Wolfman
17th March 2007, 01:07 AM
From Randi's latest commentary:
We’re told that South Africa has now reversed its controversial advice. But why was such a juvenile statement made, in the first place? Are African countries determined to stay back in the Dark Ages, rather than moving into the twenty-first century along with the rest of the world? My brief visit there brought me hope that not only were they leaving behind the disgrace of apartheid, but also the supernatural mythology that it appears they still insist on embracing. It’s time to sweep out that trash along with the medieval notions of racial superiority and discredited ideas of magical influences. Yes, it takes some courage to do so, but if the leaders don’t accept reality rather than trying to keep their people in an atmosphere of ignorance and superstition, these countires [sic] will remain on a road to nowhere. And its citizens will continue to die from their leaders’ lack of rationality…
Now, I've had some questions about Randi's comments in the past, but none that have shown such appalling ignorance (in my opinion).
Randi seems to share the North American inability to perceive that Africa is composed of many different nations, many of which are quite radically different from each other. Instead, Randi takes instances in only two African countries (Gambia and South Africa), and uses it as an excuse to generalize about all African countries. The reply is a rambling string of statements that frequently shift back and forth between referring to the single nation of "South Africa" (such as is comment about "My brief visit there", which I assume refers to South Africa only, not to every African country), and to "these countries", referring to all of Africa.
Yes, there are African nations that have ignorant leaders and are rife with superstition. There are also African nations with enlightened leaders and strong programs to promote scientific knowledge.
And I most definitely take exception (as, I would assume, would the majority of Africans), with Randi's contention that "these countries are on the road to nowhere". My god, we hear Randi constantly insulting others for crass generalization and unsubstantiated claims, then he turns around and makes the most crude generalization possible, lumping all African nations together, and depicting them all as being on the road to nowhere!
At my most generous, I'd say that this article lacks cohesion and logic, mixing references to a single nation and to all of Africa in a manner that confounds the reader and will inevitably lead to misunderstandings. At my least generous, I'd say that this article reeks of ignorance and unsubstantiated generalizations, reflective not of a mind that values skepticism, but of a mind that is happy to draw broad conclusions on many different nations based on a fleeting experience of only one country.
In short -- not impressed.
We’re told that South Africa has now reversed its controversial advice. But why was such a juvenile statement made, in the first place? Are African countries determined to stay back in the Dark Ages, rather than moving into the twenty-first century along with the rest of the world? My brief visit there brought me hope that not only were they leaving behind the disgrace of apartheid, but also the supernatural mythology that it appears they still insist on embracing. It’s time to sweep out that trash along with the medieval notions of racial superiority and discredited ideas of magical influences. Yes, it takes some courage to do so, but if the leaders don’t accept reality rather than trying to keep their people in an atmosphere of ignorance and superstition, these countires [sic] will remain on a road to nowhere. And its citizens will continue to die from their leaders’ lack of rationality…
Now, I've had some questions about Randi's comments in the past, but none that have shown such appalling ignorance (in my opinion).
Randi seems to share the North American inability to perceive that Africa is composed of many different nations, many of which are quite radically different from each other. Instead, Randi takes instances in only two African countries (Gambia and South Africa), and uses it as an excuse to generalize about all African countries. The reply is a rambling string of statements that frequently shift back and forth between referring to the single nation of "South Africa" (such as is comment about "My brief visit there", which I assume refers to South Africa only, not to every African country), and to "these countries", referring to all of Africa.
Yes, there are African nations that have ignorant leaders and are rife with superstition. There are also African nations with enlightened leaders and strong programs to promote scientific knowledge.
And I most definitely take exception (as, I would assume, would the majority of Africans), with Randi's contention that "these countries are on the road to nowhere". My god, we hear Randi constantly insulting others for crass generalization and unsubstantiated claims, then he turns around and makes the most crude generalization possible, lumping all African nations together, and depicting them all as being on the road to nowhere!
At my most generous, I'd say that this article lacks cohesion and logic, mixing references to a single nation and to all of Africa in a manner that confounds the reader and will inevitably lead to misunderstandings. At my least generous, I'd say that this article reeks of ignorance and unsubstantiated generalizations, reflective not of a mind that values skepticism, but of a mind that is happy to draw broad conclusions on many different nations based on a fleeting experience of only one country.
In short -- not impressed.