James Randi and Richard Dawkins Interview
tags:
Stumble ThisThis is a clip of a James Randi and Richard Dawkins discussing the paranormal versus the perinormal, and testing such phenonomena, and the Million Dollar prize. I think Randi's answer to Dawkins' last question on the video is quite admirable and speaks volumes of his mindset.
This interview took place towards the tail end of the Amazing Meeting in 2005, hosted (I believe) by the James Randi Educational Foundation. You can see another clip from this conference, one of Dawkins giving a lecture here:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Richard-Dawkins-on-the-Darwin-awards-Douglas-Adams-more
This interview took place towards the tail end of the Amazing Meeting in 2005, hosted (I believe) by the James Randi Educational Foundation. You can see another clip from this conference, one of Dawkins giving a lecture here:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Richard-Dawkins-on-the-Darwin-awards-Douglas-Adams-more
Regarding Randi's answer to Dawkins' last question on the video, I'd say that it is really the only satisfying answer he could give. If some paranormal phenomenon could pass the JREF's testing, it would cease to be strictly paranormal and would be shown as something perinormal. Obviously here I'm assuming that the JREF's tests wouldn't be flawed. This creates the potential for a sort of catch-22 situation, in that no phenomenon could pass the tests and still strictly be considered paranormal. I'd hazard a guess that's why Randi is talking about "defining words being a risky process" as the clip ends.
Anyway, enough with my pedantry. Great clip, thanks Rembar!
What I thought was really cool about his response was not just that he did acknowledge the danger of the definition of paranormal preventing winning the prize, but more importantly his comment about the possibility of being proven wrong being "worth the million dollars". That mindset, the disregard for "me against you" in favor of "let's discover something amazing", is the kind of outlook that drives scientists and researchers everywhere.