When thinking about the psychology and motivation of materialistic pseudoskeptics, and their well-known irrationality and bigotry when trying to debunk serious research on psi, afterlife or any other field that suggest the existence of a spiritual realm beyond materialism, is almost unavoidable to think that an irrational factor (in addition to the ideological one) is at play.
No rational, sane and normal person would dedicate their entire life and professional carrer debunking and discrediting whatever seems to be contrary to materialistic orthodoxy, specially when such materialistic ideology is essentially immoral (e.g it denies free will, which is a pre-condition of morality), irrational (e.g. it denies the existence of consciousness, or its causal efficacy; when everything we humanly do is based in our consciousness and its effects in the world; including the efforts of materialists to convince us of the contrary) and spiritually self-defeating and hopeless (it teaches for example that, when you die, you'll dissapear forever; so, your ultimate destiny is the total, absolute and permanent extinction. Your existence is essentially NOTHING = without any ultimate meaning or significance or sense).
No rational, sane and normal person would dedicate their entire life and professional carrer debunking and discrediting whatever seems to be contrary to materialistic orthodoxy, specially when such materialistic ideology is essentially immoral (e.g it denies free will, which is a pre-condition of morality), irrational (e.g. it denies the existence of consciousness, or its causal efficacy; when everything we humanly do is based in our consciousness and its effects in the world; including the efforts of materialists to convince us of the contrary) and spiritually self-defeating and hopeless (it teaches for example that, when you die, you'll dissapear forever; so, your ultimate destiny is the total, absolute and permanent extinction. Your existence is essentially NOTHING = without any ultimate meaning or significance or sense).
A rational person could disbelieve in psi or afterlife (e.g. because he considers the evidence is not good). But you won't see that person attacking and difaming the researchers or distortioning the evidence, or using double standards and rhetorical tricks to debunk the topic. The latter behaviour is evidence that such individual DOESN'T WANT psi and afterlife to be true (and this is the irrational factor at play: wishful thinking). (For the record, a person can believe in psi or afterlife for irrational factors too; in fact, some paranormalists are pretty irrational.)
Why a person would try to combat evidence that suggest the trascendence and survival of their own soul, or that life has a real meaning and purpose? Why such person would reject and combat something that, if true, is good, positive and give authentic hopes and ultimate meaning for them and their love ones? This simple fact suggest, again, that some irrational negative and intellectually destructive factor is at play.
So, the question is: In addition to the materialitic ideology behind this kind of obsessive anti-psi and anti-spiritual behaviour, is there any other factor that causes symphaty for that self-destructive and self-defeating ideology?
In his book The Last Word, first rate philosopher Thomas Nagel (an atheist and naturalist) made an amazing concession (that give us some lights about the psychology of materialists and metaphysical naturalists):
"I believe that this is one manifestation of a fear of religion which has large and often pernicious consequences for modern intellectual life.
In speaking of the fear of religion, I don’t mean to refer to the entirely reasonable hostility toward certain established religions and religious institutions, in virtue of their objectionable moral doctrines, social policies, and political influence. Nor am I referring to the association of many religious beliefs with superstition and the acceptance of evident empirical falsehoods. I am talking about something much deeper—namely, the fear of religion itself. I speak from experience, being strongly subject to this fear myself: I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and wellinformed people I know are religious believers. It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and, naturally, hope that I’m right in my belief. It’s that I hope there is no God! I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to be like that.
My guess is that this cosmic authority problem is not a rare condition and that it is responsible for much of the scientism and reductionism of our time. One of the tendencies it supports is the ludicrous overuse of evolutionary biology to explain everything about life, including everything about the human mind. Darwin enabled modern secular culture to heave a great collective sigh of relief, by apparently providing a way to eliminate purpose, meaning, and design as fundamental features of the world" (emphasis added).
Note several things:
1)Nagel concedes that, behind the typical scientism and obsession with "science" and evolution by atheists and naturalists, there is exist a COSMIC AUTHORITY PROBLEM (fear of religion or, maybe more exactly, of God).
2)This fear (and bear in mind that fear is an emotion) produces a wishful thinking regarding atheism: they WANT atheism to be true. (So, are atheists and materialists objective and neutral when they consider evidence that refutes their worldview?) By the way, if they wish that materialistic atheism be true, do you consider likely to convince them of the existence of psi (or, more controversially, of an afterlife) based on evidence and rational argument alone? Is likely to convince someone of something that he WANTS to disbelieve?
3)This fear has negative consequences for the intellectual life (e.g. denying evidence inconsistent with materialism and metaphysical naturalism, like psi evidence)
4)This emotional (non-rational) factor, caused by fear, is at least partially responsible of scientism and reductionism, which are rampant in current academia.
5)The appeal to Darwin is a way to consolidate atheism and to eliminate any concept of purpose, meaning and design in a fundamental level of reality. (This explain why any criticism against the neo-darwinian evolution theory is replied by atheists and materialistic pseudoskeptics with comments against intelligent design and creationism, even if your criticisms have nothing to do with ID. This is another example of atheist irrationality)
If the above is true, then you can understand why materialistic pseudoskeptics are so obsessed with debunking parapsychology. The existence of psi and other phenomena like that suggest that consciousness is trascendent and not fully reducible to the material world or to the physical brain. And this is interpreted by materialists as an intolerable concession to religion (and God) which postulates the existence of the immaterial soul.
Given that they're driven by a fear regarding religion and God, they have to debunk, undermine, stigmatize and combat any research or evidence suggesting a spiritual reality or trascendent dimension. So, their worldview is essentially a negative anti-religious anti-spiritual philosophy. This is the basic or fundamental idea behind their philosophy.
For example, when you examine carefully the theses of "secular humanism" and metaphysical naturalism, you realize soon that it consists mostly of a negation of the core values and beliefs of traditional religion (specially of Christianity):
-Religion supports the belief of an afterlife (secular humanists-materialists reject the afterlife)
-Religion supports free will (secular humanists/naturalists deny free will).
-Religion supports objective moral values, prupose and meaning (secular humanists deny objective moral values, meaning and purpose. Example, Richard Dawkins: "The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference"(River Out Of Eden, p. 155) )
The core beliefs of secular humanism and metaphysical naturalis are, mostly, a negation of religion, in special of Christianity. It's another kind of ideological fundamentalism, but based on a FEAR of religion and, therefore, in a negation of it, and masked for propagandistic purposes with the rhetoric of "science" to give it some plausibility and credibility.
Another evidence supporting this conclusion is that, when you try to argue with pseudoskeptics and atheists regarding afterlife evidence or psi research, they often reply with irrelevant comments on creationism, God, angels and religion. They're mentally fixed in these religious ideas, and interpret whatever you can say in terms of their obsessive fixation with religion and God. (This suggest a possible mental-emotional disorder in these people, because they're unable to hold the conversation in a rational, abstract plane of logical argumentation and scrutiny of evidence, that is, an examination of this evidence in neutral terms and in its own merits; their obsession with God and religion "colors" their interpretation of the evidence, and cause in them delusional ideas and conclusions.)
So, the "fear of religion" (or fear of the supernatural, including God) seems to be a factor in the psychology of many materialistic pseudoskeptics and atheists. In this point, another first rate philosopher, Hilary Putnam, wrote: ""Naturalism", I believe, is often driven by fear, fear that accepting conceptual pluralism will let in the "occult", the "supernatural"" (The Content and Appeal of Naturalism)
But why a person would have a fear of the supernatural as such? I think you have to examine the biography of each individual to answer that, but I would say that negative personal experiences with religion, preachers, or fundamentalists (e.g. having been forced to pray at school; or being sexual or morally abused by a religious dogmatist or bigot) is part of the explanation. David Leiter (who had first hand experiences for several years with organized pseudoskeptics) wrote: "The reaction of those who have joined PhACT is however more dysfunctional. They have been wounded at a deeper level, to the extent that what was purported to be a valid philosophy of life, and in which they were heavily involved, turns out to be empty and useless, even damaging, in their eyes. Thus, they gravitate to what appears to them to be the ultimate non-faith-based philosophy, Science. Unfortunately, while they loudly proclaim their righteousness, based on their professed adherence to “hard science”, they do so with the one thing no true scientist can afford to possess, a closed mind. Instead of becoming scientifically minded, they become adherents of scientism, the belief system in which science and only science has all the answers to everything. This regrettable condition acts to preclude their unbiased consideration of phenomena on the cutting edge of science, which is not how a true scientist should behave"
Some concluding remarks:
1)If Nagel is right, then you know that debating psi or afterlife evidence with pseudoskeptics is a waste of time. They're driven for emotional and irrational factors, and you'll be victim of their fallacies, ad hominem attacks, irrelevant comments on God and angels, and similar delusional and uninformed replies.
2)Also, in extremes cases, their irrationality has signs of possible emotional or psychological disorders. It's often manifested in ad hominem attacks against you, or the researchers who have gotten the evidence. Leiter confirms this point too (even though whoever has debated with pseudoskeptics know that): "Anyone who has spent much time engaging members of Skeptics’ organizations knows about their strong inclination toward ridicule and ad hominem criticism of those with differing viewpoints."
So, if you don't want to be verbally abused by these irrational individual, it's a better and wise idea to keep them away from you.
3)If the materialist and naturalist is honest and rational, he will (like Nagel) examine if there is exist emotional and non-rational factors causing his opposition and resistence towards psi evidence, afterlife research (and religion), and if his position is actually rational, or instead is a case of overacting induced by irrational factors.
4)Finally, keep in mind that not all the atheists or naturalists are neccesarily like that. I'm referring to the most radical, bigoted and irrational ones. The ones that, without knowledge of the topic, dismiss evidence about psi or afterlife, and add ad hominem attacks against you or the researchers, or use double standards and other tricks to win the argument. They're not interested in the truth, but in to defend and protect their own worldview from refutation.
5)Also, keep in mind that irrationality, arrogance and bigotry is not a property of atheists and materialists alone. Any person, materialist or not, could fall victim of dogmatism, intellectual arrogance and other kind of irrational behaviours. Ocassionally, check in yourself for possible signs of this kind of manifestations.
Links of interest:
-My post on Richard Dawkins' moral relativism
-My post titled Atheist bigotry in Amazon.com
-Atheist philosopher Julian Baggini's article "The New Atheist Movement is Desctructive"
