness, you will find Skeptics Dictionary an informative and very readable book. Carroll's occasional touches of wit and humor combined with tight, quality writing make it a pleasing read. The articles are just long enough to give a good general overview of a subject, yet short enough to cover a tremendous range of topics. And Carroll helpfully provides references for further reading. The examination of a questionable belief may come from historical, logical or scientific angles, or a combination. The criticisms can be a bit repetitive ("ad hoc hypothesis" and "cold reading" accusations repeatedly stated), but only because most gurus are repetitive in their promises and rhetoric.

Carroll's skeptical eye is cast over topics as diverse as: alternative/quack medicine, alien-related intrigue, pseudoscience, new age mysticism, classical occultism, known political and spiritual hoaxes, conspiracy theories, and motivational pedagogues. He also explains underlying concepts relevant to all these fields, such as confirmation bias and communal reinforcement. And he touches on real science in various forms, as well as atheism and agnosticism. Though Carroll has little mercy for cult organizations and religious ideologues, such as creationists, there is a minimum of slander towards mainstream, moderate religious practices such as Judaism and non-fundamentalist Christianity.

Occasionally an article here or there may lack depth or leave a bad taste in the mouth, but on the whole I can highly recommend this book to anyone who is already at least marginally skeptical.

There is no review I could write for this book that would be as good as simply directing you to the books parent website, [...]. If you've read the site, then you know what to get from the book; a listing of various pseudoscience, religous and just plain 'out there' beliefs with short essays about why they are bunk.

The problem in the book lay in the fact that it simply isn't that much better than the website, making it difficult for me to recommend that anyone buy it when the site is free.

Still, if you want something you can take on the road with you, or something that you can bring to your 'true believer' friends' house, or if for some reason you would rather read a book than look at a computer monitor, then go ahead and buy it...if you liked the site, you'll like the book.

Unfortunately, that means a lot of mis-reviews have to be debunked.

First, Carroll never claimed this book would be exhaustive. He doesn't even claim that about his website.

Second, the book is a snapshot; the website is a motion picture. If you don't grasp that analogy, you probably shouldn't be reading either one.

Third, NO encylopedia or dictionary compiler of a century or two ago, let alone today, claims to be a polymath. Carroll refers to the best of what is out there in skeptical refutation of many commonly held misbeliefs.

Fourth, sarcasm intended, how does one become an "expert" in some of these fields where expertise is claimed to be needed? I don't know of any universities that offer degrees in UFOlogy, distant viewing, telekinesis, etc.

Fifth, Carroll IS an expert in the most important thing -- logical, critical thinking. As a professor of philosophy, he has all the academic credentials, which honed his real-life reasoning skills, for logical reasoning skills.

Sixth, some unskeptical reviewers need to look at semantics and linguistics. It's easy to say "Carroll is an idiot" when you're working with completely different definitions than he is. I've looked at a couple such reviewers, and their claimed references to the appropriate entries in this book were nowhere close to what Carroll actually wrote.

This book DOES give a concise overview of the state of skeptical empirical research and logical claims deconstruction of all the hot topics out there. I doubt that most bashing reviewers have even ever visited Carroll's website, www.skepdic.com, or will make the effort in the futhre.

This is one of those books where you pick it up to look something up, then find yourself flipping through it to check out other stuff and, before you know it, an hour or two has gone by. There is a lot of good stuff in here, so much so that I hate to criticize it for its few shortcomings, but here goes.

ALCHEMY-- The section could be a lot longer and more in-depth.
ANCIENT ASTRONAUTS-- He is apparently unaware of Thor Heyerdahl and his crew making an Easter Island statue.
ANOMALOUS LUMINOUS PHENOMENA-- He doesn't debunk!
CASTANEDA-- He is apparently unaware of Richard DeMille's numerous books and articles debunking Castaneda.
GURDJIEFF-- He too readily dismisses him as a crank and con-man, but then again, I'm biased.
LOCH NESS MONSTER-- Could have been more in-depth. Dealing with the Dinsdale film, for example.
JINNI and JOGINI-- I'm not sure what these entries are doing here.
PYRAMIDIOCY-- Instead of being objective, he goes off on a rant here. Odd.
SPEED READING-- Doesn't adequately deal with all the aspects of this subject (sub-vocalization, for example), and is apparently unaware of John Stuart Mill being able to read as fast as he could turn the pages.
SUBLIMINAL-- Doesn't adequately deal with the neurological aspects of this phenomenon.

Despite these problems, I would recommend this book highly, and it's a welcome addition to my library. 4 1/2 stars.

A very entertaing book for skeptics and fans of the paranormal. The entries are full of gltiches where bits of entries appear scrambled in different places-so an entry might contain half the next of another entry

I recently bought this book and was very impressed with how much information is packed into the book. It has a wide range of entries on many different topics, like aliens, intelligent design, psychic powers, etc. It also had many entries on topics I'd never heard of before like the Nazca lines and craniosacral therapy.

The book was laid out in very easy to read manner, and is a pleasant read. For being called a "dictionary" it sure has some thorough information on many of the topics it covers.

I agree with some reviewers who said that the author tells us his opinion about some of these subjects, but for the most part I thought he included relevant facts and sources for nearly every entry. Even on the subjects where the author seems to give his opinion on matters, I found myself agreeing with him, so I don't think his opinions are irrelevant. I'd recommend double checking with other sources to make sure what he says is legit, though, just to be sure his opinion isn't biased.

All in all, I'd highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to learn about many of the silly and unsubstantiated beliefs that people hold. It's good not only for research but for casual reading as well.

Bob Carroll has put together a solid overview of mystical, paranormal, and magical beliefs, deceptions, and hoaxes. He takes a simple point of view in asking simple questions -- what is the truth? What can be proven? Where might the "believers" be deceiving themselves? -- AND, he clearly also is not so biased to think that all beliefs are wrong. What can't be explained away, debunked, or proven wrong is an area of faith, either beyond the realm of science or remaining for science to figure out in the future.

I've yet to come up with a topic that Carroll has omitted, though other reviewers have, apparently. His entries are generally enough information for me, though he maintains plenty of references should anyone actually want to read that much more about anthroposophic medicine (or any other topic). Certainly topics like Argument from Design and Creationism are covered ad infinitum, ad nauseum, from various viewpoints elsewhere; thus, the Skeptics Dictionary provides a simply solid overview, definition, and description of these, with plenty of references.

All in all, this is an excellent book. I think it's not only for "skeptics", but also for those who want to know if they are being scammed. Scan this book before sending cash to Miss Cleo, Sylvia Browne, John Edward, or any other fortune tellers or psychics.

Here's something you won't read everyday (actually, you may never read anything like it again!). I'm a psychic healer who thinks Bob Carroll's Skeptic's Dictionary is an absolutely indispensable resource. Indispensable.

I first found the Skeptic's Dictionary online as I was searching for responsible information on some of the truly questionable things I see in my New Age/metaphysical culture. Unless you're a part of the culture - or unless you're a skeptic keeping an eye on the New Age culture - you really wouldn't believe the amount of untested theories, urban legends, wild ideas, and just plain irresponsible stuff that's going around. I've often likened the New Age to the Wild West - I mean, it often feels like open season on consumers here.

I struggled for years to find responsible dissent literature in my New Age culture, but the fact is that responsible skeptical questioning simply doesn't exist in the New Age. If I want to get a non-sales-pitch or non-dreamy-eyed version of the latest channeler, spiritual leader, divination protocol, personality typing modality, magic herb, megavitamin, healing gadget, or sacred destination, I can only get that information on the q.t. If I want to research things, I have to call friends who might know a friend who knows a guy who went to the healer or took the vitamin or whatever. That's how New Age skepticism works - it's a person to person process of trial and error.

If you are in the New Age, but don't know enough people, you won't have access to this underground consumer protection agency, and you'll probably end up wasting time and money chasing after stuff that just doesn't work (or is dangerous).

True consumer protection is not a part of my New Age culture. Everything offered is generally agreed to be healing and harmless, because God or Spirit or Faeries or good Atlanteans are involved - so why should anyone question any of it? Questioning in the New Age is only allowed at the level of gossip - anything more open than that is treated as a sign of rudeness, near-paranoia, or betrayal. Real questioning can actually get you expelled from the culture.

So when I needed to question the heck out of the things I saw in the New Age, I had no culturally approved way to proceed. Luckily, I have access to the Internet, so instead of making a fuss or shutting off my mind in response to all the pressure I experienced, I just became quiet and navigated around the Web on my own. Thankfully, I ended up on skepdic.com - the site from which the Skeptic's Dictionary was created.

I've read stacks of books by skeptical authors, but I haven't respected too many of them. However, I respect Bob Carroll because his debunking and skepticism aren't bad-tempered attempts to denigrate believers or take the magic out of life (real life is magical enough without any mystical crutches, thanks). Instead, his skepticism is a natural function of his intelligence, his concern for people, and his interest in discovering what's true and what isn't. Sure, Carroll's writing sometimes leans toward sarcasm, but honestly, if you had reseached as much strange material as he has, you'd probably get a bit arch yourself. For me, this isn't just a book - it's a clear example of compassionate information gathering and dissemination. It's cool.

Here's my suggestion for New Age people or very devout people who need to be able to question what they have been taught. Flip to a topic in the Skeptic's Dictionary that you already KNOW is a hoax (all New Age people and all religious people can identify hoaxes - however, I've noticed that their training generally keeps their hoax-detection behaviors to a minimum). Don't flip to topics that cover your most cherished beliefs. Instead, stay in the safe areas.

Take a look at how Bob Carroll handles the things you've already debunked on your own, and see if you agree with his approach and his research (and his humor). Then you'll know if this book is for you - and if it is, perhaps you can then tread into touchier, sacred cow areas with the sense that you'll be treated with respect.

As a full-fledged member of the New Age culture for over thirty years, I've seen so many instances of chicanery, half-truths, and exploitation that I'm just heart-sick. If my culture can't be skeptical of itself (and it can't), then someone else has to be. I'm really grateful that a person of Bob Carroll's integrity, scholarship, and humor stepped up to the plate. The Skeptic's Dictionary is an indispensable resource. Bravo, Dr. Carroll.