Finished (Audiobook) - "The Science of Good and Evil" and "Why People Believe Weird Things" - Michael Shermer

I listened to "The Science of Good and Evil" by Michael Shermer and was, surprisingly, quite bored and disappointed in the book.  I've recently read many books on the grey area between science and religion (e.g. Dawkins and Hitchens; some Creationist stuff), many better than this one.  However, I should acknowledge that many of the discussions/examples suffered by being similar to issues discussed by Dawkins and Hitchens, so Shermer was starting at a distinct disadvantage - I might have appreciated the book much more had it been earlier in my reading sequence.

However, "Why People Believe Weird Things" is a great review of the goals of science, and the distinction(s) between science and pseudoscience.  Nicely laid out, interesting, with great examples of psychics (cold reading), dismissing astrology as it failed to predict disasters that killed thousands (e.g. 9-11 and any of several tsunamis) and basically lays out skepticism (not cynicism) as the basis for investigating relationships - also known as the scientific method.

I'm not sure where I got it, but I had a recording of Mark Bell (Coast to Coast am) radio show with Shermer as a guest.  The show is a call-in show, right of centre politically, playing to a primarily religious audience, though likely not an extreme one.  One of the callers (prior to the start of the recording) called in to say his wife was quite ill with an aneurysm and was critically ill, asking for listeners to pray for her.  Shermer, of course, doesn't support the interventionist-God hypothesis (don't think he considers himself an atheist, as does Dawkins, but he doesn't believe in the power of prayer).  At some point he was asked about the caller and the request for prayers.  To his credit, Mr. Shermer did represent his views, bringing up issues such as asking whether or not God was not aware of the situation prior to prayers, or if people who have loved-ones who die should somehow feel responsible, as either they didn't pray, or didn't pray enough.

The discussion that followed was very interesting, particularly for having been "off the cuff" - it involved whether or not psychics or others who are entertaining and may provide solace to grieving individuals (e.g. by allowing survivors to talk or communicate with the deceased) are doing damage or a service.  The host was taking the "service" perspective, as folks felt soothed by the "communication".  Shermer took the "damage" perspective, as treating entertainment as science reduces the general understanding of "science" and that people aren't served by being tricked.

The discussion didn't go deep enough to sway any believers in either side, but was a very nice example for skepticism and its role in problems solving, and an entertaining philosophical discussion.

All in all, my overall opinion of Shermer is unchanged - I like his viewpoints and the vast majority of his writings (including the articles he used to write in Scientific American).  I would even recommend "the Science of Good and Evil", particularly as an introduction to the religion-science border regions.