|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
2nd December 2012, 11:22 AM | #1 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 395
|
[Merged] What is a "skeptic"?/Was Carl Sagan a skeptic?
Just out of curiosity, how do the members of the "General Skepticsm etc." forum define skepticism? Thanks for your input.
|
2nd December 2012, 11:30 AM | #2 |
Now. Do it now.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,804
|
What is a skeptic?
It's an American sceptic, of course. Mike |
2nd December 2012, 11:37 AM | #3 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: hic.
Posts: 8,035
|
A skeptic is like a psychiatrist, but without the pharmacological medication.
|
__________________
|
|
2nd December 2012, 12:46 PM | #4 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,231
|
A skeptic is someone who never takes anything at face value.
|
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd |
|
2nd December 2012, 02:18 PM | #5 |
Non credunt, semper verificare
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,571
|
Somebody which look at claims, compare them to what is known (science/history etc...) and agaisnt the provided evidences by the claimant, to see if the claim is at least probable or not. Note that I said probable or improbable (or even impossible). Note I did not say "to see if the claim is true or false" , IMHo such binary results are more or less only valid in pure logic/math/philosophy.
|
2nd December 2012, 02:27 PM | #6 |
Student
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 47
|
A member of a specific geek subculture focused on consuming books and other media about how dumb other people are, instead of, let's say, caped superhero comics. As in other geek subcultures, there's a small group of creators and a much larger pool of consumers, some of which aspire to join the former group, with varied success. A further parallel with other geeks cultures is the accumulation of its own lingo, in-jokes and other memes, such as "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" and "the plural of anecdote is not data".
(As you can guess, I'm in a cynical mood today.) |
2nd December 2012, 02:35 PM | #7 |
a carbon based life-form
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
|
|
2nd December 2012, 02:35 PM | #8 |
Sorcerer Supreme
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 7,905
|
A person who, when confronted with an extraordinary claim, examines the evidence for that claim and, if not convinced of its veracity, provisionally rejects the claim pending further evidence.
|
__________________
"I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99 "When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." -- Jimi Hendrix |
|
2nd December 2012, 02:37 PM | #9 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,628
|
knows poop when he smells it
|
2nd December 2012, 04:29 PM | #10 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32,124
|
|
2nd December 2012, 04:41 PM | #11 |
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 87,214
|
The search for truth.
|
__________________
So take that quantum equation and recalculate the wave by a factor of hoopty doo! The answer is not my problem, it's yours. Three Word Story Wisdom |
|
2nd December 2012, 05:35 PM | #12 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 439
|
|
2nd December 2012, 05:37 PM | #13 |
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 752
|
|
2nd December 2012, 05:38 PM | #14 |
Grammaton Cleric
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,114
|
Vell, a skeptic's just zis guy, you know?
|
__________________
"The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline "Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain. |
|
2nd December 2012, 06:51 PM | #15 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,231
|
|
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd |
|
2nd December 2012, 06:53 PM | #16 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,231
|
|
__________________
"When I was a child I caught a fleeting glimpse out of the corner of my eye. I turned to look but it was gone, I cannot put my finger on it now. The child is grown, the dream is gone. I have become comfortably numb. " Pink Floyd |
|
3rd December 2012, 02:15 AM | #17 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32,124
|
|
3rd December 2012, 06:51 AM | #18 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Limmen, The Netherlands
Posts: 2,534
|
|
__________________
Keep your questions terse, and your answers terser. Wait, "terser" is a word, right? |
|
3rd December 2012, 07:50 AM | #19 |
Merchant of Doom
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 15,112
|
|
3rd December 2012, 07:52 AM | #20 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,260
|
I came across this intriguing double play.
Skeptics are reactive not proactive. They are not seekers of knowledge nor keepers of knowledge they are critiques of knowledge. And because knowledge is never present in an absolute way skeptics can get caught up in endless disagreements. For example "A man is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." As abstract as the law may be it is circumspect in the application of the word "reasonable". But what is a reasonable doubt or reasonable argument is less definable or guaranteed to satisfy the skeptic because the threshold also vary from skeptic to skeptic. Most skeptics are not in a positioned to make an informed decision or arrive at a reasonable conclusion because the process designed to extract the facts are often steeped in ignorant dogma and the failure to admit to ones own biases. Skeptics often put the burden of proof on the one who makes the claim. It is not a cooperative exchange but an adversarial challenge. More often than not the skeptic is not an expert in the field under discussion which leads to endless missed turns, so complex issues are best avoided when confronting a skeptic. Which begs the question, why deal with skeptics if even the obvious are subject to
Quote:
|
3rd December 2012, 07:56 AM | #21 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32,124
|
|
3rd December 2012, 08:05 AM | #22 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32,124
|
Determining the truth about the natural universe has little in common with a courtroom. Your comparison is invalid.
Quote:
Is that to say that all people who self-identify as sceptics are free from these things? No. I mean, they're all human for one and, as such, are just as fallible as everybody else. But they should be more aware of the pitfalls and be better at avoiding them. And there are other sceptics around to let sceptics know if they are giving in to personal biases. And, not to go all Scotsman on you, but if someone consistently fails to question established dogma, consistently fails to avoid their own biases, and consistently ignores or resents corrections from other sceptics then, by definition, they're not really a sceptic.
Quote:
|
3rd December 2012, 08:08 AM | #23 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,192
|
Sceptics care.
|
3rd December 2012, 08:21 AM | #24 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,260
|
Was Carl Sagan really a Skeptic?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, particularly in claims that are far fetched or that violate physical laws.
Carl Sagan did not need extraordinary evidence to spend his adult life searching for ETI (aliens). He just followed his early obsessions with flying saucers and aliens to fuel his scientific curiosity and a rather weak statistical probability based on arbitrary assumptions, hardly scientific by any definition or even scientifically skeptical. |
3rd December 2012, 08:24 AM | #25 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 699
|
in my opinion, a sceptic is someone who questions extraordinary claims and is open to new ideas and evidence to change their position. Alas far too many self declared skeptics have closed, small minds and are way more vociferous in what they believe, for example the climate change deniers or anti MMR inoculation brigade.
|
__________________
UKLS - 1984-2003, 2007- Girl 6: Besides, it's like he's an absentee landowner... And, I hate slumlords... ;-) |
|
3rd December 2012, 08:33 AM | #26 |
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator, Russell's Antinomy Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
|
OK, you got banned on yet another forum, so you are going to try this silliness here?
As you have been told, over and over, Dr. Sagan was not "obsessed" with flying saucers". He wrote, frequently, about the way credulous people see "flying saucers", and experience "alien abductions", the same way they used to see "fairies and goblins" and experience "visitations by saints". Dr, Sagan was of the expressed opinion that it was more likely than not that there were other intelligences "out there", which is why he arranged to search for them. Since skeptical inquiry is at the heart of properly done science (http://skeptoid.com/skeptic.php) Dr, Sagan's search for evidence of other intelligences makes much more sense than, say, claiming that the fact that the universe exists is "evidence" for creation. |
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest "The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David "Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze |
|
3rd December 2012, 08:37 AM | #27 |
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator, Russell's Antinomy Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
|
http://skeptoid.com/skeptic.php
It's all about the evidence, just as you have been told over and over on the other fora from which you have been banned. |
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest "The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David "Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze |
|
3rd December 2012, 08:39 AM | #28 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
|
Had Sagan insisted that alien life exists despite having no direct evidence, then one could certainly question his scientific skepticism. But he simply followed what evidence we do have to the conclusion that, given the possibility of extraterrestrial civilizations and the low cost of searching, it is certainly worth having a look. One can hardly say that his curiosity regarding the possibility of other civilizations in the galaxy was fueled by an obsession with UFOs given that he was quite clear that he was convinced that the UFO phenomenon was the result of human psychology and sociology, and not extraterrestrial visitors.
In short, Sagan never made an extraordinary claim. He never said, "Alien civilizations exist". He (and many other scientists) essentially said, "Given what we know about biology and astronomy, it is possible that alien civilizations exist. Given the low cost of observation it's worth having a look. If we detect something, that's certainly worth knowing. If we don't, and the sky is silent, then that's also worth knowing". |
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
3rd December 2012, 08:43 AM | #29 |
Inquisitor
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,483
|
|
__________________
"You're entitled to your opinion; you're just not entitled to have it taken seriously when you can offer no evidence to support it." - Garrison "I am the danger." - Heisenberg |
|
3rd December 2012, 08:47 AM | #30 |
fishy rocket scientist
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: among the machines
Posts: 2,682
|
|
3rd December 2012, 08:48 AM | #31 |
Mostly harmless
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 38,373
|
Justintime's post on another thread claims that skeptics don't look for new information, so it is necessary for him to argue that Sagan (or anyone else exhibiting this behaviour) wasn't a skeptic: As FZ said, Sagan didn't claim that aliens exist, he just advocated looking for evidence. |
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield "The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky |
|
3rd December 2012, 09:03 AM | #32 |
Merchant of Doom
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 15,112
|
|
3rd December 2012, 09:15 AM | #33 |
Inquisitor
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,483
|
I am a Scot, but I prefer the hard 'k' in skeptic. 'Sceptic' could be pronounced with the first c silent. Not good.
|
__________________
"You're entitled to your opinion; you're just not entitled to have it taken seriously when you can offer no evidence to support it." - Garrison "I am the danger." - Heisenberg |
|
3rd December 2012, 09:17 AM | #34 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
|
No. Many skeptics are driven to seek knowledge. So much so that they are prone to ask "but what if this claim is wrong?" regarding a great many things. So skeptics simply hold claims to a higher standard of evidence than the more credulous.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But you seem to be conflating this challenge with a mean-spirited aggression. Are you, perhaps, an exponent of some hypothesis or claim that has failed the challenge?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
3rd December 2012, 09:17 AM | #35 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,260
|
Is scientific skepticism really rationalism?
I keep hearing that Skepticism is a process of applying critical thinking and demanding credible evidence to determine validity. Now they are nice catch words. But the roots of Skepticism are closer to a psychological state of mind than a philosophical approach.
Definition of Skepticism: . A doubting or questioning attitude or state of mind; dubiety synonyms with uncertainty.
Quote:
|
3rd December 2012, 09:19 AM | #36 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
|
|
3rd December 2012, 09:23 AM | #37 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,260
|
|
3rd December 2012, 09:32 AM | #38 |
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 32,814
|
Was it reasonable to send ships into the ocean looking for new land? Or should people not bother because someone drew a waterfall edge and "There be dragons here" on a map?
|
__________________
"Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales now! More, cheaper, better games, right? Right? |
|
3rd December 2012, 09:34 AM | #39 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
|
Cherry picking. There are definitions of skepticism other than the Pyrrhic definition.
Even after three posts it is apparent that your goal is to construct a puerile straw-man of an exemplary skeptic as someone who is simply driven to reject all claims out of prejudicial disbelief. The truth (which I suspect you've been told innumerable times) is that many skeptics apply rational skepticism to ideas that they feel very well may be true. Before subjecting a scientific paper for peer review by other skeptical scientists, any good scientist will first subject his/her own ideas to the greatest skeptical scrutiny that he/she can manage. You seem to be directing a good bit of vitriol toward skeptics, but you give the impression that it is you who have the visceral issues you ascribe to others. By the way, this thread seems to be in the wrong sub-forum, unless you have something to say regarding religion and/or philosophy. |
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
3rd December 2012, 09:38 AM | #40 |
Mostly harmless
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 38,373
|
|
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield "The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|