I get accused of not being skeptical because I apply the highest level of skepticism to US news stories. The standard should be the person making the claim (like the CIA or journalists) to publish all their evidence for peer review. Until such time, we should reject the claim.
Here are the reasons why I support my method
-it is the most effective tool we have for determine truth.
-Not knowing a lot of things is an acceptable position.
-we don't have a need to default to a weaker standard. The prosecutors examining the case do. But for nearly everyone on the forum, it probably won't alter decisions they make.
Why am I doing skepticism wrong?
Here are the reasons why I support my method
-it is the most effective tool we have for determine truth.
-Not knowing a lot of things is an acceptable position.
-we don't have a need to default to a weaker standard. The prosecutors examining the case do. But for nearly everyone on the forum, it probably won't alter decisions they make.
Why am I doing skepticism wrong?
via International Skeptics Forum http://bit.ly/2Dkv2xw
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire