Jason on me in D.C.

May 29, 2015 • 9:30 am

As Jason Rosenhouse promised, he has a report on my book talk in D.C., a report tersely called “Coyne in D.C.“. It’s a Coyne-ian report, complete with pictures of cats and noms! Jason is no sycophant, and has a few words of constructive criticism, which I’ll ponder, about answering questions by angry people. He may be right, and my response to such people may be unduly testy because I’m picking up on their anger. As I said, I have to learn to understand where these people are coming from, and that understanding may lead to a more empathic response.

So thanks to Jason, and I hope he’ll write more about science and religion on EvolutionBlog in the future. I hear tell he’s got a good post coming up along those lines.

43 thoughts on “Jason on me in D.C.”

  2. A nice summary. I am not sure I agree with the “less sure-footed in dealing with the critics” comment. It’s difficult when there is no real question! And I fully agreed that the nurse was speaking of a different kind of faith, in the way that Dr Coyne pointed out: she was talking more about an empirically tested kind of faith, where you know that her work routine works because it’s been vetted against so many other patients. I also did not quite get the rabbi’s point – he just kept saying “you need to learn more”, but what, that was not clear. I liked Dr Coyne’s explanation, that it might get to him more when a rabbi goes after him because of cultural identity. I thought that was disarming and honest – an example of the humor and light touch, even.

    1. It sounds to me as if the nurse was throwing around a bunch of assertions, including a Little People Argument regarding the weak capacities of people who are sick. They can’t handle the truth, they need comforting lies.

      Note that this argument isn’t being made in order to hush up an intemperate atheist haranguing a pious believer in their sickbed. It’s being advanced in order to shut up an author speaking to an audience in a book store. Or anywhere. Or writing a book.

        1. I don’t know the study, but I suspect someone has created a study that takes advantage of an already well-known fact- when a patient knows more about the surgery, the recovery process, has more time to feel they’ve developed a relationship with the surgeon etc, they have better outcomes. Therefore, if a doctor prayed with a patient, and that wouldn’t happen if the patient didn’t want it, that is bound to help. If a doctor prayed over everybody, including those who didn’t want it, I’m sure the result would be different.

          And aren’t there some surveys talked about in The God Delusion that show praying has a negative result? There are times I can imagine it putting undue pressure on patients.

          3. If I was readied for surgery and a man in scrubs waltzed in and said, “I’m your surgeon, let’s pray”, I’d feel more than a little pressure.

          5. I’ve yet to watch the video/scrutinize the nurse’s comments. What if the patient requests that the physician participate in the PATIENT’s prayer? Seems it won’t do for the physician to object, what with surgery imminent, though the patient ought not impose that on the physician, IMHO. Why not also call in the hospital’s CEO, and all other surgical staff, while we’re at it?

  3. Jerry was a little less sure-footed in dealing with the critics. It seemed to me he got a little too exasperated with them, especially the nurse, when humor and a light-touch would have been more effective.

    Hm. I’m not sure a humorous, light-touch approach would have been a good idea when responding to a nurse talking about sick people in hospitals.

  5. I also find that when people are testy with me then I get testy in response.

    The only exception to this is with students, because of course I’ve gone into the lecture or tutorial with the mindset that you have to be calm and constructive whatever they say.

    So maybe the way round Jason’s criticism is just to look at the audience as though they were students.

    1. “So maybe the way round Jason’s criticism is just to look at the audience as though they were students.”

      Maybe so, but fer sure don’t let them know that’s how you’re looking at them, eh?

      Anyway, who are they to impose their “miffed”-ness on Dr. Coyne, but expect him to be all sweetness and light in return? Are they “special,” somehow fancying themselves possessed of the sense of entitlement of a corporate tyrant? Is he somehow their bloody servant, they his customers, and he’s to provide customer satisfaction?

      (Reminds me of Rep. John Shimkus asserting he didn’t have to let Sec. Kathleen Sebelius answer questions he posed to her, he simply wanting to rudely harangue her.)

  6. The nurse had claimed that there were studies showing that prayer has a healing effect. It would be well neigh impossible to have some facts ready for random claims made after a talk, but we can always find some facts afterwards.
    A quick perusal finds many links (from religious sites of course) that describe healing benefits from intercessory prayer, but a meta-analysis of these tests, as described in Wikipedia, states that the results are really very mixed. Many studies on intercessory prayer showed no effect, while others only correlated that patients who were prayed for did only slightly better than the negative control group. There was the very large and carefully controlled ‘STEP’ study described in The God Delusion that correlated prayer with patients doing less well.
    So the nurse just picked whatever she wanted to believe. That is the very nature of belief, of course. Most everyone is more receptive to hearing confirmation of their beliefs.

    2. Yes. If there is even one study, no matter its pedigree, qualifications or what other studies say, it can be claimed that, “Well, all I know is this study says it works and I know from personal experience that it does too.” They don’t know how science works but they know, somewhere deep inside, that it does work. A perfect recipe for misuse.

    3. I made some comments to Ant above before reading this – you’d already written some of what I wrote – I should’ve looked further!

  7. I think the key in dealing with those who want to pontificate rather than ask questions is simple:

    WWHD – What Would Hitch do?

    1. “It’s called faith because it’s not knowledge.” – Christopher Hitchens

    2. Well, he perhaps likely would respond, “We’ll take that as a comment.” I.e., you didn’t ask me a question.

      (In one video he tells the speaker that, then says to the speaker, “I couldn’t have said it any better myself; I certainly couldn’t have said it any better if I were YOU.”)

  8. I think the trick to learn in the case of the nurse is to separate the practice from the explanation. It is fine for her to engage in the prayer before surgery, etc., if that makes sense for the patient.

    Where you differ is on why that might help. Getting patients to relax and be optimistic has a number of useful physiological effects that are beneficial when undergoing and recovering from a medical procedure. We would explain them in terms of hormones, neuro-transmitters, blood pressure, mood, and the like; she wants to explain them as religious woo.

    We obviously think the scientific explanation is more useful and correct. But that doesn’t mean she should stop doing it. What she is doing may very well be helping her patients, even if her notion of why it works is unrealistic.

    1. I disagree. 1st, the two options you present are not the only two available.

      Also, while she may put many patients at ease, and thus help them, her belief in the effectiveness of prayer may also lead her to do things, make decisions, that either directly harm her patients or do not help them when she could / should have. In the general sense this is not speculation. Believers do harm people, even kill them, because of their beleif in the power of prayer. Though neither of us are in a position to know how delusional this specific nurse is.

      As for other options. Non-believers are just as compassionate as believers. In a patient care situation a non-believer is perfectly capable of being comforting in their own right, as well as being able to offer the services of a priest, religious counselor or what have you, or confer with family / friends as to how best to satisfy the patients spiritual desires.

  9. You’re going to get people who disagree, and a lot of them will say similar things. I’d advise you to write down what they say, then write a response to what they say in the same way you would if you were writing a post disagreeing with a published opinion.

    From that you could develop a series of stock answers to use in these situations. You could even practice them. Sometimes humour will be appropriate, but that can backfire too because it can sometimes come across as excessively mocking. You have to use answers you’re comfortable delivering though or whatever your intentions, it can come across badly.

    It’s not easy disagreeing with someone, especially when you’re really just thinking how stupid they are (you’re probably nicer than that actually), which is why I think preparation for such people is helpful.

    2. Good ideas! It can imagine how difficult it might be to deal with these people and remain professional. I applaud Jerry for for getting out there and trying. He certainly has the knowledge but applying it live in public will always be different from a post on a website. It sounds like he’s done well so far but it’s also good to hear he’s open for constructive criticism. This way he can only get better! Not everyone can/has to be a Hitchens and just obliterate his opponents without so much as batting an eyelash 😉

      1. Well, sometimes Hitch succumbed to temptation and did more than bat an eyelash. One response on video, “What an incredibly stupid question.”

    3. I try to catch any huffy response welling up in me, and say to myself, “Be Nice,” and then do my best to be nice, or at least as nice as the Philistine in question will allow me. But, in my Older Age, I feel I’ve paid my dues in trying to Keep The Peace and Maintain The Bigger Picture, and will sometime fire a return salvo when dealing with some Gordon Ramseyesque character who won’t lift a finger to keep things civil.

  10. I suspect the book title gives too much weight to ‘faith’. This encourages the faithful to think about the book as ‘science’ vs their faith.

    But what if Jerry had said to the rabbi (who said he could also discern religious “truths” through faith alone) that other faiths discern different “truths”? Does the religious faith of the nurse provide an equal healing for believers with different faiths?

    Too late now but perhaps the book title should have been ‘Science vs Faiths’ – Why science and religions are incompatible.

  11. I just look at faith in the title as religious faith because the other part of the title is fact and fact has to be science.

    We could call it fiction verses truth and then start all over with the discussion.

  12. It depends on what you’re trying to accomplish with these book events. A little diplomacy and PR are fine for selling books, but ultimately, for a topic such as this, I’d think one wants to remain intellectually honest. It’s OK to try different tactics. I don’t think anyone will be converted on the spot at a book event, so I’d suggest that you stay true to who you are, continue to be kind, patient and courteous, but don’t put up with crap. Some won’t ever like what they hear, so speak your truth quietly and clearly, and let them howl.

    1. hmmm…I thought that would post a picture of your book (“Faith vs. Fact”).
      And I was kidding about him maybe not having read it.

      1. Actually, no, he hasn’t read the book…”I haven’t had a chance to read the book yet”…that’ll teach me from commenting about a blog post before I’ve read it 🙂

  14. “my response to such people may be unduly testy because I’m picking up on their anger.”

    After listening to the audio I found your response almost perfectly appropriate. Showing a bit of testiness is certainly not a fault, if you ask me. It is much more honest than smothering your reactions in a practiced, casual, smile. What better message to leave an audience with that a dose of directness and sincerity?

  15. The talk was so well presented, I could see how PCC’s students must have appreciated him from seats in the classroom and lab. As for the Q/A session, even the long-winded, “I’m just sayin’…” no-question questions were handled with such respect and strong clarity that it was quite powerful.

Comments are closed.