This programme, which includes clips from the film Race to Witch Mountain, explores ways of thinking and contrasts being gullible, sceptical and cynical.
The programme invites discussion of the question 'What makes a good, healthy scepticism different from being gullible or cynical?' - and sets up any talk about truth or faith.
Here are some other videos that might be suitable for use at your live event (the downloads are available to anyone with a Tools for Talks subscription)
Prof Alister McGrath (Kings College, London) on the evasion of evidence
Prof Alister McGrath (Kings College, London) on Richard Dawkins' view of faith as a 'process on non-thinking'
Dr Gary Habermas (Liberty University) on the claim that Christian Faith means 'Blind Faith', a claim several Atheists attempt to substantiate by referencing the Biblical story of doubting Thomas
Dr Gary Habermas (Liberty University) on the meaning of faith as 'grounded trust'
Dr Krish Kandiah (EA) and Dr Peter May (UCCF) on the evidence and significance of the resurrection (part of the Easter resources from Damaris)
Show the first part of the programme - then freeze frame on the question "What makes a good healthy scepticism different from being gullible or cynical?"
Invite people to share their answers with one another.
Invite feedback and discuss what our answers tell us about:
the dangers of being gullible (dictionary defines it as "easily deceived or tricked")
the dangers of being cynical (dictionary defines it as "sneeringly distrustful, contemptuous, or pessimistic")
the nature of scepticism (derived from the Greek word skeptikos which means literally "look about, consider, observe").
If appropriate begin to introduce some of the different variants of scepticism (which Nick covers in the next section of the video and which you can read about below) and consider the pros/cons of these different versions. Perhaps the discussion might reveal that Paul Kurtz' "Methodological scepticism" (properly called Skeptical Inquiry) is closest to the original meaning of the term and the most productive approach? NB Paul Kurtz is an atheist philosopher who has written extensively on the dangers of gullible approaches to supernatural claims - but some might, justifiably, claim that his materialistic presuppositions (his assumption that there can be nothing beyond the physical, material world) have led him to a cynicism about the supernatural - and perhaps he ought to apply his methodological scepticism with rather more openness to the evidence, particularly concerning the existence of God.
If appropriate you could extend the discussion to consider claims of religious experience and miracles. Are we gullibly drawn towards that which is "exciting and dramatic"? Do we cynically dismiss such things out of hand? What would a healthy scepticism look like when considering such issues?
Show the rest of the programme.
Deliver a short talk lifting off from the suggestion to look at the reliability of the New Testament texts and the importance of not being dogmatic in our beliefs. You could look at the miracles in the early chapters of Mark that encourage people to question for themselves who Jesus is (for example Mark 1: 27-28; Mark 2: 7), which eventually leads up to Peter's confession of Christ in Mark 8: 27-29. Or you could look at the initial scepticism of the disciples when facing the risen Jesus, and the way in which this is put to rest by the evidence before them. (See Luke 24: 36-43, John 20: 24-29.) This could be illustrated with contemporary quotes about doubt, evidence and faith (N.B. these links into the large collection of relevant Bible references and contemporary quotes are free to anyone with a subscription to Tools for Talks - non-subscribers can obtain immediate access with a 1 year or 30 day subscription).
Background reading
As in most areas of philosophy, scepticism has a number of overlapping terms and definitions. In this episode Nick chose to use four terms which are more descriptive and thus easier to understand. Before using this programme you may find the following helpful (N.B. we cannot vouch for the accuracy of any content in wikipedia):
Mitigated Scepticism. This is a descriptive term often used to refer to the skepticism of David Hume
Methodological Scepticism. This is the descriptive term used by Paul Kurtz in his book The New Skepticism: Inquiry and Reliable Knowledge when he advanced his view which he properly calls "Sceptical enquiry" (actually Skeptical Inquiry because he is American!)
Copyright
This video is copyright The Damaris Trust. It may be viewed, republished and downloaded.
HOWEVER - it must NOT be re-edited or decompiled in any way.
