It seems to me, unlike the united fronts of, say, religious followers, individuals in the skeptical "community" don't march to the beat of the same drum. That makes it difficult, of course, to coordinate any kind of organized action, as many participants might not agree on the goals or methodology.
Joe Nickell recently brought up the idea of the "sighing debunker" in a short piece he wrote for CFI. Nickell described an unnamed skeptic who would tell potential interviewers that certain topics were "too silly for words" and would not elaborate. Nickell continues:
So that's one type of skeptic, the "debunker." I think Nickell sees himself as a scientific skeptic who is willing enough to consider new evidence and maybe even change his mind if it's convincing enough.
My mom is a weird type of skeptic. She claims to be a scientist and doesn't believe in God, but she also extolls numerology and claims to have premonitions and possess telekinesis. Trying to explain to her that those things aren't scientific, and why the "evidence" supporting them isn't good enough, just makes her defensive and she won't hear of it. It's funny how she can be skeptical of some things but have blinders on in regard to others.
I'm curious how many variations on "skeptics" and skeptical viewpoints we can come up with. What other ones are out there? How would you characterize your own thoughts?
Joe Nickell recently brought up the idea of the "sighing debunker" in a short piece he wrote for CFI. Nickell described an unnamed skeptic who would tell potential interviewers that certain topics were "too silly for words" and would not elaborate. Nickell continues:
Quote:
But seasoned skeptics know that paranormal subjects—ghosts, Bigfoot, weeping statues, and the like—are here to stay. The number of cable TV shows devoted to such is living proof of that. Actually it appears the skeptic has tired of certain subjects (if ever interested in them in the first place)—i.e., is suffering from skeptical burnout. This eventually happens to debunkers—not real investigators, who are willing endlessly to seek explanations for mysteries and use them to teach science and the scientific method. |
So that's one type of skeptic, the "debunker." I think Nickell sees himself as a scientific skeptic who is willing enough to consider new evidence and maybe even change his mind if it's convincing enough.
My mom is a weird type of skeptic. She claims to be a scientist and doesn't believe in God, but she also extolls numerology and claims to have premonitions and possess telekinesis. Trying to explain to her that those things aren't scientific, and why the "evidence" supporting them isn't good enough, just makes her defensive and she won't hear of it. It's funny how she can be skeptical of some things but have blinders on in regard to others.
I'm curious how many variations on "skeptics" and skeptical viewpoints we can come up with. What other ones are out there? How would you characterize your own thoughts?
via JREF Forum http://ift.tt/1hMeDBh
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire