Skepticism

nivek

As Above So Below
What does it really mean to be Skeptical?...Can Skepticism be defined more specifically in an age (in my opinion) where its usage been overly abused?...Is Skepticism really just something logical and scientific based in an evaluation of claims that are made or is it used more or less as an conclusive judgement as well?...

...
 

pigfarmer

tall, thin, irritable
Lacking some direct personal experience a skeptic needs to be convinced and extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof to do so.

Is Skepticism really just something logical and scientific based in an evaluation of claims that are made or is it used more or less as an conclusive judgement as well?

Sort of, depends on the source. A scientist or investigator might make some conclusive judgement after examination, or at least offer an professional opinion. I would think they would or should be held to a higher standard than a layman.

As a nitwit who is simply interested in UFOs I get to make the ball park call and am certainly willing to be proven wrong.

In either case, lacking definitive proof of a hoax I'm not sure a truly conclusive judgement is possible.
 
What does it really mean to be Skeptical?...Can Skepticism be defined more specifically in an age (in my opinion) where its usage been overly abused?...Is Skepticism really just something logical and scientific based in an evaluation of claims that are made or is it used more or less as an conclusive judgement as well?...
This question is deeply significant and pertinent to everyone on Earth who wants to think clearly and thereby reach logical conclusions regarding the truth of any subject.

And that’s why I fight so vigorously against the people who are trying to redefine the meaning of “skepticism” to suit their own personal agendas – the people we call “pseudoskeptics.”

Skepticism is not a stance; it’s a methodology.

And it’s a very simple methodology. It goes like this:

1.) collect all of the relevant data on a subject.

2.) cull that data until only the credible data remains.

3.) weigh that data against the data set that one should reasonably expect to find.

4.) dispassionately let the culled data speak for itself.


Note that the methodology of skepticism is not adversarial in nature; it’s impartial. This is a crucial distinction that sets it apart from the scientific method, which is adversarial. The scientific method is applied to scientific theories and data analysis. Then that data and scientific knowledge is used in the skeptical method to arrive at an unbiased conclusion (which is always contingent upon the arrival of new data).

So when people call themselves “skeptics” and imply that this means “taking a hostile stance to all new claims or data,” they’re abusing and redefining the term “skepticism.” The adversarial process belongs to the scientific method, not the method of skepticism. But the people in the pseudoskeptic community generally aren’t scientists, and they can’t call themselves scientists without getting called out, so they’ve tried to hijack the term “skeptic” instead because that allows them to sidestep the problem of scientific qualifications.

A true “skeptic” is somebody that doesn’t care what the truth is; they only care about finding the truth regardless of its nature or controversiality. A true skeptic is neither a believer nor a disbeliever: both of those positions poison the well of logical analytical reasoning.

The pseudoskeptics, on the other hand, start with a conclusion and then try to work backward to rationalize their preconceived worldview. This is the antithesis of the skeptical method, which demands a completely open mind from the outset so the data can speak clearly for itself without letting cherry-picking or other logical fallacies contaminate the reasoning process.

In many cases, the available data is insufficient to form a reasonable conclusion. Skeptics are fine with that: uncertainty is a perfectly reasonable position about many things in life; often more time is needed for more conclusive data to arrive. So a hallmark of a biased mind is found when hasty conclusions are drawn from insufficient data: both believers and disbelievers constantly fall prey to confirmation bias. That's generally the quickest way to identify a biased and irrational mind - they've made conclusions that aren't adequately supported by the available data.
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
IT must be added to this Words in practical use locally for groups almost always carry emotional application, While Definitions and uses are the top priority for many, There are in great cases preconceived Biases and expectations from the Word.

You have to take the Social environment and scale it back, Social interaction in large groups tends to be simplistic in casual settings. So The Ultimate practical Social definition Of a Skeptic in a paranormal community is.

Skeptik~ Transitive Verb <- see it's already different. A person Who seeks to Disprove or otherwise Discredit The Values we Seek To hold Dear. See how Different it translates in some peoples minds, And You may be shocked and ask, Well how can anyone interpret it that way. I mean Don't they? Do they not?


The meaning of the word and it's definition doesn't change. But the Setting is what's important here. For instance, Action, Eating Ice cream, The Value of that action changes depending upon the setting, let us change the setting to Weight watchers conventions, Now, You're eating Icecream at a weight watcher's convention. While the Action is the Same, The Implied message is not.

Skeptics Here are Admirable because they are in for a hard time, I think they should expect as much. I mean, How does a man stand in front of a waterfall and not expect to get wet?
 

Toroid

Founding Member
What does it really mean to be Skeptical?...Can Skepticism be defined more specifically in an age (in my opinion) where its usage been overly abused?...Is Skepticism really just something logical and scientific based in an evaluation of claims that are made or is it used more or less as an conclusive judgement as well?...

...
I think skepticism is playing it safe and not stepping outside of accepted views. They say risk takers push forward progression of a species. Maybe skeptics are unconsciously suppressing us.
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
I think skepticism is playing it safe and not stepping outside of accepted views. They say risk takers push forward progression of a species. Maybe skeptics are unconsciously suppressing us.
I feel ya on that and Yeah. I mean, A person Could be a skeptic anywhere. Why choose to do it at a paranormal community.

They should expect a difficult path honestly.
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
Forward Insight. I'm not bashing the skeptic with this proclamation. However, Practicality plays its role.

The Communicative thought is, Skeptics, They are a foundation of logic in paranormal forums that keep down the "I'm an Alien Hybrid And Bigfoot was My Dad and My Alien Baby Threads." Because Yes. In a Paranormal Community, It is very important to keep out the Fantasy Aspect as Eventually, It wouldn't even be a paranormal community it would be a role-playing fantasy playground. I don't think Any of Us Ever Came here Or To AH With the intentions of Engaging in Fantasy Roleplay. Skeptics are important because they are a needed Reality Check.

On the Flip Side, That doesn't make them Not Big smelly Doo Doo heads <---- "SP Fact" that Keep all the fun just, Totally wrecked... Fun Discussion is Fun to have... Who doesn't want to talk to the Chick with the Alien hybrid baby? Even if it's not real, It's a fun discussion, Skeptics Rob me of this Joy. That Mind you, You can't even find in paranormal forums these days. Sigh. lol


I can counterpoint this All Day, But It's all in Good Fun. We are all here for the same reason, We All respect and like one another. I think that's the Biggest Draw to any community.
 
Last edited:

Kchoo

At Peace.
I think the key for me is... you can be a skeptic as long as you are not a negative bastard. Just do not use skepticism as an excuse to lash out at people discussing paranormal experiences.

That said, I do not really care, because it is obvious to me the poor negative bastard is the one missing out.
 

APIGuy

Independent Field Investigator
What does it really mean to be Skeptical?...Can Skepticism be defined more specifically in an age (in my opinion) where its usage been overly abused?...Is Skepticism really just something logical and scientific based in an evaluation of claims that are made or is it used more or less as an conclusive judgement as well?...

...

You are right that word "Skepticism" has been abused. However, I believe that skepticism, rightly understood, is still virtuous. I wrote this essay a few years ago and I still stand by it:

Dream of the Open Channel: What Skepticism Isn't
 

nivek

As Above So Below
You are right that word "Skepticism" has been abused. However, I believe that skepticism, rightly understood, is still virtuous. I wrote this essay a few years ago and I still stand by it:

Dream of the Open Channel: What Skepticism Isn't

Number five on your short list, "A commitment to debunk no matter what.", this is what I have noticed before, some self proclaimed skeptic that really just debunks anything and everything, almost like a denier but more like a 'pseudoskeptibunker'...Now there's a tongue twister, say that five times fast lol...

...
 

APIGuy

Independent Field Investigator
Number five on your short list, "A commitment to debunk no matter what.", this is what I have noticed before, some self proclaimed skeptic that really just debunks anything and everything, almost like a denier but more like a 'pseudoskeptibunker'...Now there's a tongue twister, say that five times fast lol...

...

I think that some of these folks get caught in a trap. They wade into area with a lot of total nonsense, and the rightly feel that no one is speaking up with a rational point of view. After many rounds of largely justified debunking, they get into a situation where they feel they can't give any ground whatever. It gets harder and harder to simply say: "I don't have any idea what that was." I know I have felt this myself a few times.
 

pigfarmer

tall, thin, irritable
cull that data until only the credible data remains

In many cases, the available data is insufficient to form a reasonable conclusion

Unfortunately this is why Bigfoot is known to love fruit pies. Reasonable is subjective. Sometimes people feel they are being objective and bringing a healthy skepticism to bear and are basing their conclusions on what they feel is valid evidence - but it's something the rest of us disagree on.

Agreed that a real skeptic just wants an answer regardless.

I'd also add that extreme skepticism is a natural foil to all the really woo-woo stuff that's been in circulation for waaaay too long. It's a form of contempt or disgust; believe nothing in the face of those who believe virtually anything.

Radicals on both sides of the equation add only distraction.
 
Top