Theos-Talk Archives (April 2004 Message tt00395)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bartl@s...> wrote:
> I first met Randi during that period, 
> and he explained to me the important difference: Kreskin and other 
> mentalists never stated they had real powers; Geller did. And 
Geller was 
> doing more than just entertaining; he was taking money from people 
in 
> order to exercise these powers. Randi opened my eyes to the level 
of con 
> artistry out there, although I stopped communicating with him 
during the 
> period where he did not differentiate between people who believed 
in 
> things not scientifically proven, and intentional frauds (he has 
gone 
> back to attacking only the intentional frauds, and merely trying to 
test 
> those who are sincere in their beliefs).

I never met Randi but I get the impression from his books and public 
appearances that his mind is already made up. The way I see things, 
one has to sift through loads of crap like Leadbeater and Creme and 
Eckankar but that there may be something of real value out there if 
one is willing to sift through enough garbage. If nothing else, 
sifting through garbage educates one in a way that no academic 
curriculum can to think critically. But to do it honestly one would 
have to remain open to the possibility that not everything is 
garbage, even though that openness may be difficult to maintain long 
term. Giving in to any sort of fundamentalism deprives one of that 
mind sharpening benefit. It does not appear to me Randi has that 
mindset, although he is certainly brilliant enough. A fundamentalist 
skeptic is the opposite side of the same coin from the fundamentalist 
True Believer.

Is that ypur perception having met him up close or does he just come 
across that way in the media?