Evidence: Factual circumstances which are accounted for, or supported by,
only one available explanation over any other.
Why is this so important? Because we don’t want to be fooled.
We want to make sure that the thing being claimed isn’t just made up.
In short, we want to make sure that it is real and that’s true.
Seemingly, not everyone seems to share this view.
Some people, especially religious and paranormal or kooky believers, think that evidence is not even required in their epistemology or belief systems.
They tell me “Why do I need evidence?” “I don’t need evidence.”
Apparently, they don’t need it but others do (special pledging),
think that’s it’s not required for beliefs that make empirical claims or are unaware of how it works
(ignorance of basic empirical epistemology, let alone science or skepticism).
The more professional ones are often dishonest and lean towards the latter than the former.
The ones I usually talk about are the uninformed, the misinformed ones, which leans towards the lack of scientific education.
Others seem to just avoid giving any, sometimes with the shifting of the burden of proof or ad hocs (which also need to be proved, making it more complicated and messy for the caliment). These people, again fall within the categories listed above (although the more dishonest ones do this more).
only one available explanation over any other.
Why is this so important? Because we don’t want to be fooled.
We want to make sure that the thing being claimed isn’t just made up.
In short, we want to make sure that it is real and that’s true.
Seemingly, not everyone seems to share this view.
Some people, especially religious and paranormal or kooky believers, think that evidence is not even required in their epistemology or belief systems.
They tell me “Why do I need evidence?” “I don’t need evidence.”
Apparently, they don’t need it but others do (special pledging),
think that’s it’s not required for beliefs that make empirical claims or are unaware of how it works
(ignorance of basic empirical epistemology, let alone science or skepticism).
The more professional ones are often dishonest and lean towards the latter than the former.
The ones I usually talk about are the uninformed, the misinformed ones, which leans towards the lack of scientific education.
Others seem to just avoid giving any, sometimes with the shifting of the burden of proof or ad hocs (which also need to be proved, making it more complicated and messy for the caliment). These people, again fall within the categories listed above (although the more dishonest ones do this more).
via International Skeptics Forum https://ift.tt/2JbRWvm
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire