Hardcore skeptics and diehard believers...

Age : 31 Joined : 12 Oct 2007 Posts : 253

Thinking that it's basically all a problem of words used in the right or wrong contest I dug out my old Oxford Wordpower Dictionary (1993 edition) and had a look at some entries:

Cynic /'SINIK/ noun [C] a person who believes that people only do things for selfish reasons

Sceptic (Us Skeptic)/'SkeptiK/ noun [C] a person who doubts that something is true, right etc.

Scepticism (Us Skepticism)/'SKEPTISIZM/ noun [C] a general feeling of doubt about something; a feeling that you are unwilling to believe something

If my classical studies are anything to go by sceptic come the verb skeptomai which means "to observe carefully, to look about". Sextus Empiricus defined the sceptic as someone who investigated the questions of philosophy but has often suspended judgment because he's unable to resolve the contraditions he found. In short the sceptic is someone who continue to investigate and try to understand the deeper meanings of the phenomenon before jumping to conclusions. There's a subtler division between Empirical and Philosophical Scepticism but God knows if I remember that after all these years!

With small differences I think we can all agree that this is the Classical (or Ancient) Scepticism and I think it's the one uphold by Mysteryshopper (correct me if I am wrong) and nobody can deny its sound bases.

Sadly in modern colloquial English (tainted by Americanisms of all sorts) the word "Skeptic" (US version) has taken another meaning: activists (be them scientists or otherwise) who aim to expose in public what they see as the truth behind specific extraordinary claims. They are sometimes known as "debunkers" and are not stranger to both controversy and using unorthodox methods to prove their point but sometimes the word is also applied to those who deny certain phenomena a priori without further investigation.

In my opinion we should draw a line here: Classical Scepticism-sound method, Modern Skepticism-a matter of personal belief.
_________________
Fas: Ite, Maledicti, In Ignem Aeternum.

Joined : 01 Feb 2008 Posts : 69

Excellent post mauro!!!!

Exactly the sort of thing I have been trying to grapple with myself - though you put it better than I did above Wink

I agree about some skeptics being - what I call 'evangelical' about their position. In the USA this is a big thing. Like Mysteryshopper has stated - these people can miss some of the more important issues simply because they are too busy employing standard and stock answers.

I personally (and its just my opinion) still would say these are not doing skepticism in its true philosophical manner - but your excellent post above already covers that!!!!

Subject: Re: Hardcore skeptics and diehard believers... Sat 09 Feb 2008, 1:32 pm

As Ophiel said Mauro, excellent post Cool

.

It brings one small question to mind though. It seems to me that on websites, forums etc (including this one) we use the American spelling of Skeptic more than Sceptic, does anyone else feel that's the case and why not spell it with without the K?

As of posting this reply, this topic is officailly the most viewed and active one on the website. Scary affraid

Age : 31 Joined : 12 Oct 2007 Posts : 253

To be honest with you Ian I had the same doubts regarding that spelling, but since the Oxford Dictionary says so I am not going to argue...
I personally believe that the popularity of the "American spelling" stems from the unsolved diatribe between how to render in English the two Greek letters kappa and chi. If I remember correctly (yet again be patient and correct me if I am wrong, I've studied this many, many years ago and I am too lazy to search the Internet) the usual English rendition should be c for the kappa (as in sceptic) and ch for the chi (as in chaos). A competing tradition, not universally accepted by purists, gives kappa as k and chi as ch .
Interesting but totally unrelated and basically useless...
_________________
Fas: Ite, Maledicti, In Ignem Aeternum.

Joined : 01 Feb 2008 Posts : 69

The use of the 'K' relates to the philosophy of Skepticism as an actual philosophical position and one developed mainly in the USA.

It is a 'harder' form of approach than sceptic (on the whole).

Joined : 01 Feb 2008 Posts : 69

If you want to know more about the underlying philosophy of skepticism then I would recommend people to go to the Prometheus books website.

Michael Shermer has a good book "why people believe weird things" which also outlines some aspects of true skepticism. I recommend this book highly. Very Happy