Freethought & Rationalism Archive

anim · 09-26-2008, 05:08 PM

I am tired of fighting the radical skeptics, want to make sure I am not alone. Here is an extreme poll:

I agree with ALL 3 statements:

1) I will believe that: psychics and hypnotists are charlatans who do not posses any special abilities other than "magic tricks" skills and social ("pulling the thread" for information) skills until proven otherwise.

2) I will believe that people claiming to have witnessed UFO, spirits, ghosts, miracles, miraculous healing, or any phenomenon as of yet unexplained by science are confused until proven otherwise.

3) I will believe that current yoga, meditation, acupuncture, and placebo effects can be achieved by the means of simply waiting, dieting, exercising, more disciplined lifestyle until proven otherwise.

figuer · 09-26-2008, 05:15 PM

If believing makes you happy....then believe.

anim · 09-26-2008, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by figuer

If believing makes you happy....then believe.

lol ... I do overuse that word, don't I?

AdamWho · 09-26-2008, 05:29 PM

I don't like your phrasing "will believe".

The term "radical skeptic" has a well defined meaning that I don't think you are using.

A radical skeptic is some one who is skeptical of everything, not just things that lack evidence. A radical skeptic and solipsist are two sides of the same coin.

figuer · 09-26-2008, 05:51 PM

From another thread (bold mine):

Quote:

Originally Posted by wordy

figuer, how much do you know about Alexander Bard's new interpretation of Zoroastrianism? Have you read anything written by him?

No I am not into "radical skepticism" and I am most likely not clever enough even to get it.

Sounds like Pyrrho to me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhonism

Quote:

Pyrrhonism, or Pyrrhonian skepticism, was a school of skepticism founded by Aenesidemus in the first century BC and recorded by Sextus Empiricus in the late 2nd century or early 3rd century AD. It was named after Pyrrho, a philosopher who lived from c. 360 to c. 270 BC, although the relationship between the philosophy of the school and of the historical figure is murky. Pyrrhonism has become influential during the past few centuries when the modern scientific worldview was born.

Whereas 'academic' skepticism, with as its most famous adherent Carneades, claims that "Nothing can be known, not even this", Pyrrhonian skeptics withhold any assent with regard to non-evident propositions and remain in a state of perpetual inquiry. According to them, even the statement that nothing can be known is dogmatic.

Pyrrhonian skepticism is similar to the form of skepticism called Zeteticism promoted by Marcello Truzzi.

fromdownunder · 09-26-2008, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anim

I am tired of fighting the radical skeptics, want to make sure I am not alone. Here is an extreme poll:

I agree with ALL 3 statements:

1) I will believe that: psychics and hypnotists are charlatans who do not posses any special abilities other than "magic tricks" skills and social ("pulling the thread" for information) skills until proven otherwise.

2) I will believe that people claiming to have witnessed UFO, spirits, ghosts, miracles, miraculous healing, or any phenomenon as of yet unexplained by science are confused until proven otherwise.

3) I will believe that current yoga, meditation, acupuncture, and placebo effects can be achieved by the means of simply waiting, dieting, exercising, more disciplined lifestyle until proven otherwise.

I voted no, I do not agree. Regarding the options:

1. Psychics and hypnotists are not necessarily charlatans. They may actually genuinely believe that they have these "powers". This makes them something, but not charlatans.

2. Pretty much the same argument applies. I have witnessed a UFO, which was never explained, probably because I did not ever bother following up what I actually saw - it was pretty unexciting and did not warrant stirring me into any research. So, it is to this day a UFO. I am not confused by what I saw. I just do not know what it was.

3. I need to disagree in part again. Yoga and meditation for example (and no I do not use it) ARE by definition disciplines, which can lead to and are often part of a more disciplned life style.

I think your statements need considerable tweaking as they are so generalised (and right down to the rather puzzling "I will believe" bit - I do not even know what that is supposed to mean) that they are pretty confusing.

Norm

Lucis · 09-26-2008, 07:14 PM

scientists and atheists often call themselves skeptics, but they're not true skeptics because they're only skeptic about spiritual things, they're not skeptic about scientific things like big bang, evolution, gravity and thermodynamics.

figuer · 09-26-2008, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucis

scientists and atheists often call themselves skeptics, but they're not true skeptics because they're only skeptic about spiritual things, they're not skeptic about scientific things like big bang, evolution, gravity and thermodynamics.

Many scientists and atheist do behave that way (not all). These are called "Scientificists", followers of a religion based on mechanistic mythology.

Student of Sophia · 09-26-2008, 07:21 PM

Yes, it's a detestable paradigm IMO. Thank goodness its days are numbered.

anim · 09-26-2008, 07:25 PM

Let me make figuer's life easier.

1) James Randi is my hero.

2) James Randi is NOT my hero.

www.randi.org

(Hopefully nobody who already voted will change their opinion.)

View Poll Results: How much of a skeptic are you?
I believe in ALL 3 statements.	13	65.00%
I do NOT believe in ALL 3 statements.	7	35.00%
Voters: 20. This poll is closed

09-26-2008, 05:08 PM	#1
anim Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: CA Posts: 102	How much of a skeptic are you? I am tired of fighting the radical skeptics, want to make sure I am not alone. Here is an extreme poll: I agree with ALL 3 statements: 1) I will believe that: psychics and hypnotists are charlatans who do not posses any special abilities other than "magic tricks" skills and social ("pulling the thread" for information) skills until proven otherwise. 2) I will believe that people claiming to have witnessed UFO, spirits, ghosts, miracles, miraculous healing, or any phenomenon as of yet unexplained by science are confused until proven otherwise. 3) I will believe that current yoga, meditation, acupuncture, and placebo effects can be achieved by the means of simply waiting, dieting, exercising, more disciplined lifestyle until proven otherwise.

09-26-2008, 07:25 PM	#10
anim Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: CA Posts: 102	Another definition of the same question Let me make figuer's life easier. 1) James Randi is my hero. 2) James Randi is NOT my hero. www.randi.org (Hopefully nobody who already voted will change their opinion.)

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-26-2008, 05:15 PM	#2
figuer Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico Posts: 7,984	If believing makes you happy....then believe.

09-26-2008, 05:29 PM	#4
AdamWho Contributor Join Date: May 2001 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 13,389	I don't like your phrasing "will believe". The term "radical skeptic" has a well defined meaning that I don't think you are using. A radical skeptic is some one who is skeptical of everything, not just things that lack evidence. A radical skeptic and solipsist are two sides of the same coin.

09-26-2008, 07:14 PM	#7
Lucis Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Sweden Posts: 666	scientists and atheists often call themselves skeptics, but they're not true skeptics because they're only skeptic about spiritual things, they're not skeptic about scientific things like big bang, evolution, gravity and thermodynamics.

09-26-2008, 07:21 PM	#9
Student of Sophia Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Inner Space Posts: 2,707	Yes, it's a detestable paradigm IMO. Thank goodness its days are numbered.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.