Home of the The Hall of Ma'at on the Internet
Home
Discussion Forums
Papers
Authors
Web Links

May 6, 2024, 3:03 am UTC    
August 26, 2001 05:42PM
<HTML>Perhaps it's worthful at this point to post the following quote from the FAQs at <a href="[www.skeptic.com">www.skeptic.com<];:


"What is a Skeptic?

What does it mean to be a skeptic? Some people believe that skepticism is rejection of new ideas, or worse, they confuse “skeptic” with “cynic” and think that skeptics are a bunch of grumpy curmudgeons unwilling to accept any claim that challenges the status quo. This is wrong. Skepticism is a provisional approach to claims. It is the application of reason to any and all ideas—no sacred cows allowed. In other words, skepticism is a method, not a position. Ideally, skeptics do not go into an investigation closed to the possibility that a phenomenon might be real or that a claim might be true. When we say we are “skeptical,” we mean that we must see compelling evidence before we believe. Skeptics are from Missouri—the “show me” state. When we hear a fantastic claim we say, “that’s nice, prove it.”

Skepticism has a long historical tradition dating back to ancient Greece when Socrates observed: “All I know is that I know nothing.” But this pure position is sterile and unproductive and held by virtually no one. If you are skeptical about everything, you would have to be skeptical of your own skepticism. Like the decaying subatomic particle, pure skepticism uncoils and spins off the viewing screen of our intellectual cloud chamber.

Modern skepticism is embodied in the scientific method, that involves gathering data to formulate and test naturalistic explanations for natural phenomena. A claim becomes factual when it is confirmed to such an extent it would be reasonable to offer temporary agreement. But all facts in science are provisional and subject to challenge, and therefore skepticism is a method leading to provisional conclusions. Some claims, such as water dowsing, ESP, and creationism, have been tested (and failed the tests) often enough that we can provisionally conclude that they are not valid. Other claims, such as hypnosis, the origins of language, and black holes, have been tested but results are inconclusive so we must continue formulating and testing hypotheses and theories until we can reach a provisional conclusion.

The key to skepticism is to continuously and vigorously apply the methods of science to navigate the treacherous straits between “know nothing” skepticism and “anything goes” credulity. Over three centuries ago the French philosopher and skeptic, René Descartes, after one of the most thorough skeptical purges in intellectual history, concluded that he knew one thing for certain: Cogito ergo sum—I think therefore I am. But evolution may have designed us in the other direction. Humans evolved to be pattern-seeking, cause-inferring animals, shaped by nature to find meaningful relationships in the world. Those who were best at doing this left behind the most offspring. We are their descendents. In other words, to be human is to think. To paraphrase Descartes:

Sum Ergo Cogito—I Am Therefore I Think."</HTML>
Subject Author Posted

Avry's objections to Garrett Fagan's new article

Mikey Brass August 26, 2001 06:24AM

Re: Avry's objections to Garrett Fagan's new article

John Wall August 26, 2001 06:26AM

Re: Avry's objections to Garrett Fagan's new article

Mikey Brass August 26, 2001 08:14AM

My response to Avry...

Anthony August 26, 2001 08:24AM

Re: My response to Avry...

Mikey Brass August 26, 2001 09:01AM

Re: My response to Avry...

jim Lewandowski August 26, 2001 10:29AM

Re: My response to Avry...

Mikey Brass August 26, 2001 05:28PM

Re: My response to Avry...

Jim Lewandowski August 27, 2001 08:20AM

Re: My response to Avry...

Keith Littleton August 26, 2001 02:14PM

Re: My response to Avry...

Katherine Reece August 26, 2001 11:04AM

Re: My response to Avry...

Anthony August 26, 2001 03:17PM

Re: My response to Avry...

John Wall August 26, 2001 03:27PM

Re: My response to Avry...

Mikey Brass August 26, 2001 03:45PM

Re: My response to Avry...

Deano August 26, 2001 05:03PM

Re: Avry's objections to Garrett Fagan's new article

Garrett August 26, 2001 02:52PM

Garrett 1, Avry 0

John Wall August 26, 2001 03:07PM

Re: Garrett 1, Avry 0

Anthony August 26, 2001 03:19PM

Re: Garrett 1, Avry 0

John Wall August 26, 2001 03:28PM

Re: Avry's objections to Garrett Fagan's new article

Mikey Brass August 26, 2001 05:42PM

Sum Ergo Cogito ?

lone August 27, 2001 06:24AM

Stupid way to have a discussion.

Jeff van Hout August 26, 2001 03:56PM

Re: Stupid way to have a discussion.

Mikey Brass August 26, 2001 04:03PM

Re: Stupid way to have a discussion.

Deano August 26, 2001 06:34PM

Re: Stupid way to have a discussion.

Mikey Brass August 27, 2001 03:11AM

Guess vs. Interpretation

Anthony August 27, 2001 06:25AM

Re: Guess vs. Interpretation

Mikey Brass August 27, 2001 06:36AM

Re: Stupid way to have a discussion.

lone August 27, 2001 06:44AM

Re: Stupid way to have a discussion.

Mikey Brass August 27, 2001 06:57AM

Going from XOR to AND

lone August 27, 2001 02:15PM

Re: Going from XOR to AND

Mikey Brass August 27, 2001 02:28PM

Re: Stupid way to have a discussion.

lone August 27, 2001 06:47AM

Re: Stupid way to have a discussion.

Mikey Brass August 27, 2001 07:00AM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login