Society

Does Science Support Infant Circumcision?

  Brian Earp and Robert Darby Ph.D According to Brian Morris in a recent issue of The Skeptic, “Science supports infant circumcision” and “so should skeptics.”...

male routine infant circumcision (RIC) or genital mutilation (MGM)

Marianne Baker Ph.D A friend recently handed me a leaflet she'd picked up over in Tower Hamlets, which is a relatively intensely studied area of...

The First Cut

  A series of articles in The Skeptic examined the relatively common practice of infant male circumcision. Is surgical removal of a child's foreskin a...

Behaving Like Animals

  Tessa Kendall looks at primatologist Frans de Waal’s work to muse upon the origin of our better natures Is human nature a beast that needs...

I Swear by Almighty God

A LITTLE OVER TWO YEARS AGO I was invited to be part of a radio show discussing proposals that the oath taken in the...

Alternative Facts

“WE HAVE BEEN FIGHTING ‘alternative facts’ for decades, haven’t we?” a fellow long-serving skeptic said recently. Indeed we have, even though it never occurred to...

Does science support infant circumcision? A skeptical reply to Brian Morris

by Brian D. Earp and Robert Darby According to Brian Morris in a recent issue of The Skeptic, “Science supports infant circumcision” and “so should skeptics.”[1] It would be more accurate to say that “Brian Morris supports infant circumcision” and that skeptics can think for themselves.

The Uncontested Word: Why do Some Historians Treat Religious Texts as Sacred?

Richard Firth-Godbehere contemplates the historical provenance and value of religious texts.
Published for The Skeptic online on 17th April 2013.

Photograph: Kevin Peters

There are a great many historians who practice religions of all flavours. Some historians jump headlong into the history of their particular faith, blending it with apologetics and philosophy. Others simply ignore their religious predilections and concentrate on other areas of history, sealing their faith in a mental box with a sign huge on the lid reading ‘do not enter while studying’. I am sure this arrangement or something similar to it is found throughout all walks of academic life, but I find it particularly puzzling when I find it amongst historians. I know of many good historians who take their collection of fables as absolutely true; it is one of the most fascinating and puzzling examples of cognitive dissonance I know of.

After all, a historian is, by definition, someone who is deeply sceptical about old texts and artefacts. It is a historian’s job to dust off manuscripts, wade through archives, dig things out of dark corners and not believe a word of it (unless there is some good supporting evidence, of course). Even when a historian does believe a word of it, he tempers this with a deep analysis of the text or object at hand, stripping it down in order to work out what the narrative really is, as opposed to what the text or object claims it is. In short, we historians are deeply sceptical pedants: each and every one of us. So why does pedantry, suspicion and obsessive checking, cross-checking, double checking and rechecking disappear so often in the face of a religious text? Here, I’ll take a lightly meandering journey through the peripheries of the philosophy of history in order to find out if there is any validity in accepting a religious text as good source of history.

Latest news

Conspiracy theorists, anti-vaxxers and alt-med quackery put our pets in harm’s way

Vet Danny Chambers highlights how the aggressive promotion of alternative therapies to prevent and treat animal diseases has become widespread.

‘Mask Mouth’: A real dental phenomenon, or merely a confection?

Dentist Shaun Sellars looks at recent reports of facemasks causing a new dental phenomenon known as 'mask mouth'.

The Ockham Awards 2020: recognising the best in skepticism, and the worst in pseudoscience

Nominations for the 2020 Ockham Awards are now open, with our annual award for Skeptical Activism and our Rusty Razor award for pseudoscience.

Don’t believe what you think!

What follows is a slightly modified and abbreviated version of the introduction to Professor Edzard Ernst's recently published book, Don't Believe What...

Ethics for Skeptics: why compassion and reason go hand in hand

Philosophy lecturer Aaron Rabinowitz outlines the ethical core of skepticism, and explains why a compassionate understanding of morality must underpin the skeptical worldview.
- Advertisement -