Friday, 12 February 2010
"Counterknowledge" is a portmanteau created by Damian Thompson to describe the mass of misinformation and disinformation being propagated by quack doctors, conspiracy theorists, pseudoscientists and pseudohistorians in the modern age. As the name suggests counterknowledge is the enemy of knowledge; whereas as one is drawn from research, experience and logic, the other comes from the imagination, superstition and irrational thinking. Thompson's book reveals how the blatant disregard for empirical facts and lack of rational thought seems to becoming ever more fashionable. Once the stuff of fringe "thinkers", urban mythmakers, New Age adherents, self-styled mystics and the paranoid, now counterknowledge is seeping into the mainstream and gaining ill-deserved respectability.
Pseudoscience has skipped the robust peer reviews and clinical testing that science has to endure. Now completely unscientific methods like homeopathy have found their way onto the NHS and being paid for by taxpayer's money. Aromatherapy has no basis whatsoever in modern science and its benefits have never been properly measured under controlled scientific conditions, and yet it has found its way into nearly every health spa, beauty treatment clinic or mainstream bubble bath company in the developed world. On the other side of the coin we have similar irrational thinking supporting conspiracy theories that scare people into staying away from modern medical procedures. Despite the huge weight of evidence of tremendous benefits incurred by vaccinations over the past two centuries, a wave of counterknowledge has prompted a reasonable percentage of parents from not allowing their children to take the MMR (Measles, Mumps and Rubella) jab.
The subject of conspiracy theories haunts "Counterknowledge" as it rightfully argues that they are the most popular form of pseudohistory being propagated. The book appropriately begins at a dinner party where a politician begins discussing his view that the 9/11 attacks were all part of a US government conspiracy. For a brief moment it seems that the politician's audience have become captivated by this theory. However, and to the author's relief, a rational thinker is present who is able to argue the ridiculous implausibility of a scheme. Science doesn't support any of the theories put forward for the destruction of the towers by conspiracy theories, especially not the controlled demolition one supported by the so-called "Truth" movement. As Thompson points out the Bush Administration certainly had its critics and enemies at the dinner, but few of them could shift their thinking from the president being incompetent or just plain wrong to being something resembled a James Bond villain!
Conspiracy theories are rife in our society and the flames of this weird way of looking at the world were appropriately fanned by a historically inaccurate work of fiction in 2003. Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" takes the thoroughly debunked research of pseudohistory, "The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail", and creates a thriller comprising of secret societies, hidden messages in works of art and a hidden truth that the heart of Christianity. Thompson rightfully puts the real history of HBHG and subsequently "The Da Vinci Code", which has its fictional story prefaced with a "fact" about "The Priory of Sion". He leads us, as Tony Robinson did in his documentary "The Real Da Vinci Code" and David Aaronovitch did in "Voodoo Histories", back to a work of alternative history created by Gérard de Sède, with the collaboration of the draughtsman Pierre Plantard in the 1940s to '60s. "The Priory of Sion" has been proven and even admitted by its creators to be a hoax created in around 1956, not the "real organization" of 1099 that Dan Brown claims in his novel's "factual" preface.
Thompson links in another important principle found in Dan Brown's book to the thinking behind counterknowledge. He demonstrates this in Brown's hero, the renegade professor Robert Langdon whose method for studying history involves making giant leaps to connect various events even when there is no sufficient date to support these claims. Such an approach is, of course, very much in line with the conspiracy theorist, but it is also in line with the methods of the hyperdiffusionist. And it is the area of hyperdiffusionism that Thompson should be most applauded in drawing attention to. This is the belief that a superior civilization is really responsible for the creation of the architecture and society of other previously thought to be indigenous civilizations across the globe. One example of hyperdiffusionism is the theory that the Chinese discovered the Americas and brought civilisation to them. This, Thompson argues is another growing form of pseudohistory and it is becoming more and more prevalent in the mainstream.
Thompson argues that there are a lot of reasons for the emergence of counterknowledge, but sees a lot of it stemming from the rise of postmodernism. It's something I had never considered before, but having now read Richard J. Evans's excellent 1997 book "In Defence of History" I can see where he is coming from. Much of the propagation of counterknowledge comes from celebrities and postmodernists. However, it has also become the unforeseen by-product of political correctness. Thompson rightfully points out how religious freedom and tolerance has allowed the teaching of creationism in some schools and the right for students not to attend classes that teach evolutionary theory on the basis of their religious beliefs. Thompson himself is a Catholic, the editor of a Catholic newspaper for that matter, but this is never something that he puts into his arguments. However, he does feel that whilst many sceptics spend most of their time combating fundamentalist Christians on Creationist theory, confronting Muslims on the issue is almost a taboo subject. This is in spite of the huge number of Muslims who do not accept evolutionary theory.
As can be imagined, "Counterknowledge" is a controversial book, even though if you break down its areas of study shouldn't really be controversial. After all, he is not the one arguing against mainstream science, history and logic as we know it. However, his critics range from obvious opponents who support the areas he attacks to even those who should be in his field. Many of the obvious opponents, particularly the conspiracy theorists who are still convinced by HBHG, often hit the author with the ad hominen argument of his Catholic faith. As previously stated, this doesn't even come into the book, although Thompson is quite vocal about his criticism of stances taken by the Vatican on creationism. Those on his side too, who have large numbers of atheists and agnostics, can also feel uncomfortable about this fact. I see it as rather refreshing. In this time where creationism has become such a loud talking point, it is worth remembering that not only did a large number of Anglicans support Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, but that the Catholic Church's current stance acknowledges it as do most rational Christians, including the Church of England.
Another common criticism from fellow sceptics comes the fact that book is quite brief, despite covering quite a variety of topics. In this respect they are annoyed it doesn't delve deep enough. I don't see this as a handicap. There are plenty of weighty books written by the likes of Michael Shermer, Richard Dawkins, Richard Wiseman, Ben Goldacre, Christopher Hitchens and so on discussing pseudoscience and mysticism, often more in the form of collected essays rather than chaptered books. If you want to go down the historical avenues you can look do no better than David Aaronovitch's book on conspiracy theories, "Voodoo Histories", or Kathryn Olmsted's "Real Enemies" or if you want to go deeper still into the roots of the postmodern problem, Richard J Evans's "In Defence of History" is a fantastic if fairly academic read. So, there is room for a lighter introductory book. What I like about it is that unlike most of the rational sceptical books I enjoy, is it leans more towards history than science and helps to give a broader view of what is happening in our society today. Its delivery makes for a very readable insight into the nonsense thinking that is creeping into our education systems, local bookstores and even at government level.
Damian Thompson's work is the perfect bait to hook the person in the street who might have half believed conspiracy theories and pseudoscience. "Counterknowledge" gives readers some straightforward and effective tools to help them lean towards rational critical thinking, science, historical theory, reason and logic.
If you enjoyed this article please show your appreciation by voting/rating it on the following websites. Here are the direct links:
Don't forget to check out Jamie Clubb's main blog www.jamieclubb.blogspot.com
Tuesday, 9 February 2010
Image via Wikipedia
“You are turning me into a sceptic” my wife said waving a mock accusation finger at me. As a mobile nail technician my wife comes back with a whole of host stories from her various colour clients and I just knew this was the start of just such an anecdote. Without elaborating I understood what sort of episode had occurred. A naïve person had just been told the truth about something they had invested a large degree of belief in and my wife now wondered whether or not it had been worth commenting in the first place. In the sceptical world this is called debunking. It is more popularly known as “pissing on someone’s strawberries”.
The woman looked at my wife with a beaming smile on her face. Being a mother, my wife knew that look all too well. It’s that smile that says pride like no other. A pride reserved for one’s child. “My daughter is having her short story published!” the woman announced. “Congratulations” my wife commented, as you would, and waited to hear how this came about. Apparently the young girl, aged 11, had entered a competition through her school to have her short story published in a book of collected stories. It would appear this woman’s daughter was a young girl of rare talent. But before we assign her to the ranks of child author stardom alongside Dorothy Straight, Anne Frank, David Klein and Susan Eloise Hinton, there is more to the story. My wife does not mince her words. “Are they are asking you and other parents to buy this book?” she said. Wishing to demonstrate the proof of her offspring’s literary success the woman pulled out the letter that revealed this exciting news. It was a letter she hadn’t read very well.
It all seemed good. Too good! My wife is the long suffering spouse to a writer, so she has had to read the type of letters writers receive from people who agree to publish. Rarely are prospective publishers who have agreed to take a gamble on paying for the printing and production of your unproven work reveal their joy in the acceptance letter. The letter is usually business-like and straight to the point. This wasn’t one of those letters. This was a letter that began with the great news that her daughter had been “chosen” to appear in the book and then ended with an order form. This was a letter that now wanted this woman to pay almost £15 per copy of a book that contained all the “chosen” children’s stories. My wife put the obvious rhetorical question, “I don’t mean to rain on your parade but don’t you think that this has gone out to all the parents of all the children who entered this ‘competition’”.
The initial reaction to this new development was anger. It is a typical response to anyone who has invested belief in something they so desperately want to believe and then been shown a convincing argument that throws serious doubt over said belief. Involve a person’s child and that belief can be strong. Denial is an also a common defence mechanism especially if the argument reveals that the believer has been duped in some way. My wife didn’t push the issue, being a mother herself she could empathize with the raw maternal feelings present at the time.
Vanity publishing comes in many forms. It can prey on the desperate new writer and in this time where fame has become a type of currency, the temptation to pay in order to get your name on the front of a dust jacket is more alluring than ever. There is a very legitimate way to pay for your work to get into print and some very reputable publish on demand (POD) services provide this. I know a good number of great authors, such as Geoff Thompson and Heather Vallance, who have found self-publishing to be a much more profitable avenue for their books than the traditional method. It is also worth noting that even the great epic poet, John Milton, self-published. It is debated that the lines between vanity publishing and other self-publishing services have blurred since digital media and the emergence of the internet. However, the distinction remains that vanity press derive all their profits from having writers pay for their work to be printed and have no real vested or direct interest in the authors being able to sell.
What is particularly disreputable about the type of vanity publishing described in this article is that not only is it targeted at parents via their children, but that it is not really very honest. It doesn’t seem to present much of a competition in the first place and worse still the “prize” is for the parent to pay for a book that includes their child’s work alongside countless others. Actually it probably would have cost far less to have the short story self-published by a reputable POD like Lulu.com. Unfortunately I do not have the name of this particular group, although “Young Writers” appear to offer a similar service and charge the same amount for their poetry competition books. There is a strong rebuttal offered in a comment to a reviewer on Dooyoo.com http://www.dooyoo.co.uk/services-misc/young-writers/1320735/
The next time my wife saw her client a rational cooling off period had done the woman some good. Rather than going deep into denial she saw reason. She went to her daughter’s school to investigate a little further. She spoke to her daughter’s teacher about this “competition”. The teacher was delighted to announce that all of her students had got their work into the book. Hey, what are the chances! Now who do you think might have been on a commission there?
Don't forget to check out Jamie Clubb's main blog www.jamieclubb.blogspot.com