Zombieland is half how-to video half tongue-in-cheek comic adventure. Aside from the occasional stupid move on the part of the characters, Zombieland is an entertaining romp through a land of the dead-of-sorts.

Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), an isolated, skinny geek, survived the initial zombie infection. He developed a series of rules to keep himself safe, uninfected, and alive. They include doing cardio and always doing the double tap. After an unfortunate series of events, Columbus is thrown into the lap of Twinkie-loving cowboy Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson). Tallahassee isn’t interested in keeping Columbus around long and does all he can to make it painfully clear. While out scouting for food, Columbus and Tallahassee find Wichita (Emma Stone) and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin), a fiercely loyal set of sisters, in a heart-wrenching situation.

The chemistry between Jesse Eisenberg and Woody Harrelson could charm the undergarments off the most dedicated nun. Brilliantly gauche sparks of silliness fly across the screen between the two, lighting up the viewer. They’re able to make the ridiculous dialogue and situations feel natural.

Lines like “Time to nut up or shut up!” and “You’re like a giant... cock blocking robot, like developed in a secret fucking government lab” pepper the script. I would not be surprised if many of the lines become instant classics amongst zombie film lovers and comedy fans alike.

I was impressed by the general bad-assery of ladies Wichita and Little Rock in the film. Not only are they smokin’ hot, they are not waiting around for men to save them; they aren’t simpering damsels but scheming, killing machines. Just when the audience has probably ruled them out, they come out swinging.

Director Ruben Fleischer doesn’t rest on acting or writing alone; he pays careful attention to how the movie looks as well. I’m not just talking about particularly disgusting zombies or flesh-ripping scenes but how the entire movie looks. The lighting, the framing, even the composition are first rate. During many of the opening scenes and at various times throughout the movie, a paused still of Zombieland is indistinguishable from a cell from a comic book.

The best part of Zombieland is the clever use of Columbus’s rules, displayed in writing during each scene. The two used most often are “double tap” and “do your cardio.” Fleischer and writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick use the rules as humorous punctuation to the sequence of the plot. When the meaning of a scene could swing either tragic or triumphant, the filmmakers add just the right comma to make its path clear.

I absolutely love zombie movies because they offer perspective on what’s important. Zombies don’t care that someone is good or bad, rich or poor, white or black; they only care that they have delicious brains and guts. The fit, smart people survive and everyone else sort of dies. Zombieland is no exception to its genre.

The consequences for being ill-prepared for an undead attack in Zombieland encouraged me to be a better person (or at least a trimmer one). I don’t want to be a “poor fat bastard,” and I don’t want to be eaten with the fatties. I wouldn’t be able to bear the indignity of being the fat zombie chasing my husband around our house. It’s just no way to go. If I’ve learned one lesson from the movie, it’s that I need to do my cardio.

My one gripe with Zombieland is that they did not get their science facts right. Columbus calls mad cow disease a virus. Mad cow disease is not a virus but a prion that gets into the body by eating infected meat.

Small disease-related details aside, Zombieland is a great addition to a genre filled with great zombie movies. Bringing together elements of humor and gore, Zombieland is a satisfying flick that amuses the morbid sense of the viewer’s inner child.

A heartbroken reporter stumbles onto a story about cold war Jedi in Iraq to whom no human, rock, or goat is immune. Charming, humorous, and sincere, The Men Who Stare at Goats, based on the allegedly nonfiction book of the same name by Jon Ronson, exercised a bit of mind control over me.

Cold war soldier Lyn Cassady (George Clooney) decides to go to Iraq. During the cold war, America taught Cassady and the other Jedis in the program the finest new-age techniques research could find, including remote viewing and how to literally get into someone else’s mind. On his way to Iraq he meets Bob Wilton (Ewan McGregor), a heartbroken reporter with something to prove to himself. Bob smells a story in Lyn and decides to tag along. Using Lyn’s “special training,” they bumble from one mishap to another.

There are limited desert war zone circumstances that could inspire laughter while staying within good taste. Writer Peter Straughan finds strings his plot points together in a delightfully bizarre way. There is something charming in the way Lyn and Bob are slapped around like a pinball in a machine throughout the movie. They may have put themselves in the chute with the goal of getting in the hole at the bottom, but the path they take is really up to the people using the flappers. The more they rationalize that they have control, the more obvious it is they are a bit delusional.

All of the Jedi, and to a lesser degree Bob, suffer from a wicked case of confirmation bias, but it’s obvious that the writer and director don’t want the audience to just believe in his abilities. Generally, when Lyn uses his training, it’s so obvious there is another explanation that the only people buying it are in the film. His wide eyed, deeply focused, new-age hippy-dippy soldiering cannot be taken seriously. There is no denying that Lyn’s unflinching belief in his training has real effects on reality though.

There is an almost ticklish chemistry between Ewan McGregor and George Clooney. Bob follows Lyn in tow like a little brother because Lyn has undashable confidence and remarkable warmth. McGregor gives Bob a wide-eyed innocence, but he never crosses the line into being utterly daft. Clooney puffs Lyn’s confidence without inflating his ego.

By making Lyn utterly sincere but lovable and obviously ridiculous, the filmmakers have created a comfortable distance between audience and character that allows the viewer to enjoy the silliness. Lyn’s earnestness also creates enough affection in the heart of the audience that they are free to roll their eyes and giggle rather than get annoyed. Even those dedicated to rational thought will not wish an IED on him.

In fact, I think most skeptics would find The Men Who Stare at Goats especially enjoyable because it displays so perfectly how screwed up nonscientific methodology can get. Wise science and logic teachers could play it for their students as a final exam, making them write a ten-page essay on the faults of the methodology and how the claims of the Jedi could be confirmed scientifically. Bonus points could be given for any student who writes about why the government would pay for this type of illogical military program and how scary it is that parts of this are allegedly based on a true story.

It’s rare that an audience is given carte-blanche to laugh at such a lovable a character and can still leave the theater with its IQ fully intact. The Men Who Stare at Goats accomplishes just that. Smart, lighthearted, silly, and charismatic, The Men Who Stare at Goats may make you wish you could remote-view it anytime.

If a doctor engages in malpractice, the practitioner is accountable to professional organizations. However, if a ghost hunter is accused of misconduct, there is no regulatory board, no code of conduct, and no guide to good ghost practices. What recourse does the client have when the poltergeists come back or the ghosts don’t leave?

Following accusations of unethical and illegal practices, the ethics of ghost hunting is currently a controversial topic among the paranormal community. In an effort to legitimize the practice, some ghost hunters have attempted to create a set of standards and ethics. Why, even the pet psychic community has a code of ethics!¹

Do Ghost Hunters Need a Hippocratic Oath?

To address this need, “Investigation Morality” in Haunted Times presents a protocol for ghost hunting. This consists of a superficial list of obvious rules: respect private property, no illegal drug use, no intoxication, no discriminatory language. Strangely, the article then creates procedures of how to capture photographs of orbs and tips for recording electronic voice phenomena. Then the list of “standards” starts sounding like a playground warning: “There will be no running or horseplay at any time during an investigation. This type of behavior does not befit an investigator and it does not give the proper respect to the place or owner.”²

Creating a code of ethics obscures the fact that ghost hunting is the problem itself. The very beliefs, practices, claims, conclusions, and cures of ghost hunters are often unethical. Is it simply unethical for ghost hunting groups to investigate at all?

Ghost hunting is hardly a civil right, but anyone can do it. Indeed, it is encouraged by “haunted” restaurants, hotels, and other businesses that thrive on their folklore and often rely on the bias of ghost hunters. Many “haunted” sites are public places. Within certain hours, cemeteries are open to visitors whether they want to mourn by a graveside, dangle a pendulum over a grave, or attempt to raise a spirit from beneath it.

The potential ethical problems arise when a troupe of ghost hunters forms a group, sets themselves up as a “business,” advertises their spurious “services,” attracts “clients,” and sets foot into private houses, even with the consent or invitation of their residents. It’s like phoning your local Kingdom Hall and inviting a few Jehovah’s Witnesses into your home…

Ghost hunting is an industry today. Inspired by the plethora of reality TV shows, ghost hunting groups are as popular today as video shops were in the 1990s. There are potentially thousands of these groups nationally. In one informal online search, an estimated 140 paranormal groups were found in Denver, Colorado, alone.³ A few of these groups even claim nonprofit status.

These groups exist because there is a need, however illegitimate it may often be. The need is not only provoked by these TV shows but stems from popular beliefs. When members of the public fear their businesses and homes are haunted, they contact these paranormal groups; they don’t come to us. From skeptics they expect a lack of sympathy and ridicule. From believers they expect sympathy and similar belief systems. When they should want fact, they seek familiarity. But the assurance is that these teams are comprised of ghost hunters who claim to be “professional,” “trained,” and “qualified.”

PhD (Ghost Hunting)

© Rocky Mountain Paranormal Research Society 2009.

Put simply, none of us are “qualified.” There are no ghost hunting qualifications. There is no apprenticeship, training, course, or degree needed to become a ghost hunter, ghost chaser, paranormal investigator, or skeptical investigator of the paranormal. That is, there are no legitimate courses. Ghost Chasers International and other organizations offer courses that ensure you will become a “Certified Ghost Hunter,”⁴ if not certifiable…

By this description, no one is “unqualified” either, but some are more unqualified than others. Some professions can be more relevant to the field: physicists can explain the way the natural world works; historians can compare claims of dates, people, and places against records; and electricians can explain strange behavior caused by faulty circuits. Even the infamous plumbers of television’s TAPS⁵ can bring to bear specialist knowledge…until they go beyond their knowledge base.

It is important that the investigator doesn’t venture beyond his or her area of expertise. Unfortunately, it is venturing beyond their area of expertise for some ghost hunters to investigate at all.

All investigators are varying degrees of amateur. For most, it’s a haphazard hobby. No degree in physics or “metaphysics” will prepare someone to investigate the paranormal. It takes many people from many different backgrounds to piece together paranormal puzzles; provided all players are playing the same game.

© Rocky Mountain Paranormal Research Society 2009.

There is no professional organization, regulatory body, union, or code of ethics to regulate ghost hunting research and practices. Should such courses and resources exist? Probably not; ghost hunting is not a structured field or standardized practice. It is based in legend and myth, and many claims involve the paranormal interpretation of natural phenomena. To date, there is no solid evidence for the existence of ghosts.

Ghost hunting seems to be the alchemy of our day.

The (Not So) Scientific Method

Ghost hunting is not a science, but any claim can be studied scientifically. By and large, investigating the paranormal is a legitimate study studied illegitimately.

There is no formal or rigorous model or methodology to investigating claims of hauntings. There is no one right way to approach it but many wrong ways. Ghost hunting can and should employ the scientific method, but most hunters don’t, or even worse, they do … but badly.

It is not field work when the data consists of photographs of orbs, recordings of electronic voice phenomena, and anecdotal evidence of ghost sightings. It’s not the scientific method when the premise is that ghosts exist.

It is not experimental research when dubious tools are used. Some devices are bogus: the “Telephone to the Dead,” a bad radio that reputedly receives garbled messages from the deceased that can be “translated” for a price.⁶ Some equipment is overkill: using a Geiger counter to find spirits is like using a concrete mixer to blend cake batter (and an imaginary cake at that). Some instruments are irrelevant: as the name suggests, Electromagnetic Field Detectors measure electromagnetic fields, not ghosts. Thermometers, ion meters, and motion sensors were not designed for the purposes of ghost hunting.

Just because someone is using scientific equipment does not mean they are using the scientific method.

Diagnosis: Paranormal

© Rocky Mountain Paranormal Research Society 2009.

Following this fundamentally flawed experimentation, it is not conclusive when the ghost hunters pronounce a location “haunted.” Belief often gets in the way of reality, and it’s easier to have blind faith than to undertake double-blind tests. Ghost hunters and clients often live in a supernatural symbiosis. The claims justify the existence of the ghost hunters, and the ghost hunters substantiate the claims, which leads to confirmation bias. It’s often the ghost hunters themselves who bring the ghosts.

Occasionally, paranormal cases are driven by underlying physical or mental health conditions, which the ghost hunter is incapable of discerning unless he or she moonlights as a medical doctor, psychologist, or psychiatrist. And unless they are the client’s chosen or assigned therapist, it’s not ethical for them to become involved at all even if they are a licensed therapist. To corroborate these claims is unconscionable, and to attempt to resolve these cases is dangerous; the ghost hunter is sorely out of his or her depth.

To be truly ethical, ghost hunters should avoid private investigations and avoid becoming embroiled in the personal lives of others.

Finally, once the ghost hunters have “diagnosed” a site as haunted, it is not ethical for them to attempt to “cure” the still-alleged phenomena. Some paranormal groups enlist psychics, demonologists, and other paranormal practitioners to “treat” hauntings with protective rituals, ghost clearings, cleansing ceremonies, blessings, exorcisms, and other Hollywood cures. “Curing” a haunting is at best a placebo for the apparent victim and at worst a fraud.

An investigation should aim to solve a mystery, not claim to be curative. The goals in investigating claims of the paranormal should be to establish whether or not there is a claim, to examine the claim carefully and logically, and hopefully to explain the phenomena. Sometimes our job is simply to accept explanations as they are found, as mundane as they may sound in comparison to the claim.

The simplest explanations can be the most difficult to accept by those who are already convinced of the presence of the paranormal.

Ghost hunting is fraught with potential ethical concerns for all parties involved. The ghost hunter and clients faces legal, moral, and safety issues. The locations are vulnerable to vandalism, theft, and damage. Then there are the more intangible dangers of ghost hunting: the destruction of history, the creation of pseudoscience, and the misrepresentation of the natural world as supernatural.

Perhaps ghost hunters don’t need a code of ethics because no one needs “ghost hunters.”

References:

1. Code of Ethics for Animal Communication. Available at http://www.herbsandanimals.com/codeofethics.html (accessed November 6, 2009).
2. Schill, Brian. 2009. Investigation Morality: Moral Dilemma—Investigating Cemeteries and MCIs. Haunted Times 4, no. 2.
3. Rocky Mountain Paranormal Research Society. Available at http://www.rockymountainparanormal.com/ (accessed November 9, 2009).
4. Ghost Chasers International. Available at http://www.ghosthunter.com/ (accessed November 9, 2009).
5. The Atlantic Paranormal Society. Available at http://www.the-atlantic-paranormal-society.com/ (accessed November 9, 2009).
6. The Telephone to the Dead. Available at http://thetelephonetothedead.com/ (accessed November 9, 2009).

Aliens, hysteria, hallucinations, theology, ancient civilizations, and psychotherapy merge en mass in Nome, Alaska. A shameless hodgepodge of supernatural ridiculousness, The Fourth Kind gave me a first-class headache and left me suffering from rapid IQ depletion.

The film opens with Milla Jovovich introducing herself as the actress who will play Dr. Abbey Tyler. She explains to the audience that everything on the screen will be from video provided by Tyler, audio recordings, or interviews with Tyler. She leaves us to ponder the upcoming movie and decide for ourselves what we believe. The Fourth Kind then goes directly to split-screen between an “actual” video of Abbey Tyler and Milla Jovovich saying exactly the same thing, at the same time, as if to prove to us they are honest depictions. Abbey Tyler, a therapist, is conducting a study of the momentously unstable Nome population. Her patients all report the same experiences and sleeplessness. The insomnia and missing persons seem to be epidemic in Nome. A proponent of hypnotherapy, she gently puts her patients in a trance. As patients remember more and more, they become more vulnerable to malevolent forces. Local sheriff August (Will Patton) tells her to stop the hypnosis sessions, but she feels that she must get to the bottom of what is behind her patients’ visions and sleep deprivation. Somehow, it is all connected.

Director, screen writer, and book writer Olatunde Osunsanmi has a split screen fetish. Most of the time the screen is just split two screens, but occasionally it is split into as many as four different boxes, swirling about obnoxiously. Osunsanmi inflates one or another screen to create false emphasis. Split screens mean split attention, and the viewer spends time comparing how each side is different instead of what they are saying. Maybe that’s the point. When I tried to listen to what each screen said, I wanted to be abducted.

Osunsanmi can’t decide if he wants to make a documentary or a fictional depiction, and he refuses to decide. The end result is a mockumentary. As if the multiple personalities on one screen weren’t enough, Osunsanmi intersperses the film with an interview between himself and the “actual” Abbey. “Actual” Abbey, sitting in her wheel chair, pale and frail, explains what she thinks happened while she and other Abbey are depicted on the screen. If that is confusing at all, you might as well give up now because it gets worse.

It is rare that an audience is exposed to so many ridiculous theories in one movie. There are ancient Sumerian stories of alien creators, ancient alien rocket ship carvings, alien abductions, hallucinations, levitations, channeling, disappearing family members, and murder conspiracies. If this is based on a true story, I’m surprised that Nome, Alaska, is still standing because the city has yet to find an irrational explanation to which it didn’t subscribe.

The worst of it comes right around the time Abbey makes excuses for God. During one of the scenes of a patient being tortured by whatever is using his body to communicate, the entity seems to admit their identity: God. Later though, Abbey—not Jovovich Abbey but “actual” Abbey—says that because it is evil, it cannot be God but can think it is God. Seriously, just like that? It can make your body do horrible things, can make horrible things happen to your family, can cause horrific events; it can control things but because it’s bad, it can’t be God? Next she’ll be saying whatever is speaking through the patient is not a genuine Scotsman. Maybe God just allowed it to happen. I actually groaned out loud and slapped my forehead when I heard that winner.

A well-acted script can cover all manner of ills, but because Osunsanmi decided to use two people for each role, there was a glut of acting issues. Where one Abbey was sincere and believable, the other Abbey couldn’t muster an ounce of reliability or credibility. The only actor with any grasp on the craft was Raphaël Coleman, the fifteen-year-old actor who played Abbey’s son.

When Jovovich begs us to make up our own minds while the first snippet of “actual” footage is shown, disbelief immediately washed over me. By minute ten, I could feel my brain cells going to war. By the end of The Fourth Kind, I was writing abduction wishes in my notebook.

Friday evening, October 9, Halloween came early to Seattle in the form of the fifth annual Seattle Creation Conference. The conference was put together by the same folks who provide the inimitable CreationWiki—the Northwest Creation Network. The Northwest Creation Network is run primarily by Chris Ashcraft, and his tireless efforts are a large reason why local skeptics and creationists are treated to these festivities year after year.

Anyone with only a passing familiarity with the creation/evolution debate naturally assumes that creationist objections largely have to do with Darwin’s theory and modern biology’s fondness for the theory of evolution. Within seconds of entering the conference held at the Family Life Center Foursquare Church in Mukilteo, Washington, one quickly put that assumption to rest. All major branches of science were under assault. It was a “take no prisoners” kind of night.

When I sauntered in, Institute for Creation Research (ICR) lecturer Steve Austin was indulging in his specialty, “Geology and the Global Flood” and “Catastrophic Plate Tectonics.” Austin animatedly explained to his audience how the Pangaea continent didn’t break up until the Great Flood. His calculations, if you can call them that, estimated that the continents broke apart and skidded along the surface of the earth at the rate of one meter per second before coming to rest.

Hey, I didn’t make this up. He did.

One of the audience members incredulously asked Austin how such a break up was possible. Surprisingly, Austin cited subduction as the mechanism. This contrasts with creationist Walt Brown’s assertion that subduction is impossible and hasn’t been observed.

Such strange contradictions among various creationists pose an interesting question. It’s obvious that creationists aren’t familiar with modern day scientific research, but are they even aware of each other’s?

One other odd thing about Austin’s lecture was his insistence that volcanic activity, and presumably earthquake activity, has been decreasing over time since Noah’s flood. This flies in the face of others in the conservative Christian arena, particularly those enthralled by the rapture, who insist that natural disasters are increasing as we usher in the second coming of Jesus.

Austin concluded his talk by explaining that all life could have formed in the first few days at a substantially accelerated rate before Adam and Eve took their first breaths of life. For a group who hold Genesis to such a literal interpretation, I was quite struck by how many in the creationist movement have developed an affinity for relativistic physics.

During the ten-minute break that followed, I milled about at the voluminous book stands and noticed Donald Chittick’s latest edition of The Puzzle of Ancient Man (2006). Had he finally removed all references to the Coso Artifact that had caused him such headaches years earlier? A quick scan of the book revealed that the answer was apparently yes.

Though the Discovery Institute pleads that they’re not creationists, numerous books by Discovery Institute members were present, including Stephen Meyer’s Signature in the Cell, which coincidentally was the topic of Chris Ashcraft’s lecture on Saturday morning.

Meanwhile, the representative at the ICR booth was exhorting me to take some free literature. Despite the 200+ in attendance, there seemed to be few takers. A small boy next to me peppered the ICR representative with questions about dinosaurs on the ark. The ICR person tried to reassure the boy that Noah was able to fit dinosaurs on the ark by taking the smallest and juveniles. The boy didn’t seem to be buying it but he smiled politely. There were definitely true believers in the audience, but I certainly got the feeling that there were more than a few folks who found the extraordinary claims just a bit too much to believe.

Then, it was onto the main show, “How Big Is God?” presented by Diego Rodriguez, a multimedia show of the heavens!

Fresno native Diego Rodriguez recently started a new creation astronomy group called the 4th Day Alliance, a clever play on the fourth day of Genesis when the Sun, stars, and planets were allegedly created. One may reasonably ask why Diego felt the need to form a creationist group dedicated to astronomy. In an introductory email to new members, he laid out his intentions in a veritable Mein Kampf of biblical science, complete with exclamation marks and full-word capitalizations:

“While most people are familiar with Charles Darwin’s theory, few realize that an even greater fight is being waged in the area of astronomy. This is because evolution, as it pertains to astronomy, doesn’t just deal with the origin of life, but with the origin of EVERYTHING! If belief in evolution is defeated in the area of cosmology and astronomy, then other forms of evolutionary belief don’t have a leg to stand on. This is why evolutionary astronomers are some of the most dogmatic philosophers in existence today. Their ENTIRE WORLDVIEW rests on the foundation of evolutionary cosmology and astronomy. This is why evolutionists often times feel most threatened by Creation Astronomy and wage the most virulent attacks against Creation Astronomers.”

And how is Diego waging this battle? By taking on local amateur astronomy clubs of course:

“There are literally hundreds of astronomy clubs around the country, but to our knowledge there is only ONE that is unapologetically Christian and that believes in the absolute truth of the Bible – the 4th Day Alliance. Astronomy clubs are responsible for teaching and introducing the public to astronomy. Unfortunately, 99.99% of the time they are teaching the myth of “billions of years” and false theories like the Big Bang. We need to turn this around. The only way to do this is for local Christian astronomy clubs to start springing up around the nation who will teach and inform their communities the truth about Creation Astronomy! Are you willing to join the battle? Are you willing to start a local Christian Astronomy club?”

And as with everything in life, these battles require money. So the 4th Day Alliance has started selling local chapter affiliate kits to enable those interested to start their very own amateur astronomy franchises.

Rodriguez seems to think that evolutionists “wage the most virulent attacks against Creation Astronomers,” but having sat through a presentation by the 4th Day Alliance and reviewing the interviews they’ve done with creation astronomers, one cannot help but feel that these attacks are self inflicted.

A vivid example is the experience of Steve Miller, former president of the Calumet Astronomical Society. Miller was under the mistaken impression that Americans who had a strong familiarity with current astronomical research would enjoy creation astronomy videos presented at the society’s regular meetings. In fact, showing these videos is what could charitably be called a “faux pas.” As Miller recounted to Rodriguez, he was promptly removed from the presidency and was out of the club in short order. Miller now runs the Indiana chapter of the 4th Day Alliance. For a taste of what his former Calumet astronomy club members experienced, feel free to review Miller’s attack on the Big Bang theory.

In light of his previous experiences, Rodriguez’s new strategy is to create a new set of amateur astronomy clubs dedicated exclusively to a literal six-days creation interpretation of the Bible. As the lights dimmed and Rodriguez began his “How Big Is God” presentation, an impending train wreck was immediately apparent.

With booming, emotional music and wide screen displays, Rodriguez took the audience through a multimedia extravaganza describing how big the universe really is. He started small with the state of Texas, and with the help of numerous videos cribbed from various sources, he made the Earth seem smaller and more insignificant as his presentation wore on.

By the end, Rodriguez resorted to grave robbing Carl Sagan’s “Pale Blue Dot” photo that Sagan had lobbied so hard to be taken before Voyager left our solar system. But that wasn’t enough. Rodriguez also aggrandized Sagan’s declaration that that pale dot represents “home. That’s us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives.” Rodriguez added onto that unreferenced statement that this dot represented where Jesus was born, died, and was resurrected. In light of the sheer scope of the universe he just spent an hour showing to the audience, the statement seemed almost laughably irrelevant.

Another odd thing about the presentation was Rodriguez’s use of light years to measure distances. It was clear from Austin’s presentation, the subsequent discussion regarding light taking “short cuts” in space, and Russell Humphrey’s disparate time dilation theories to accommodate the seven days of creation that creationism is in a crisis. A visit to the special section on starlight and time on 4th Day Alliance’s Web site reveals an even more jumbled mess.

Creationists realize the growing evidence of extreme ages makes a mockery of a literal interpretation of Genesis. But their four decades long fixation on such an interpretation cannot be easily overturned overnight. Doing so would accommodate dissenters like Hugh Ross of Reasons to Believe. So they resort to ever more desperate attempts to appeal to relativistic time differences, ludicrously rapid growth speeds, and “short cuts” through space and time.

If you’re an amateur astronomer and are looking for a diverting afternoon exploring the outer limits of human belief, a trip to 4th Day Alliance’s Web site is highly recommended.

Diego Rodriguez thinks that “evolutionists” are most threatened by creation astronomy but at this point I would strongly disagree. Due to its sheer absurdity, most amateur astronomers are unaware that creation astronomy even exists. They assume that biblical creationists haven’t taken on astronomy since the days of Galileo. The rest of us who know of the 4th Day Alliance are simply amused.

At the conclusion of the night, a final prayer was offered and the conference organizers checked once again to see if the heavens above would allow a star party with the telescopes Diego Rodriguez had brought along. Alas, God smote such plans with a cloudy night.

Two classical Confucian philosophers once had a famous disagreement over the morality of music. Mozi mounted a utilitarian case in his “Codemnation of Music”: “What benefits men, the man of humane principles will carry out; what does not benefit them, he will leave alone. . . . Sounding bells, striking drums, strumming zithers, blowing pipes, and waving shields and axes in the war dance do nothing to feed the people when they are hungry, clothe them when they are cold, or give them rest when they are weary.”

The great Xunzi responded that if Mozi’s policy were to be implemented, society “would be pressed to such extremity by his measures that all clothing would be coarse and gross and all food would be bad and detestable, with only hardship and grief when music and joy have been condemned.”¹ But Xunzi did not defend music by asserting its intrinsic value or extolling its aesthetic properties. Instead, he accepted Mozi’s utilitarian premises, insisting that music is valuable just because it is necessary to preserve civic order.

When music is centered and balanced, the people are harmonious and not [consumed by] dissipation. When music is sober and dignified, the people are uniform and not chaotic. When people are harmonious and unified, the army is stiff and the cities secure. . . . When music is ornate and seduces [people] to malice, then the people are dissipated, indolent, crude, and base. Dissipation and indolence lead to chaos, crudity and baseness to contention. When there is chaos and contention, the army is soft and the cities are pillaged.

Referring to the sage-rulers of antiquity, Xunzi concluded:

Thus the Former Kings were cautious about what they stirred [the people] with. They used ritual to make their wills [conform] to the Way, music to harmonize their sounds, government to unify their actions, and punishments to prevent licentiousness. Rituals, music, punishments, and government are ultimately, a means to make the people’s minds similar and bring about the ordered Way. ²

Music is a means for moral instruction, ritualized rehearsal of social roles, and ultimately discipline and control—hegemony in harmony. No less than sound, it seems that science in China has been political from its beginning.

China’s Scientific Revolution

The story of modern science in China begins with the introduction of mathematical astronomy by Jesuit missionaries during the late Ming period in the 1580s. In 1592, the Ministry of Rites discovered that the Astrocalendrical Bureau had miscalculated the date of the lunar eclipse by a full day. This was going to foul up the timing of all the auspicious and inauspicious events. Fortunately for them, the Jesuits were adept at dealing with calendar crises, having not long before resolved a European controversy over the date of Easter.

In the 1630s the government was persuaded to undertake a major calendar reform, and as Benjamin Elman explains in A Cultural History of Modern Science in China, this “opened the door for leaders of the mind and Qing dynasties to accept Jesuits as calendrical experts, just as earlier rulers had accepted Indian, Persian, and Muslim specialists.”³ So long as they continued to supply expert assistance in astronomical and geographical matters, the missionaries were tolerated by the emperor and eventually incorporated into the bureaucracy. Throughout the eighteenth century, the Jesuits introduced a variety of European technologies. But they failed to keep apace with the latest scientific advances back home. Consequently, the Earth-centered cosmological system of Tycho Brahe was still being taught in China in the nineteenth century.⁴

With the help of the Protestant missions, modern science was born in China: “From 1850 to 1870, a core group of missionaries and Chinese co-workers in Guangzhou, Ningbo, Beijing, and Shanghai translated many works on astronomy, mathematics, medicine, as well as botany, geography, geology, mechanics, and navigation.” Scientific training was centered on the military arsenals, shipyards, and factories of the coastal cities where armaments and ships were being constructed. After 1895 and China’s defeat in the First Sino-Japanese War, elites increasingly agitated for political reform and modernization. As Elman observes,

Chinese radicals linked political, social, and economic revolution to their perception that a scientific revolution was also required. Those who were educated abroad at Western universities such as Cornell or sponsored by the Rockefeller Foundation for medical study in the United States after 1914, as well as those trained locally at higher-level missionary schools in China, often regarded modern science as a revolutionary application of scientific methods and objective learning to solve all modern problems.⁵

Here began a political rhetoric fusing scientific advance, technological application, and Chinese national aspiration, the same rhetoric that later resounded in the May Fourth Movement after 1919, up through Maoist “mass science” to Hu Jintao’s Scientific Development Concept.

Humming Along

Today the country’s enormous investment in science is overwhelmingly pragmatic, driven by short-term technological applications. In 2008, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao told Science magazine that only 5 percent of the nation’s total spending on science goes toward basic research (by comparison, basic research accounts for 17.5 percent of the U.S. government’s science funding).⁶ The ubiquity of the Chinese term keji—literally, science and technology—illustrates the importance of applied knowledge.

It would be mistake to think of China’s scientific revolution as a fast-motion replay of Europe’s. Science did not come to China as it had come to Europe, and most Chinese elites did not come to science for the reasons that their European counterparts had. Early modern European science depended heavily on private commercial interests and autonomous professional associations (like the Royal Society). Its propagandists pressed for knowledge to improve the human condition but also to read the mind of God or the book of Nature as an end in itself. An anti-authoritarian ideology arose in response to confrontations with the Church. Chinese science, by contrast, evolved in symbiosis with state power, and its propagandists championed it as a means to national development.

In this way, from its origins the Chinese scientific establishment was organized and mobilized to achieve the practical ends of those in power. But perhaps the best explanation for the dearth of political dissent among professional scientists is more pedestrian than philosophical. Since Tiananmen, the shocking brutality of the crack- down and the constriction of civil society have surely taught many would-be disharmonious scientists that silence is the only sensible option. More importantly, they have so much to lose. Today’s technoscience professionals are members of a comfortable middle class with enviable positions to look out for and reliable research funding to look forward to.

China’s vast economic engines churn ahead, and its scientists hum along.

Notes

1. John Knoblock, ed., Xunzi: A Translation and Study of the Complete Works (Palo Alto: Stanford University Press, 1990), 128.
2. Paul Rakita Goldin, Rituals of the Way: The Philosophy of Xunzi (Chicago: Open Court, 1999), 79–80.
3. Benjamin A. Elman, A Cultural History of Modern Science in China (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2006), 18.
4. —. A Cultural History of Modern Science in China (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2006), 18.
5. —. “New Directions in the History of Modern Science in China Global Science and Comparative History,” Isis, 98(3): 522.
6. See “Science: Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao Sees Science as a Key to Development,” (accessed 17 October 2009).

New age spiritualism has its origins in the nineteenth century spiritualism movement that introduced the world to mediums, channeling, Ouija boards, and séances (and paranormal fraud). Today, spirituality encompasses a diverse range of beliefs and practices.

Is New Age Spiritualism a Religion or a Gateway to Leaving Religion?

Spiritualism in and of itself might not be religion, but it can include religion. Spiritualist beliefs often integrate facets of philosophy, culture, jargon, and rituals from historical religions blended with pseudoscience and the paranormal (like voodoo). Spiritualism draws mainly from Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and Hinduism but also indigenous and other faiths.

Spiritualist beliefs can be polytheistic or monotheistic, and the theistic higher being could be a God, Goddess, Creator, Supreme Being, or Omnipotent Presence. However, spiritualism is not invariably theist. For those who perceive themselves as nontheistic but still “spiritual,” spiritualist beliefs are compatible with atheism. For these believers, the nontheistic higher power could be the Cosmos, Chi, Prana, Love, Light, or Life Force.

Spiritualism is often conceptualized as religion, much as atheism is, because the structure of religion is our comparative cognitive model. However, there is no clear-cut continuum of belief to nonbelief. There are parallels because spiritualism is a belief system, but it is eclectic, unstructured, dynamic, and idiosyncratic. People who practice some form of spiritualism might describe themselves as spiritual persons, but they wouldn’t necessarily employ spiritualist as a label of self-identification or spiritualism as a designation for their beliefs.

Without denominations or sects, spiritualism is composed of loose communities that often evade classification. Alternatively, there can be in-group categorization, such as the theory of homeopathy or the various schools of yoga. This broadness and factionalism gives rise to the continual emergence of new beliefs, like psychic medium Sylvia Browne’s “religion,” the Society of Novus Spiritus.

Many proponents value spiritual beliefs for this very lack of labelling and rigid structure. It is religion without a rule book. There is no unified theology, no universally defining characteristics nor collective history. There is no doctrine. The holy book of spiritualism is whatever self-help book is currently on The New York Times Best Seller list. The priests and popes of spiritualism are authors and celebrities, including fire-walking motivational mentor Tony Robbins, psychic medium John Edward, and Wayne Dyer and Phil McGraw, the prophets with PhDs.

The intersection of religion and spiritualism is often mysticism. Customs of the Pentecostal and Charismatic Churches, such as speaking in tongues, divination and healing through the Holy Spirit, are also spiritualist practices. But there is no single spiritual House of Worship; the temporary “church” is the yoga class or reiki workshop. Although there is no formalized liturgical service, spiritualism is often ritualistic. Advocates of spiritualism enact their beliefs and petition the powers not only with prayer but other forms of intercession, including meditation, mantras, Pilates, and positive affirmations.

Instead of entrance to Heaven, spiritualist beliefs have more esoteric goals of attaining enlightenment, consciousness, awareness, oneness, and mindfulness. Depending on cultural preference, its goal is an individualist spiritual quest to find your true self or is collectivist: you become part of the Greater Whole or Overmind.

Spiritualism offers not only salvation for the soul but also Chicken Soup for the Soul.¹ It is concerned with mind, body, and spirit and promises a practical function. It is a religion of self-help that preaches to its parishioners about alternative medicine, aging, activism, diet, environmentalism, relationships, art, music, finance, career, peace, politics, psychology, science, sexuality, quality of life, and the afterlife.

God tells us to “do unto others as we would have them do unto us,” but He can’t help you lose weight. Spiritualism is more holistic than holy and claims to treat a bizarre range of “life issues”: it teaches us how to develop confidence, read body language, interpret our dreams, boost brain power, develop our ESP, overcome stress, navigate gender differences, enjoy better sex, cure impotence, look ten years younger, win friends, and influence people.

God helps those who help themselves, but religion is often about fate and acceptance of one’s lot. Spiritualism doesn’t wait for God to reveal His plan; a psychic can do that. Nostradamus and the Bible Code provide us with prophecies (that are interpreted subjectively). Intuitives, sensitives, and astrologers supposedly offer us glimpses into the future (using cold reading). Why wait for God to remember you when your life will improve in the time it takes to read Enjoy Life and Be Happy in 30 Seconds?²

Spiritualism is instant karma! New age books are replete with spiritual quick fixes to transform your life—for awhile. Religion seems to be about the power wielded over us, but spiritualism promises to empower, affording us control over our lives. Advocates promise that reading their books and attending their lectures will be a life-changing experience…for a price.

For Mormon Elders and Jehovah’s Witnesses, their faith is free. It is “good news” to be shared, be it door-to-door or from the pulpit. Bibles are usually complimentary, and you will even find one in your hotel room should you forget to pack your copy. However, spiritualist promoters often have a we-know-something-you-don’t-know manner, although they are prepared to sell you this knowledge. The keepers of the secret have been silenced, until now. It’s a conspiracy. Like Kevin Trudeau’s books, this is information “they don’t want you to know about.”³

Celebrities become missionaries for their beliefs. If you loved their movies and music, now try their religion. Madonna promotes the Kabbalah, and Tom Cruise promotes Scientology. Spiritualism is also faddish. The latest products and techniques are hailed as miracles until they fail to work even as placebos. In a spiritualist treadmill, new concepts soon replace old ones. Believers go from wearing copper bracelets to magnetic necklaces and following macrobiotic diets to food combining, low-carb, Superfoods, and clean eating. Tahitian Noni Juice and Himalayan Goji Berries are modern snake oils claimed to be the elixirs of youth and eternal life. Hair shirts and self-flagellation are penance for sin, but in spiritualism the punishments are “treatments” of detox. The eleven-hour sessions of yoga, colloidal silver, ear candling, cupping, purgation, colonic irrigation, and nasal irrigation with a Neti Pot are so bad they must be good for you.

Like a cup of chamomile tea, spiritualism is soothing. It tells us what we want to hear. We have past lives and will continue to be reincarnated. We don’t die; our souls are in transition. There’s a spiritual afterlife where our guardian angels watch over us and protect us. Having passed on and crossed over to the Other Side, our loved ones await us there. Psychic mediums claim they receive messages from our friends and family if we’re satisfied with the stock message, “Your mother loves you.”

Spiritual beliefs can give people false hope. Alternative therapists claim to be able to cure the incurable. For thousands of dollars, a clinic in Tijuana guarantees to cure patients of cancer. For thousands more, a peculiar zapper device will supposedly heal your dysfunctional liver, purify your blood, boost your immune system, and cure you of illnesses you didn’t know you had. Chiropractors and acupuncturists promise to treat your chronic pain. Spiritual healers promise to heal terminal diseases with their bare hands without surgical instruments or anesthesia (or success). For a substantial “donation,” evangelists will perform miracles Jesus-style, wherein the blind will see and those in wheelchairs will walk again (because they are plants in the audience).

And if you don’t like it, don’t believe it. With no fixed ideology, believers can afford to go spiritual shopping. This gives rise to the ad hoc adoption (and abandonment) of beliefs and practices. Some see the freedom of choice as its strength, but this cherry picking often masks underlying problems, breeding hypocrisy. People try a bit of everything and discard what doesn’t work or suit their biases. Sylvia Browne’s motto summarizes the spiritualist ethos: “Take what you want and leave the rest behind.”⁴

Should Skeptics Be Skeptical about New Age Spiritualism?

Overall, spiritualist beliefs are pseudo-religious, but they are often pseudoscientific too. Belief systems tend to be outside the realm of skepticism for many skeptics, but irrational, dangerous, and unscientific practices are always our concern and are often testable.

Spiritualism is often framed as religion but also framed as science. This can be confusing for the consumer. Proponents claim that they too were skeptical until they were convinced by the evidence. Anecdotal evidence is still evidence, isn’t it? The homeopathic preparations are beside the aspirin on the pharmacy shelves. The herbs are natural so they must be safe. Traditional Chinese Medicine has been around for thousands of years. The naturopath has a nicer bedside manner than the medical doctor. The only thing that supersedes science is the exotic; if it is foreign (and especially Eastern), it is imbued with unquestionable authority and wisdom.

Science has credibility, and spiritualism can appear to be integrative. Parapsychology and Postmodernism have a scientific facade. Dr. Deepak Chopra is a medical doctor. Bruce Lipton aims to “bridge science and spirit.”⁵ Feng Shui is adapted for business, and there are psychic financial advisors. Homeopathic doses of physics are blended with hyperdimensional physics and linguistics with Neuro-Linguistic Programming. Astrology aligns itself to astronomy, and birth chart declinations give the semblance of science. Electromagnetic readers are scientific tools, used irrelevantly for ghost hunting. Spiritualism does not use the scientific method; its approaches are metaphysical, not empirical.

Some proponents of spiritualism promulgate inaccurate and often unsafe ideas. Anti-vaccination organizations engage in fear-mongering campaigns, leaving communities susceptible to contagious diseases. Moon landing conspiracy theorists jeopardize the public’s understanding of science. Historical revisionists rewrite history erroneously. Even if a spiritualist theory is proven wrong, it’s reinterpreted as “correct.” The end of the world is always nigh, but suddenly this becomes a metaphor for any current global problem. Of course, the next scheduled Armageddon is the real one!

Some spiritualism is guilty of undoing science and is harmful when it actively undermines what is known. Scientists turned pseudoscientists commit this academic irresponsibility. They disregard science and discard their formal education yet flaunt their qualifications, invoking the lexicon of science with convincing authority. The metalanguage of physics, math, and neuroscience is adopted to appeal to the intellect of consumers. Fringe scientists try to persuade the public with conventional yet ambiguous terminology like “quantum” and “energy.”

Recognizable, trusted terms are used to peddle spiritual concepts persuasively. Spiritual practitioners are psychic surgeons, psychic detectives, and herbal therapists. The unorthodox is portrayed as orthodox, giving us Ayurvedic medicine and Homeopathic vaccines. Science is name-dropped in The Science of Getting Rich⁶ and Christian Science. Scientologists and Raëlians blend science fiction into their theories.

“Gut feelings,” “intuition,” and “knowing” are employed to defend extraordinary claims for which there is no extraordinary evidence. Instead of addressing the Burden of Proof, claimants expect skeptics to disprove their outrageous claims. Correlation equals causation to some non-skeptics, and Occam’s Razor is simply ignored.

Cold Comfort or Culture?

New age spiritualism fills the void created by secularization. Spiritualist beliefs and practices try to address the shortfalls of religion and the gaps of knowledge, offering a modern alternative. Self-identifying as a “spiritual person” conveniently addresses the question, “What do you believe in?” Otherwise, you’re just a soulless, immoral atheist.

Spiritualism is not overtly religious, and perhaps this is why it appeals to some people as a non-committal, secular belief system for those not ready to give up the trappings of religion. But it is a break away from religion. Spiritual beliefs can be stepping stones on the path to letting go of religion.

Perhaps we’re all a little spiritual by social necessity. Spiritual beliefs and practices tend to reflect popular culture and lifestyle. In a sense, we’re merely living in our own times when we utter “Thank God,” speak of a “soul” or “spirit,” burn an incense stick, shop for organic food, read our stars in the newspaper, or self-medicate with vitamin supplements. These seem to be customary, but we don’t want to assign unrelated significance to these acts.

Some see spirituality in every experience. To pattern-seeking minds, a simple thought becomes an epiphany. Emotions become intuition. An earthquake becomes an Act of God. A solar eclipse becomes a bad omen. Bonding with an animal becomes mystical. Surviving an accident triggers religious sentiment. Birth becomes miraculous. Death becomes sacred.

Some find spiritual experiences in society. Coincidences become synchronicity. Luck is not made. Outside influences affect our lives. We choose our parents before we’re born. Our friends are kindred spirits. Our partner is our soul mate. We tend to observe the hits and ignore the misses. We recall that chance encounter that led us to meet our partner, but we forget the car accident and the unsuccessful relationships. Alternatively, we put these down to “bad luck” and read the failures as “life lessons” we’re “meant to have” on the path to finding our true selves.

Some find spiritual experiences in nature. The complexity of nature is misinterpreted as evidence for a creator or designer. We derive incredible emotional satisfaction from physical phenomena. Some wish on shooting stars and rainbows. Sunsets and night skies inspire romance, wistfulness, and hope. These powerful feelings can be so overwhelming that they seem to come from beyond, but they come from within. This is the naturalist connection to the universe of which Carl Sagan spoke⁷, but the sense of awe is misconstrued as divine.

Spiritualism is what we make spiritual. It is about meaning. We tend to think our “spiritual experiences” are unique and deeply meaningful, and they are…to us. They are no doubt profound, but they are human experiences and individual experiences. Assigning additional importance to them is a subjective attempt to understand the objective world.

For many, spiritualism is an ongoing quest. The search for truth ends in falsehood. The shamans and gurus are false gods. Enlightenment becomes disillusionment.

But many seekers of new age spiritualism never seem to find what they’re looking for…

Notes

1. Canfield, Jack. 1993. Chicken Soup for the Soul: 101 Stories to Open the Heart and Rekindle the Spirit. Florida: Health Communications, Inc.
2. Lluch, Alex. 2009. Enjoy Life and Be Happy in 30 Seconds: Daily Steps to Enrich Your Life. San Diego: W.S. Publishing.
3. Trudeau, Kevin. 2005. Natural Cures "They" Don’t Want You To Know About. Birmingham, Alabama: Alliance Publishing.
4. Sylvia Browne, www.sylvia.org/home/aboutnovus.cfm (accessed September 14, 2009).
5. Bruce Lipton, www.brucelipton.com/ (accessed September 14, 2009).
6. Wattles, Wallace. 2007. The Science of Getting Rich: Find the Secret to the Law of Attraction. Waterford, Michigan: Wilder Publications.
7. Sagan, Carl (edited by Ann Druyan). 2006. The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God. New York: Penguin.

As its gangplank rose dramatically, the tanker’s public address system blared symphonic pomp. The music, rousing to the point of desperation, sounded at turns like a knockoff of the theme from Star Wars, then Superman, as if John Williams had been forced at gunpoint to produce an anthem in a single sitting. From beneath this rose the sound of vigorous clattering from a core of traditional Chinese drummers assembled on the dock. Clouds of confetti descended onto the expectant crowd, a few hundred journalists, local government officials, ordinary onlookers, and one curious American philosopher. As the massive ship pulled away from the Shanghai port, a fleet of sleek hostesses in red silk gowns and a pack of schoolchildren in imperial yellow tracksuits waved goodbye to the crew.

Those on board were not celebrities on a luxury cruise or military officers deploying for a foreign campaign. They were scientists. Their vessel was the Xue Long, Snow Dragon, and it was bound for the South Pole on the twenty-fifth Chinese National Antarctic Research Expedition.

When the Xue Long set off in October 2008, I was in Shanghai visiting with leaders of the municipal branch of the Chinese Association for Science and Technology. After several weeks of working in cramped offices in gloomy Beijing, I enjoyed the time in Shanghai, where I found the air somewhat freer and the espresso easier to come by. I was there on behalf of the Center for Inquiry, seeking to interest a division of the Chinese Association for Science and Technology (CAST) in conducting the Worldviews of Scientists study.

Pioneered by the Institute for the Study of Secularism in Society and Culture at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, the Worldviews series is an international sociological survey of the religious, ethical, and social opinions of working scientists. Above all, I was curious about the extent to which the scientific community in China exemplified the critical rationalist spirit in their public lives. One might expect scientists to be occupationally committed to anti-authoritarianism and freedom of inquiry, intellectual honesty and pluralism. It was probably no accident that an astrophysicist, Fang Lizhi, had such an important part in inspiring the student unrest that led to Tiananmen Square. Scientists are a disharmonious bunch. How willing could they be to sing in tune to the Party’s official march?

Big Science

At the most recent national congress of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in October 2007, President Hu Jintao trumpeted “scientific development” and the Harmonious Society, directing the government to

thoroughly apply the Scientific Outlook on Development, continue to emancipate the mind, persist in reform and opening up, pursue development in a scientific way, promote social harmony, and strive for new victories in building a moderately prosperous society in all respects. . . . Emancipating the mind is a magic instrument for developing socialism with Chinese characteristics, reform and opening up provide a strong driving force for developing it, and scientific development and social harmony are basic requirements for developing it.¹

Soon after I arrived in Beijing, my colleagues made it clear to me that for official purposes, building the Harmonious Society would mean tapping into scientific methods, but it also would mean placing limits on the scope of scientific values. With the utmost congeniality and reasonableness, they explained that survey questions about religion would be deemed too divisive and sensitive, and questions about politics could be considered seditious. Further, the term “skepticism” was to be avoided because what remained of the Party’s ideologues might consider it a threat to Marxist-Leninist doctrine.

This should not have been surprising. After all, CAST is a part of the bureaucracy, not an independent, non-governmental professional association (genuinely independent civil society organizations are still almost unheard of in China). On Wednesday afternoons the entire office—spare two junior female researchers—emptied out to attend the meetings of the Party. For those who seek professional positions of privilege, it is of course the only thing going.

On December 10, 2008—the 60^th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights—over three hundred Chinese dissidents released Charter 08, an open letter calling for human rights, civil liberties, private property, and a democratic, federated republic. The letter was organized by Liu Xiaobo, a literary critic, and the list of signatories included more lawyers and entrepreneurs than professional scientists. One prominent scientist signatory was Jian Qisheng, who was arrested following his involvement in Tiananmen and subsequently spent four years in prison after commemorating the massacre in 1999. Jian studied philosophy and worked as a physicist. But, perhaps significantly, he is now identified as a former physicist.²

Scientist-Reformers of the 1980s

There was a moment in recent Chinese politics when elite scientists were in the vanguard of dissent. Ironically, this was not the result of the CCP’s antipathy towards science but rather its embrace of science in the post-Mao era. Central to Deng Xiaoping’s reform efforts, begun in 1978, was a new policy on science and technology. Mao was faulted for his utopianism, for becoming unhinged from empirical reality. While carrying on the traditional Marxist rhetoric of the “science” of dialectical materialism, Mao had little but suspicion and hostility for the scientific establishment. The Cultural Revolution made scientists targets in the class struggle, branding the Chinese Academy of Sciences a “bourgeois headquarters.”

Once in power, Deng rallied for a return to scientific rationality. He recruited scientists and technologists as essential partners in effective policymaking and governance in a modern China. By the early 80s, leading specialists were being incorporated into the bureaucracy as the staff and directors of permanent consultative bodies. But in some cases, this close association ended up blowing back on the government. The period is described by Alice L. Miller, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, in her excellent study Science and Dissent in Post-Mao China: The Politics of Knowledge:

Especially among those in the “basic” sciences—those pursuing scientific knowledge for its own sake—a conflict of professional mission and identity with the regime’s utilitarian goals for science emerged. Among some, the reforms were seen not as alleviating problems in the scientific community but as making things worse. By the late 1980s many scientists were deeply frustrated with the reforms, anxious over their jobs and futures, and alarmed at their declining standing in a rapidly changing society. A few, at least, felt a deepening alienation from a regime that they had previously supported, spurring them onto the path of political dissent.³

Miller argues that the public political dissent of leading figures in the scientific community—Fang Lizhi and others, such as Xu Liangying, Jin Guantao, and Li Xingmin—was inspired by the powerful anti-authoritarian norms and Enlightenment values of science itself:

For scientists such as Fang and Xu, the anti-authoritarian norms of science translated easily into a classically liberal politics. The message these scientists carried into the larger political arena defended above all the sanctity and worth of individual autonomy and conscience above the claims of state and society. . . . the emergence of a renewed liberal voice in China’s political arena in the 1980s was in significant part a natural extension of what some scientists believed to be the norms of healthy science into politics.⁴

What became of this scientific dissent in the intervening years? Was it suppressed by the force of the post-Tienanmen crackdown, or were there other dynamics at work?

A Musical Interlude

One afternoon my colleagues held a lunchtime party in honor of my visit. We all drove over to a local karaoke lounge for a buffet-style meal followed by what turned out to be several convivial hours of drink, chat, and of course, singing. Everyone took turns at his or her favorites, often with wild abandon.

Someone had brought along an acoustic guitar, so when my turn came around (after first agreeing to sing karaoke on John Denver's “Country Roads,” which somehow everyone knew by heart), I taught the group the chorus to “Free Falling,” the wonderful rock ’n’ roll anthem by Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers. As we belted out “Now I’m free . . . free falling!” it felt like the right song for the hour, putting us in the shoes of a skydiver who thrills to the rush of the leap even though he cannot control the direction in which he spirals. It was now late afternoon, the workday was ending, and we could linger no longer. We left the lounge and headed back into the drone of Beijing.

Notes

1. President Hu’s speech, presumably translated by the Chinese Embassy, can be found at http://www.china-embassy.org/eng/zt/768675/t375502.htm.
2. See http://www.pen.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/3343/prmID/172
3. H. Lyman Miller, Science and dissent in post-Mao China: The politics of knowledge (Seattle, Wash.: University of Washington Press, 1996), 69.
4. —. Science and dissent in post-Mao China: The politics of knowledge (Seattle, Wash.: University of Washington Press, 1996), 4.

Even though deep inside we feel that pestering instinct to look logically at what society gives us to consume, we often fail to respond to that nagging desire to know. In the end all the garbage we ingest becomes so lethal that it threatens regurgitation, but we still assume and believe we are doing well. The result is that the garbage becomes a poison that is regurgitated so violently that we don’t know how to deal with it. Analogously, the African society fed us with ideas about witchcraft, witches, and witchdoctors that we consumed whole. These ideas entered our minds, growing over time and transforming into something so dangerous that it has caused a human rights crisis in many republics of Africa: the recent witch lynching activities that hit both local and international press.

Not long ago, we believed that a group of able-minded people free from the ideologies of the old would be born in Africa. The members of the group would develop their brains well and focus on agendas to help develop Africa. They would eschew mystical and tribal thinking to escape ideas of witchcraft, caste discrimination, and other dogmatic perspectives. They would thrive with the growth of scientific literacy in Africa, which would give them their name: the Millennium Children of Africa. Having grown up immersed in technology, the members of the Millennium Children of Africa could reap all the benefits of a computerized world to think forward and bring industrialization to Africa.

Of course, this group was born. They found when they intermarried with other tribes, tribal and ethnical thinking disappeared. They found when their educational institutions were secularized they could interact with people of all calibers and of all religions. They found when the eras of political assassinations and well-known dictators had gone, they now had the freedom to learn in an environment that somehow best suited them. The coming of the Internet with the computer age transformed the world into a global village in which the free exchange of ideas was possible. Their energy was capable of making Africa a continent of change. The coming new millennium was bright with strategic plans to enable these young people to develop a brighter future for Africa.

But things started taking a slower turn and, as the millennium came, it seemed as though things were stalling. The promises remained elusive, and nothing constructive was being done to empower this group of young minds. The education system began deteriorating, and ideas that could have opened up their minds for positive and creative thinking were gagged. All avenues to critical thinking, reason, and science were blocked and replaced with dogma.

To be precise, I am talking about the current youth in Africa. Young people face many obstacles that block both their individual progress and collective contributions to the country at large. The story is even worse in developing nations where youths face a bleak economic future due to lack of information and experience. Without job opportunities, young adults have been vulnerable to a wide range of hazards, including sexually transmitted diseases, unwanted pregnancies, violence, discrimination, and alcohol and drug abuse. The situation in Kenya specifically and Africa as a whole is a story of youth poverty and unemployment. In the cities, young men and women walk day in and day out in search of employment to fulfill their basic needs. Here, they end up in the slums where they find themselves in awful living conditions where running sewers and out of control human decay is the norm. In the rural areas, desperate youths have tried to engage in subsistence farming to survive only to find other obstacles like decline in prices and competing products sold at lower market rates.

Moreover, young adults in Kenya and most other African countries have been viewed with uncertainty and suspicion. Both the government and international strategists frequently overlook them and their views on economical, political, and social agendas as unwise and unripe. In the end, the young people have been left vastly unattended to, which has rendered them hopeless and disillusioned.

With all these obstacles, many youths have resorted to redirecting their energies to social vices. This is where they meet bad individuals who prey on their gullible, desperate minds. They find individuals who have watched them in their desperate situations and continue to tap and encourage their primitive instincts and plant dogmas in their unsure minds. Suspicion and superstitious ideas seep in, and they become willing slaves to be brainwashed.

This misery might explain why the youthful demographic has been reported at the forefront of the recent activities of witchcraft violence and witch lynching. According to statistics in the Ralushai Commission Report, a conference that was organized in South Africa by the Commission on Gender Based Violence, youths often lead attacks on alleged witches. Their involvement was found to be based on various factors, including unemployment, poverty, and lack of credible leadership. It was found that the purveyors of the modern phenomenon of witchcraft violence—who target the wealthy and successful—were motivated by greed and personal gain. These people incited and mobilized youths by feeding them superstitious ideas about their business competitors. Here the youths took matters into their hands and quickly hacked these people to death.

Credo Mutwa, a victim of witchcraft violence, gave his personal account of being accused of witchcraft and nearly burnt alive. He also recounted how two of his friends, Mrs. Ramatsimela and Mr. Khupe, were killed by a mob of young activists in the land of Kgosi Phase. Ramatsimela and Khupe were dragged to the top of mountain and burnt alive by a group of young people. Rocky Mabunda, who comes from Zangoma, explained how the youths take a lead in killing those accused of witchcraft. He did not blame the youths, however; he said that youths never went to the seers, witchdoctors, and religious leaders and asked them to identify the witch. It was the parents and other ill-motivated people who sought the seers and gave the information to the youths who carried out lynching without inquiry.

Harold Mathebula, a young convict serving a twenty-year sentence narrated the story of a crime he committed in 1990 after the release of Nelson Mandela. Mathebula celebrated Mandela’s release by burning someone accused of witchcraft, which he now accepts was an innocent man. In prison, Mathebula was part of a group that produced videos to educate people about the dangers of witchcraft violence. He says, “We believe if the youths are given proper education about the horrors of witchcraft violence, this could help reduce or stop the carnage….We are aware that what we did was wrong, accept the consequences of our actions, and are prepared to work hard to prevent other senseless acts.”

In Kisii, a group of youths known as Sungu sungu has been a nightmare to many. They are notorious forerunners in burning alleged witches in Kisii. Sungu sungu was formed under the guise of community policing—a program that was launched by the Kenyan government in various local communities to involve citizens in keeping securities when the administrative police had failed working alone. In other communities, this program succeeded. However, in Kisii, the formed group used the opportunity to combat witchcraft, and witch accusation became the norm. This group is widely known to have burnt five women alive—a story that made headlines in both local and international media.

Usually when sickness, death, or other misfortune befalls a person or a family, witchcraft is the assumed culprit. The aggrieved party then consults a traditional healer to determine the source of the tragedy. Should the tragedy be ascribed to witchcraft, the traditional healer points out a witch and the Sungu sungu are fed the information that ultimately leads to a lynching.

The story has always been of youths involved in witchcraft violence. People between the ages of forty and sixty years have in rare cases been involved directly in witch violence, but young people usually commit the actual violence. This means that if the youths are not mobilized and given a proper education involving reason, science, and critical thinking, then a lot more witch hunting and witch lynching will continue in Kenya. Youth empowerment is the only way to curb witch lynching in Africa.

In its Anti-Witchcraft campaign, the Center for Inquiry/Kenya has embarked on engaging the youths in this fight. From September 28 to October 1, 2009, the Center for Inquiry/Kenya will visit Moi University to meet students on campus. Here they will organize a workshop to discuss ways in which youths can avoid becoming victims of unscrupulous individuals who mobilize them to carry out witchcraft and other related violence. We will debate “Do Witches and Witchcraft Powers Exist?” which will hopefully open the minds of students to science, reason, and critical thinking.

From October 26 to 28, 2009, the Center for Inquiry/Kenya will organize a major Anti-Superstition Campaign at the University of Nairobi. Here we will invite all the campus groups from different universities, local youth groups in the areas that have been on the spot on witch lynching, and other NGOs that have been at the forefront of the Anti-Superstition campaign. This campaign, whose theme is “Superstitious Thinking and Its Dangers to the People,” will raise concern on some issues that have been overlooked in the fight against witchcraft-related crimes. Many intellectuals from various learning institutions will be involved.

The Center for Inquiry/Kenya will then select a few individual campus groups and visit the local rural youth groups, like the Sungu sungu, that have been involved in witchcraft violence and have a session. We believe this will be a thoroughly positive direction in the fight against witchcraft violence and belief in witchcraft.

“Where can you find science,

Nature, art, and magic, too

Making music, paper airplanes

So many things to challenge you?”

The high rafters of the camp lodge rang out with the sound of voices set to the exuberant strum of Monty Harper’s guitar. Forty-five youngsters, aged 7 to 16, over eighty of their parents, 14 staffers, and one of world’s leading cosmologists joined in the song collectively written by the campers over the previous week, with the expert guidance of Mr. Harper, a professional children’s songwriter. Then came the answer, in chorus:

“Camp Inquiry, Camp Inquiry, Camp Inquiry

I-N-Q-U-I-R-Y

Inquiry makes your brain cells fly!”

This theme song for Camp Inquiry was one of dozens of original compositions that were showcased at the emotional Saturday evening closing ceremonies of the Center for Inquiry’s innovative camp for critical thinking located in Holland, New York, now in its fifth year.

“We ended up with lots of great songs,” Mr. Harper commented. “The kids were incredibly creative and talented and enthusiastic. I guided them where needed, but mostly I tried to just stay out of the way and let them do their thing. The ones that performed on Saturday night were so proud and excited. They created many lasting memories and the kids came away feeling empowered to express themselves artistically whenever they feel the need.”

Songwriting and performing was just one activity of a well-rounded program featuring outdoor education, art, scientific inquiry, team-building, and recreation.

“Where can you hear lectures

To learn about the planets and outer space?

Where can you see magic

Popping up all over the place?”

Throughout the week, kids were entertained and taught by three magicians presenting the physics and psychology behind feats such as sleight of hand, mind reading, and walking on glass. One of the magicians, Scott Dezrah Blinn, observed:

“It was thrilling, inspiring and a little bittersweet to see how eager the kids were to be in an environment where they were free to express themselves and encouraged to question everything. They didn’t have to accept things just to fit in. They were in a community of peers and leaders who knew what it was like to be bright, to be curious, opinionated and misunderstood.”

Proving that reality is as amazing as illusion, stellar speakers like Kevin Grazier and Lawrence Krauss led discussions and hands-on activities to illustrate principles of physics and cosmology.

“Who would have thought a crew of kids ranging from teenagers on down would be excited to listen to a talk about cosmology and would have the attention span to survive the whole thing and then ask questions! I came away feeling amazed at the polite kindness the kids showed toward each other and their excitement about learning anything and everything.”

Camp counselors, many of whom were trained scientists, marveled that one seven-year-old camper was able to readily answer a question posed by Dr. Krauss by listing all four of the fundamental forces of nature.

Lead counselor, Laurie Tarr, shared the consensus of the staff, “The children who attended Camp Inquiry ’09 were an exceptional group. Not only were they all smart, friendly, funny kids who enjoy learning, they also asked the most amazing questions and provided even more amazing answers.”

“Where can you make new friends,

Sometimes crazy, always smart?

Friends from around the country;

You’ll always hold them in your heart.”

In the end, Camp Inquiry was about creating a community of inquirers. As Monty Harper put it, “It was an I-have-found-my-people moment.” They parted with hugs, tears, and, for many, promises to return for Camp Inquiry 2010.

“Camp Inquiry, Camp Inquiry, Camp Inquiry

It’s the place we love to go.

Come and feed your need to know!”