What is your method for scepticisim?

[Pauliesonne]

I would appreciate your opinions on this subject.

[drkitten]

I would appreciate your opinions on this subject.

What a meaningless question. Is English your native language?

[epepke]

I would appreciate your opinions on this subject.

I don't know exactly what you mean, but at I guess I'd say the scientific method, the method of observation/experiment, hypothesis formation, and analysis.

[FireGarden]

Yes, that was a broad question.

I think the first step in being skeptical has to be discussion. I know I am subjective. Everyone else is also subjective (probably!) -- but usually from a different viewpoint.

Talking to myself is never going to be the same as talking to others. Nobody has that much imagination.

I guess that begs the question "Can an individual be scientific?" I reckon science has to be a group activity. For humans, anyway.

[tkingdoll]

I would appreciate your opinions on this subject.

And we'd appreciate yours, but I'm sceptical that we'll get them.

Do you remember the post I wrote explaining how your threads aren't adding any value at all in this current random-thought-but-no-substance format?

You might want to re-read it, I think you'll find the advice still stands.

[Tricky]

First, I make a big pile of everything that it is possible to believe. Then I go through them one by one and toss out the ones that don't have any evidence. It's sort of like doing laundry.

[Roboramma]

First, I make a big pile of everything that it is possible to believe. Then I go through them one by one and toss out the ones that don't have any evidence. It's sort of like doing laundry.
Wow, you must have a lot of clothes, to be throwing some away every time you do laundry!

For me, I choose words at random from the dictionary, try to form a meaningful sentence, and then believe that.
By the way, coresponding penguins march discordantly.

[FireGarden]

Running with the laundry analogy....

You have a pile of clothes; you can recognise for yourself that some of them are full of holes. So you chuck them. Some are just dirty, so you wash them. But sometimes you need to be told by other people to stay out of the blue-lycra Tick-costume.

And, of course, some people like to wear uniforms rather than choose their own style. Some people wear the same thing day in, day out. They never even consider changing what they're comfortable with. (How old is my sig, anyway?)


EDIT ::: I forgot hand-me-downs. We all have to wear a few of those.

[Tricky]

Wow, you must have a lot of clothes, to be throwing some away every time you do laundry!

For me, I choose words at random from the dictionary, try to form a meaningful sentence, and then believe that.
By the way, coresponding penguins march discordantly.
Of course I don't throw clothes away. I check to see if they're clean enough to wear again. These days a sniff test is good enough. Back in my college days, I'd throw it against the wall and if it didn't stick, it was clean enough to wear again.

And indeed, we skeptics also sort ideas by seeing if they will pass the "sniff test".

[Serenity]

And we'd appreciate yours, but I'm sceptical that we'll get them.

Do you remember the post I wrote explaining how your threads aren't adding any value at all in this current random-thought-but-no-substance format?

You might want to re-read it, I think you'll find the advice still stands.I'm with her Paulie, I'd expect a bit more substance too from a thread you start. After all, this is the Academic - Religion & Philosophy forum. I'm far from being the most substantive poster here, but I do try.

Having said that, here's my quickie opinion:

My skepticism is predicated largely on a trust of the scientific method. If I had to prove-out “everything” I believed to be true, life would be overwhelming to the point of dysfunction. Some degree of trust is necessary, so one finds reputable institutions, organizations, etc… to align themselves with if they don't have the time, resources, or knowledge to prove assertions for themselves - step 1.

[Tricky]

I'm with her Paulie, I'd expect a bit more substance too from a thread you start. After all, this is the Academic - Religion & Philosophy forum. I'm far from being the most substantive poster here, but I do try.

Having said that, here's my quickie opinion:

My skepticism is predicated largely on a trust of the scientific method. If I had to prove-out “everything” I believed to be true, life would be overwhelming to the point of dysfunction. Some degree of trust is necessary, so one finds reputable institutions, organizations, etc… to align themselves with if they don't have the time, resources, or knowledge to prove assertions for themselves - step 1.
A quickie opinion is all that is necessary for pauliesonne, based on the content of most of his posts.

Great avatar by the way. Can I advertise in your space?

[jjramsey]

Occam's razor is important, too. If one has to use strained explanations to fit one's beliefs to the facts as one knows them, maybe it's time to change the beliefs.

[Serenity]

A quickie opinion is all that is necessary for pauliesonne, based on the content of most of his posts.

Great avatar by the way. Can I advertise in your space?

Thanks, it came from Oolon Colluphid actually.

At the moment I’m currently running the <Advertise Here> ad for a client. My advertisement normally reads as, <This Space For Rent>. Please forward your request to me. Payment may be in the form of sock puppet privileges to push other product, some of which might be woo - be warned. :D

Note - Serenity does not necessarily endorse, support, sanction, encourage, verify or agree with the advertisements posted. Any information or material placed online by users is the content and responsibility of those users and does not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Serenity.

Passing thought - BTW, other methods of skepticism would be to openly question your belief system and not feel like you must "own" it, for what you believe today, is just a vehicle for what you will believe tomorrow.

[blutoski]

I would appreciate your opinions on this subject.

Start with the possibility that I could be wrong. Prioritize objective evidence, when available.

[fishbait]

I rely on modern technology for data
http://toob.typepad.com/content/images/hubbardtomatoaudit.jpg

[bjb]

I think the JREF Challenge gives a good structure of a skeptical method. If someone tells me of something new and wonderful, I ask them what exactly does it do? I also ask how it works and what evidence backs up the claims. Next, I evaluate the responses to these questions. If they contain logical fallacies or outright misinformation, then I know the claim is not valid. The idea itself may still be valid, but the arguement for it will not be persuasive.

A skeptic also need to be prepared to recieve good answers to these questions. Occasionally, someone does have good evidence and they turn out to be absolutely right about their new and wonderful idea. During these encounters, it is best to maintain a neutral attitude, even if you think someone else is full of it. They might turn out to be correct and then you look like a jerk. I know all about this! Keep an open mind and be prepared to admit someone else is right. I think the hardest thing about being a skeptic is that the rules mean you occasionally have to allow someone else to change your mind.

Finally, a skeptic needs to follow their own rules when dealing with other people. I can't try to convince someone about something new and wonderful that I've come up with until I have my own story in order. I need to tell them what I've done, why my idea works, and give hard evidence to back myself up. I also request others to repeat my work to see if they are able to duplicate my results. If I'm smart, I'll also determine the weaknesses of my idea as well as its strengths before I present it to others. Once I have my story in order, then I feel I have a convincing arguement and I will go forward and make my claim.