Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 General Skepticism
 Old skepticism' debunkery tactics ..debunked.
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 10

latinijral
Banned

197 Posts

Posted - 03/06/2005 :  16:05:57  Show Profile Send latinijral a Private Message
Daniel Drasin is the autor of the article : Zen . . . And the Art of Debunkery .

http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html

Old skepticism is still using those old tactics/strategy that seems to be part of just a dogma of a true believer secta.

Don't do the same mistakes ,please.
Try to think in something new.
They all already debunked.





Father of the new skepticism

Cuneiformist "But yeah, I'm sick of latinijral. And his "new "skepticism"!

tomk80
SFN Regular

Netherlands
1278 Posts

Posted - 03/06/2005 :  16:27:38   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit tomk80's Homepage Send tomk80 a Private Message
So let's ask again, what is 'new skepticism'? Come on, don't be shy.

edit after reading: So do I have to assume from reading the link that the 'new' skepticism consists of taking rumors, baseless claims and vague allusions serously? It does fit a certain pattern I've seen with a certain poster.

Tom

`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll-
Edited by - tomk80 on 03/06/2005 16:39:22
Go to Top of Page

latinijral
Banned

197 Posts

Posted - 03/06/2005 :  16:44:39   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send latinijral a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by tomk80

So let's ask again, what is 'new skepticism'? Come on, don't be shy.

edit after reading: So do I have to assume from reading the link that the 'new' skepticism consists of taking rumors, baseless claims and vague allusions serously? It does fit a certain pattern I've seen with a certain poster.



So you reply then you read?
Firts learn about the mistakes of the old skepticism.

Father of the new skepticism

Cuneiformist "But yeah, I'm sick of latinijral. And his "new "skepticism"!
Go to Top of Page

R.Wreck
SFN Regular

USA
1191 Posts

Posted - 03/06/2005 :  16:46:25   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send R.Wreck a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral:

Daniel Drasin is the autor of the article : Zen . . . And the Art of Debunkery .

http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html




Wow. I'd say Danny is a little upset that nobody believed his UFO story.

The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley

The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
Go to Top of Page

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4954 Posts

Posted - 03/06/2005 :  16:56:57   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by tomk80

So let's ask again, what is 'new skepticism'? Come on, don't be shy.


Come on, tomk80-- it's clear that NEWskepticism involves believing that UFOs (and ESP, spoon-bending, etc.) are real. They are mocked only because cermudgeony scientists argue that such things don't exist because of the reasons listed in Mr. Drasin's humorous essay.

Indeed, it would be quite easy to make a list just as long and humorous as Drasin's regarding the paranormal/UFO fringe. For sintance:

How to Assert the Truth of the Paranormal

<>Before you argue for the paranormal, but sure that you have no actual training in the field about which youre going to profess expertise in. The further removed your source of income is from this field the better. Unless, of course, your main source of income is
talking about your paranormal claim on the lecture circut.

<>Portray actual scientists and researchers as mean-spirited people who are reluctant to change their ways.

<>Assert that some phenomenon cannot be explained by a certain cause, but don't mention that no one ever claimed that the cause in question ever explained the phenomenon in the first place.

<>Use blurry photos whenever possible. When no one can see the object you claim to be in the photo, tell them to look harder. Repeat.

<>Selectively cite quotes that cast doubt on the scientific consensus of an issue even if, when put in their proper context, such quotes argue for the opposite.

<>Announce your claims only on obscure websites or in pubications that cater to beleivers in the paranormal. When asked why your claims aren't published in peer-reviewed journals, mumble something about the "establishment" and then change the topic.


And so on-- I'm sure you all can come up with more...
Edited by - Cuneiformist on 03/06/2005 17:02:54
Go to Top of Page

tomk80
SFN Regular

Netherlands
1278 Posts

Posted - 03/06/2005 :  17:01:15   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit tomk80's Homepage Send tomk80 a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral
So you reply then you read?

As of yet, you have shown to be pretty predictable. I was expecting some guy ranting about how skepticism is not a good thing because it actually required people to give evidence. I got what I expected.

quote:
Firts learn about the mistakes of the old skepticism.


If I would have been a good 'old skeptic', I would have first read the link and then commented. So this is not exactly a mistake of the old skepticism.

Then, I had read it when I made my edit. It's just a guy upset that noone believed his UFO-story. Come on man, you can come with something better than that. Cough up, how should we, as 'new skeptics' go about our business. Suppose I got a guy coming up to me and say that he has seen a UFO. What should I do as a 'new skeptic'.

Tom

`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll-
Go to Top of Page

tomk80
SFN Regular

Netherlands
1278 Posts

Posted - 03/06/2005 :  17:04:41   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit tomk80's Homepage Send tomk80 a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Cuneiformist

quote:
Originally posted by tomk80

So let's ask again, what is 'new skepticism'? Come on, don't be shy.


Come on, tomk80-- it's clear that NEWskepticism involves believing that UFOs (and ESP, spoon-bending, etc.) are real. They are mocked only because cermudgeony scientists are argue that such things don't exist because of the reasons listed in Mr. Drasin's humorous essay.


True. I'm just trying to have Latinijral spill that out at some point. He probably won't. It is clear enough to me that he will not state his position openly, but at present I don't have anything to do and I'm having fun seeing him dodge.

Tom

`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll-
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 03/06/2005 :  17:40:03   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message
I dunno, 'Jarl. The old skepticism has served me so well over the decades that I'm loath to give it up. O'course, if you can come up with a better alternative, I'll consider it.

I read the Draisn piece a couple of years ago. He makes the mistake of thinking that skepticism is all about 'debunking.'

Not so. If something is proven correct, we'll argue as hard as we would otherwise.

And science is not nearly as hide-bound as he would have us believe. Here's another piece by Draisn:
quote:
Parapsychology and related Topics
this page is designed for a 1024x768 trucolor display. The pictures might take a while to load, so please be patient. The amazon.com links will open new windows.
On this page, I have collected some resources (webpages and books) for open-minded individuals who don't think that the boundaries of orthodox science have to be the limit of their personal quest for knowledge. A hundred years ago, physicists believed that physics was more or less complete, with only a few minor flaws, some anomalies, to fix. Those anomalies became relativity and quantum mechanics, which have forever changed our understanding of the world we live in. It would be presumptious in the extreme to assume that we have complete knowledge of the fundamental laws of nature today. Indeed, a growing mountain of evidence suggests otherwise.

Decades of parapsychological research have produced convincing evidence that PSI phenomena such as remote viewing or psychokinesis are real. When this realization finally hits the mainstream, the result will be no less than a revolution. Philosophy, the physical sciences, psychology, history and medicine, but also the conventional religious beliefs will all have to be re-evalutated. The implications for the future of humanity are enormous:

Historians could explore the past directly, through ESP. Doctors might use ESP to diagnose patients, and psychokinesis to cure them. Physicists and astronomers will have the means to explore both the very small and the very large without instruments. Philosophers will have to let go of Cartesian duality, but in return, they will gain the means to explore "metaphysical" questions through direct perception. Organized religion will perish, because people will no longer need religious authorities to tell them what happens after death, or about God.

I'm not sure how good a reference this guy is.

Farther down, he really gets a hard-on for skeptics. I don't know what his problem is -- he got burned on a far-out claim, maybe? Or one might speculate that he's into the New Skepticism.

On the other hand, I've seen a few of his photographs, and his photography is faultless.


"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page

latinijral
Banned

197 Posts

Posted - 03/06/2005 :  20:19:20   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send latinijral a Private Message
[quote]Originally posted by Cuneiformist


Indeed, it would be quite easy to make a list just as long and humorous as Drasin's regarding the paranormal/UFO fringe. For sintance ( snip)

That this make Drasin's list wrong?
You just confirmed his point. You debunked yourself.

Father of the new skepticism

Cuneiformist "But yeah, I'm sick of latinijral. And his "new "skepticism"!
Go to Top of Page

furshur
SFN Regular

USA
1536 Posts

Posted - 03/06/2005 :  20:35:41   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send furshur a Private Message
quote:
Daniel Drasin is the autor of the article : Zen . . . And the Art of Debunkery .

The "new skeptism" is not new it is the same old conspiracy, ufo, woo woo crap that has been around for years.



If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know.
Go to Top of Page

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4954 Posts

Posted - 03/06/2005 :  21:35:10   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by latinijral

[quote]Originally posted by Cuneiformist


Indeed, it would be quite easy to make a list just as long and humorous as Drasin's regarding the paranormal/UFO fringe. For sintance ( snip)

That this make Drasin's list wrong?
You just confirmed his point. You debunked yourself.


Uh, no. I did not "confim" his point, as he made no assertions regarding anything paranormal or otherwise outside the accepted scentific paradigms. All his did was write a sardonic (his words) piece relating how he sees the current state of science and scientific research.

He makes no specific claims, and indeed it's quite easy to see through what are often very weak critiques.

It is quite humorous, though. And its real genius is in the point you no doubt unwittingly bring up: his critique comes with a built-in "debunk-proof" defense-- with any attempt at writing his critique off, he can claim (via his dozens of faux examples) that it's just another example of mainstream (old?) skeptics dismissing something new.

But again, it would be easy to go point by point and knock down every one of his mocking claims.
Go to Top of Page

Starman
SFN Regular

Sweden
1613 Posts

Posted - 03/07/2005 :  01:22:41   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Starman a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by filthy

I read the Draisn piece a couple of years ago. He makes the mistake of thinking that skepticism is all about 'debunking.'

Not so. If something is proven correct, we'll argue as hard as we would otherwise.
I think this is the common misconception about skepticism. This and the belief that a skeptic should always regard even reasonable statements as dubious until "proven".

Just like the average evolution denier latinijral attacks a word he has failed (and doesn't bother) to understand...



"Stupidity has a certain charm - ignorance does not."
-- Frank Zappa
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 03/07/2005 :  02:08:47   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Starman

quote:
Originally posted by filthy

I read the Draisn piece a couple of years ago. He makes the mistake of thinking that skepticism is all about 'debunking.'

Not so. If something is proven correct, we'll argue as hard as we would otherwise.
I think this is the common misconception about skepticism. This and the belief that a skeptic should always regard even reasonable statements as dubious until "proven".

Just like the average evolution denier latinijral attacks a word he has failed (and doesn't bother) to understand...



"Stupidity has a certain charm - ignorance does not."
-- Frank Zappa

Indeed. We all take lots of statements at face value, even some that might be a little iffy. No one has the time nor the inclination to research every, little thing.

But please, don't present us with far-out, unsupported claims and expect us not to investigate them amd demand reference. That's something of an insult, because we'll also investigate the reference, if provided.

Y'know, I once saw a UFO. It was pretty and I'd like to see it again.


"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page

latinijral
Banned

197 Posts

Posted - 03/07/2005 :  06:21:51   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send latinijral a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Cuneiformist

But again, it would be easy to go point by point and knock down every one of his mocking claims.



Then do it ,so you be on topic.

Just don't use those tactics of the old skepticism ,already debunked.

Father of the new skepticism

Cuneiformist "But yeah, I'm sick of latinijral. And his "new "skepticism"!
Go to Top of Page

Siberia
SFN Addict

Brazil
2322 Posts

Posted - 03/07/2005 :  06:34:24   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Siberia's Homepage  Send Siberia an AOL message  Send Siberia a Yahoo! Message Send Siberia a Private Message
Such as evidence, common sense and sanity, I suppose.
Psh. Been there. Done that. It's so easy to create perfectly believable (for the believer, as Latin would say) pieces of evidence... I already proved that with the Jesus-sighting forgery.

"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa

"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
Go to Top of Page

latinijral
Banned

197 Posts

Posted - 03/07/2005 :  07:18:21   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send latinijral a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by R.Wreck

quote:
Originally posted by latinijral:

Daniel Drasin is the autor of the article : Zen . . . And the Art of Debunkery .

http://members.aol.com/ddrasin/zen.html




Wow. I'd say Danny is a little upset that nobody believed his UFO story.

Anther mistake of the old skepticism.
The wrong use of the words " anybody" "everubody",etc, when they want to reinforce their arguments,


Father of the new skepticism

Cuneiformist "But yeah, I'm sick of latinijral. And his "new "skepticism"!
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 10 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 6.41 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000