|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13481 Posts |
 Posted - 07/06/2001 : 02:31:18 [Permalink]
|
I am a skeptic. I also have beliefs. What makes me a skeptic, I think, is that I am willing to change or discard a belief, even a cherished belief, if evidence dictates. My beliefs are provisional. A skeptic needs to have an open mind to maintain credibility. If an investigation of a claim leads to debunking that claim, that's fine. If a skeptic sets out to debunk a claim there is a risk of bias ruining the investigation. Also, who has the time to question everything? Most skeptics can recognize a dubious claim. A claim worth questioning.
The Evil Skeptic |
 |
|
|
Orpheus
Skeptic Friend
92 Posts |
Posted - 07/06/2001 : 02:51:28 [Permalink]
|
One thing I would like to add to this debate is a possibly more profound difference between rational skeptics and non-skeptics.
It strikes me that there exists a basic difference in the way which these two groups orientate themselves towards reality:
Skeptics seem to view their reality as a puzzle- something with which to test their curiosity and cerebral wattage with. They have no pre-ordained answers and a willingness to engage reality, no matter how counter-intuitive it may be (which means they had better be very comfortable with ambiguity).
Non-skeptics apprehend reality as an arena in which to confirm their beliefs- beliefs which they hold to be self-evidently true and ready-made. Thus, few instances, if any, reality has to offer can cause a shift in these beliefs, since they are seen as pre-eminent and prior to external evidence.
This difference, I would argue, is quite profound. I'd love to know what y'all think of this...
Find your own damned answers! |
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2001 : 21:44:23 [Permalink]
|
All of my beliefs are provisional. However, I am the person who makes the decisions about changing any of them. As I get older, many of the ideas have been set and are unlikely to change without further excellent evidence. I do not like wasting time reiterating the same old stale arguments thrown against scientific principles. An example of this is the Steady-State Universe versus the Big Bang Universe. The CMB and later theories have thoroughly demolished the Steady State ideas, but the Steady Staters keep at it, ad infinitum. I simply refuse to listen to the same old arguments. Somebody needs to come up with new ones to take their places. In the time it takes to rehash the old worn arguments, one could learn something new about the universe.
ljbrs
Perfection Is a State of Growth... |
|
|
|
sega
Skeptic Friend
USA
73 Posts |
Posted - 07/10/2001 : 14:57:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
One thing I would like to add to this debate is a possibly more profound difference between rational skeptics and non-skeptics....
I agree, it appears that the human brain likes to create strict categories, and fit the world into them. Fighting this tendency is a part of skepticism and rational thought.
This pigeonholing is easily seen in politics, as republican and democrat.
The complicated world is distilled into black and white so people can choose sides and comfortably beleive that this covers all the issues adequately. No extra thought is required, the answers are scripted, and the gray areas are ignored.
Unfortunately, the world is mostly grey.
|
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 07/10/2001 : 21:38:57 [Permalink]
|
Jim:
You stated further back:
quote:
A skeptic is nothing more than someone who will not hold any specific belief. Once you hold a certain belief, reguardless of how you come to it, you are no longer a skeptic. The dictionary defines is as "One who habitually questions matters generally accepted." I think I believe this is right. I am not a skeptic, I just enjoy observing them.
Actually, skepticism is only a method for finding information. Skeptics do not live in cocoons. That is as bad as being a *true believer*. Look, some ideas and information are better than others. Some things can check out and some things cannot check out. Total skepticism is a misnomer. Skepticism is a method. One always leaves room for new information, so that anything one finds can later be challenged.
I am being very careful not to resort to ad hominems (or ad womanems).
ljbrs
Perfection Is a State of Growth...
Edited by - ljbrs on 07/10/2001 21:41:38 |
|
|
|
Antie
Skeptic Friend
USA
101 Posts |
Posted - 07/21/2001 : 19:37:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I am being very careful not to resort to ad hominems (or ad womanems).
That's cute! Ad hominem can be used when the person is a male or a female, though. You could also use one of the following:
ad virum = to the man
ad feminam = to the woman
Ian Andreas Miller. My site. |
|
|
|
Wendy
SFN Regular
USA
614 Posts |
Posted - 07/29/2001 : 21:57:51 [Permalink]
|
I think the key to this issue is the difference between the words "skeptic" and "cynic". I robbed them from dictionary.com:
skeptic \Skep"tic\, n. [Gr. skeptiko`s thoughtful, reflective, fr. ske`ptesqai to look carefully or about, to view, consider: cf. L. scepticus, F. sceptique. See Scope.] [Written also sceptic.] 1. One who is yet undecided as to what is true; one who is looking or inquiring for what is true; an inquirer after facts or reasons.
cynic \Cyn"ic\, n. (Gr. Philos) 1. One of a sect or school of philosophers founded by Antisthenes, and of whom Diogenes was a disciple. The first Cynics were noted for austere lives and their scorn for social customs and current philosophical opinions. Hence the term Cynic symbolized, in the popular judgment, moroseness, and contempt for the views of others.
2. One who holds views resembling those of the Cynics; a snarler; a misanthrope; particularly, a person who believes that human conduct is directed, either consciously or unconsciously, wholly by self-interest or self-indulgence, and that appearances to the contrary are superficial and untrustworthy.
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
This is why we're the skeptic friends network. I'm pretty sure cynics can't be friends.
Wendy Jones |
|
|
|
Zandermann
Skeptic Friend
USA
431 Posts |
Posted - 07/30/2001 : 05:40:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
"skeptic: One who is yet undecided as to what is true; one who is looking or inquiring for what is true; an inquirer after facts or reasons." ... This is why we're the skeptic friends network.
Welcome to the board, Wendy! And thanks for adding these defs to the discussion.
But if you want to keep believing that we're all skeptics here, don't stray over into the religion folders. 
|
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 08/05/2001 : 17:57:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
That's cute! Ad hominem can be used when the person is a male or a female, though. You could also use one of the following:
ad virum = to the man
ad feminam = to the woman
Oh, I know. I was just being facetious. I was making fun of using the generic word which once applied only to men.
On August 18, 1920, women received the vote in the United States. I always have blamed women for permitting themselves to exist for such a long time as lower-caste citizens. I have fought against it for most of my life. However, I think that there are religious attempts by certain morons (female and male) to change things back to pre-1920 times. Just try to purchase a knee-length skirt or dress nowadays. You cannot drive a car with the stupid things women are now wearing for clothing without hiking the skirt up near your waist. Dangerous! I think some women are wishing to go back to the family cloister. I would not wish to live a world of such blatant ignorance with respect to women. Better dead than led.
ljbrs
Perfection Is a State of Growth... |
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 08/05/2001 : 18:32:27 [Permalink]
|
Re: Skepticism
All real scientists are skeptics and any scientific theory can be overturned by better information and proofs -- ACCENT ON THE *PROOFS*! I am that kind of skeptic. To be against each and every idea which is brought before me would seem to be the height of stupidity and/or ignorance. On the other hand, I give short shrift to the same old, same old, weary ideas. I think that skeptics keep all relevant ideas open and tend not to waste any time with thoroughly disproved theories. Scientists avoid negatively pouncing on each and every new idea. However, there are no cherished ideas in science which cannot be overturned by excellent evidence to the contrary.
I think that people who mistake skepticism to be synonymous with cynicism most likely have specific anti-skeptical and anti-scientific agendas. They should know the differences, but refuse to acknowledge them.
I, personally, do not waste any time with failed theories which have been proven false (through peer review, which attempts to keep everything honest in science). So my own personal skepticism has limits.
ljbrs
Perfection Is a State of Growth...
Edited by - ljbrs on 08/05/2001 18:34:32 |
|
|
|
Garrette
SFN Regular
USA
562 Posts |
Posted - 08/10/2001 : 08:14:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
You cannot drive a car with the stupid things women are now wearing for clothing without hiking the skirt up near your waist.
Excellent idea, lb! Here's to women driving with their skirts hiked up to their waists!
And welcome, Wendy, and hello again.
My kids still love me. |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 08/10/2001 : 08:54:29 [Permalink]
|
quote:
[Excellent idea, lb! Here's to women driving with their skirts hiked up to their waists!
hee hee! Welcome back, Garrette. Hope you had a nice vacation.
------------
Ma gavte la nata! |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 08/10/2001 : 09:13:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
quote:
That's cute! Ad hominem can be used when the person is a male or a female, though. You could also use one of the following:
ad virum = to the man
ad feminam = to the woman
Oh, I know. I was just being facetious. I was making fun of using the generic word which once applied only to men.
On August 18, 1920, women received the vote in the United States. I always have blamed women for permitting themselves to exist for such a long time as lower-caste citizens. I have fought against it for most of my life. However, I think that there are religious attempts by certain morons (female and male) to change things back to pre-1920 times. Just try to purchase a knee-length skirt or dress nowadays. You cannot drive a car with the stupid things women are now wearing for clothing without hiking the skirt up near your waist. Dangerous! I think some women are wishing to go back to the family cloister. I would not wish to live a world of such blatant ignorance with respect to women. Better dead than led.
ljbrs
Perfection Is a State of Growth...
Several years ago, my brother got married. In the service, my sister-in-law had to say that she would submit entirely to my brother. I was amazed, my mother didn't walk out. My mother was not a part of the church my brother belonged to. My mother never again set foot in my brother's church. I was also seriously thinking of leaving during the service when that load of horse hockey was spewed, but I figured that my sister-in-law could sell herself into whatever slavery she wished.
BTW, my wife would have never agreed to the stuff my sister-in-law did. Her favorite view on this stuff (She's Lutheran Missouri Synod) is "God created Eve from Adam's rib because woman was not to walk behind man, but by his side."
|
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 08/11/2001 : 08:48:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
BTW, my wife would have never agreed to the stuff my sister-in-law did. Her favorite view on this stuff (She's Lutheran Missouri Synod) is "God created Eve from Adam's rib because woman was not to walk behind man, but by his side."
Unfortunately there was that little apple thing too. That's where some of that idea comes from, gods punishment and all.
He's YOUR god, they're YOUR rules, YOU burn in hell! |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
