|
|
|
Orpheus
Skeptic Friend
92 Posts |
 Posted - 07/06/2001 : 10:58:09 [Permalink]
|
I think that (yet again) semantic differences exist in defining what is meant by skepticism which often obscure substantive similarities in our arguments.
I refer the interrested reader to any number of good texts explicating the history of skepticism.
I suspect that Slater and I agree more than has been shown by this debate. All I wish to show is that a method can easily turn in on itself if it is applied over-enthusiatically to its own primary tenets.
While being skeptical about ones findings which were derived from a skeptical method is just good science, being skeptical about the skeptical method seems to strain rational credibilty and risk becoming plain old nonsense...
Find your own damned answers! |
 |
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2001 : 19:46:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
While being skeptical about ones findings which were derived from a skeptical method is just good science, being skeptical about the skeptical method seems to strain rational credibilty and risk becoming plain old nonsense...
I will agree with that. Since most of what we discuss here bears on science, we are not discussing the philosophical skepticism. Being skeptical about skepticism is for those who want to find a way to circumvent scientific results of research.
However, I think that any results should always be open to revision with new evidence, otherwise science would sink into the same sinkhole as has religious dogma.
I do not believe that traditional philosophy is appropriate for this site.
ljbrs
Perfection Is a State of Growth... |
|
|
|
Orpheus
Skeptic Friend
92 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2001 : 09:33:58 [Permalink]
|
Could not agree with you more! Endless circular debates about the meaning of skepticism can become somewhat tiring and pointless...
Find your own damned answers! |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2001 : 11:17:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Endless circular debates about the meaning of skepticism can become somewhat tiring and pointless...
You're the one who brought it up!!! 
You said: quote:
If you are skeptic, what prevents you from being skeptical about skepticism? Does that not call into question the utility of the skeptical method? Note that being a skeptic about skepticism does not imply that you hold with any other method of knowing, just that you doubt skepticism as complete. Thoughts??
------------
Ma gavte la nata! |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2001 : 11:20:45 [Permalink]
|
The idea that one can be too skeptical may be possible, but it sounds a lot like saying that one can be too healthy.
Stop the murder of the Iraqi people.
http://www.endthewar.org |
|
|
|
Orpheus
Skeptic Friend
92 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2001 : 12:32:29 [Permalink]
|
quote:
You're the one who brought it up!!!
Yeah, okay, so you got me on that...I just thought it would stimulate some thought on the topic (which it did). Also, I DO think it important to be at least somewhar clear about the terms we use when debating skepticism in all its forms.
quote:
but it sounds a lot like saying that one can be too healthy.
Nope, it does not: health does not have the same meaning which skepticism does when possesed in maximal amounts.Being absolutely healthy is a good thing, and will mean you're gonna outlive a lot of people, being absolutely skeptical means you doubt everything, even your ability to doubt etc., which is tantamount to keeping such an open mind that you're brain will fall out!
Find your own damned answers! |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
