Would you consider yourself to be a skeptic?

[Tammuz]

"A skeptic is one who prefers beliefs and conclusions that are reliable and valid to ones that are comforting or convenient, and therefore rigorously and openly applies the methods of science and reason to all empirical claims, especially their own. A skeptic provisionally proportions acceptance of any claim to valid logic and a fair and thorough assessment of available evidence, and studies the pitfalls of human reason and the mechanisms of deception so as to avoid being deceived by others or themselves. Skepticism values method over any particular conclusion." - Steven Novella

"What skeptical thinking boils down to is the means to construct, and to understand, a reasoned argument and, especially important, to recognize a fallacious or fraudulent argument. The question is not whether we like the conclusion that emerges out of a train of reasoning, but whether the conclusion follows from the premises or starting point and whether that premise is true." - Carl Sagan

I very much consider myself a skeptic. I think skepticism is much more important than atheism. I am an atheist because I am a skeptic. If the evidence pointed in favor of the existence of some sort of god, then I would stop being an atheist, but still be a skeptic. Also, the world is full of atheists who are not skeptics.

 

[phands]

100% skeptic, 100% atheist.

 

[WAB]

I find myself skeptical where it is warranted, as in reference to Gods, spirits, magic, prophecy, telepathy, ESP, etc; but I find myself equally skeptical of anyone who claims they are skeptical of fundamental things like existence, consciousness, intelligence, and knowledge.

 

[bilby]

I'm pretty sure I am a skeptic, but I am reserving judgment until there is overwhelming evidence to confirm it.

 

[Politesse]

I am a skeptic before I am a lot of other things; I am extremely suspicious of the mind and its "shortcuts", and prefer not to rely on a single line of reasoning or evidence for anything, if I can help it. I don't know if a "pure" skepticism would ever be possible; we are prisoners of our brains. But I do what I can.

 

[ruby sparks]

If the evidence pointed in favor of the existence of some sort of god, then I would stop being an atheist, but still be a skeptic.

Neatly put.

 

[southernhybrid]

I think that my brain is very skeptical. I don't think that I control my brain, but rather it controls me. Sometimes I think my skepticism might be over the top, but that's just how my brain is programmed and how it has been influenced by the experiences in my life. I agree with Poli that there is no pure skepticism.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I consider myself skeptical but have been told I'm just afraid to consider possibilities. So skepticism is a bit intellectual in my view. Most of my friends believe in magic spacemen of some kind.

It seems weird to say but I see the opposite of skepticism as being pronounced emotionalism. Both skeptics and non-skeptics will do what feels good but skeptics simply bring more scientific knowledge to the discussion. That takes courage, not fear.

 

[aupmanyav]

100% skeptic, 100% atheist.

Same here.

 

[Underseer]

"A skeptic is one who prefers beliefs and conclusions that are reliable and valid to ones that are comforting or convenient, and therefore rigorously and openly applies the methods of science and reason to all empirical claims, especially their own. A skeptic provisionally proportions acceptance of any claim to valid logic and a fair and thorough assessment of available evidence, and studies the pitfalls of human reason and the mechanisms of deception so as to avoid being deceived by others or themselves. Skepticism values method over any particular conclusion." - Steven Novella

"What skeptical thinking boils down to is the means to construct, and to understand, a reasoned argument and, especially important, to recognize a fallacious or fraudulent argument. The question is not whether we like the conclusion that emerges out of a train of reasoning, but whether the conclusion follows from the premises or starting point and whether that premise is true." - Carl Sagan

I very much consider myself a skeptic. I think skepticism is much more important than atheism. I am an atheist because I am a skeptic. If the evidence pointed in favor of the existence of some sort of god, then I would stop being an atheist, but still be a skeptic. Also, the world is full of atheists who are not skeptics.

Too many people confuse skepticism with refusing to accept changes in conclusions regardless of what evidence is shown.

A good example of this are "climate change skeptics."

It doesn't matter how much evidence you show a climate change "skeptic," they will keep their same beliefs regardless.

Many Christians will claim to be similarly "skeptical" of atheism (e.g. "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist").

9/11 conspiracy nuts insist that they are "skeptical" of the "official version."

Anti vaccine nuts insist that they are "skeptical" of medical science.

Anti GMO nuts are also eager to tell you how "skeptical" they are of medical science.

People who believe in alternative medicine are also quick to mention how skeptical they are of evidence-based medical science (which in their jargon is "big pharma").

This of course denies what actual skepticism is. Actual skeptics are willing to change their conclusions when shown evidence that they are wrong, whereas most who describe themselves as skeptics are merely obstinate, delusional, and utterly impervious to arguments and evidence.

 

[Underseer]

As for whether or not I myself am a skeptic, I certainly try to be, but often it takes me far longer than I would like to admit that I am wrong about something.

 

[Bronzeage]

My problem is not skepticism, but that I am smart. This can be a problem, because it offers limited choices. In any situation, it's good fortune if there are more than two good choices, and more often, there is only one choice less bad than all the others.

Reluctance to make a bad choice often appears as skepticism. Last Monday an old friend stopped by for a visit. He wanted to tell all about how cancer researchers don't want to find a cure for cancer, because they make so much money off of treatments. The first time I heard this was around 1976. Something called Laetrille was involved.

Disbelieving the cancer conspiracy story is not really skepticism, it's just declining to be stupid.

 

[Underseer]

My problem is not skepticism, but that I am smart. This can be a problem, because it offers limited choices. In any situation, it's good fortune if there are more than two good choices, and more often, there is only one choice less bad than all the others.

Reluctance to make a bad choice often appears as skepticism. Last Monday an old friend stopped by for a visit. He wanted to tell all about how cancer researchers don't want to find a cure for cancer, because they make so much money off of treatments. The first time I heard this was around 1976. Something called Laetrille was involved.

Disbelieving the cancer conspiracy story is not really skepticism, it's just declining to be stupid.

In those cases, I usually ask "How do you know that?" and hilarity generally ensues.

In modern times, most of those claims come from David "Avocado" Wolfe, who deliberately works to undermine people's faith in evidence-based medicine so that people will be more willing to purchase the products he offers that are based on evidence-free health claims. For example, for the low, low price of $200, David "Big Pharma Has A Seekrit Cure Fer Cancer, But They Ain't Tellin' Ya, 'Cuz Money" Wolfe will sell you a "grounding" pillow case that among other things will suck out the "wi-fi toxins" from your head as you sleep.

 

[Bronzeage]

My problem is not skepticism, but that I am smart. This can be a problem, because it offers limited choices. In any situation, it's good fortune if there are more than two good choices, and more often, there is only one choice less bad than all the others.

Reluctance to make a bad choice often appears as skepticism. Last Monday an old friend stopped by for a visit. He wanted to tell all about how cancer researchers don't want to find a cure for cancer, because they make so much money off of treatments. The first time I heard this was around 1976. Something called Laetrille was involved.

Disbelieving the cancer conspiracy story is not really skepticism, it's just declining to be stupid.

In those cases, I usually ask "How do you know that?" and hilarity generally ensues.

In modern times, most of those claims come from David "Avocado" Wolfe, who deliberately works to undermine people's faith in evidence-based medicine so that people will be more willing to purchase the products he offers that are based on evidence-free health claims. For example, for the low, low price of $200, David "Big Pharma Has A Seekrit Cure Fer Cancer, But They Ain't Tellin' Ya, 'Cuz Money" Wolfe will sell you a "grounding" pillow case that among other things will suck out the "wi-fi toxins" from your head as you sleep.

I think if one reads Fox News online, your more likely to get those kinds of ads in your "news feed."

 

[Underseer]

My problem is not skepticism, but that I am smart. This can be a problem, because it offers limited choices. In any situation, it's good fortune if there are more than two good choices, and more often, there is only one choice less bad than all the others.

Reluctance to make a bad choice often appears as skepticism. Last Monday an old friend stopped by for a visit. He wanted to tell all about how cancer researchers don't want to find a cure for cancer, because they make so much money off of treatments. The first time I heard this was around 1976. Something called Laetrille was involved.

Disbelieving the cancer conspiracy story is not really skepticism, it's just declining to be stupid.

In those cases, I usually ask "How do you know that?" and hilarity generally ensues.

In modern times, most of those claims come from David "Avocado" Wolfe, who deliberately works to undermine people's faith in evidence-based medicine so that people will be more willing to purchase the products he offers that are based on evidence-free health claims. For example, for the low, low price of $200, David "Big Pharma Has A Seekrit Cure Fer Cancer, But They Ain't Tellin' Ya, 'Cuz Money" Wolfe will sell you a "grounding" pillow case that among other things will suck out the "wi-fi toxins" from your head as you sleep.

I think if one reads Fox News online, your more likely to get those kinds of ads in your "news feed."

Really? Because I always associated that kind of nonsense with liberals. I certainly hear claims like that from the "I shop at Whole Foods" crowd.

 

[Jobar]

I definitely consider myself a skeptic- but that isn't the opposite of being open-minded. As the famous saying goes, I try to keep an open mind, but not so open my brain falls out!

As Cromwell said, we should always consider it possible we might be mistaken. We should put error bars on all our certainties, and stay aware of them even if those bars are very short.

 

[skepticalbip]

I think if one reads Fox News online, your more likely to get those kinds of ads in your "news feed."

Really? Because I always associated that kind of nonsense with liberals. I certainly hear claims like that from the "I shop at Whole Foods" crowd.

Same here. I know several super liberals who swear by healing crystals and magnetic bracelets. The super right people that I know have their own different brand of idiocy like swearing that the illuminati controls the world and "9/11 was an inside job".

 

[Bronzeage]

I think if one reads Fox News online, your more likely to get those kinds of ads in your "news feed."

Really? Because I always associated that kind of nonsense with liberals. I certainly hear claims like that from the "I shop at Whole Foods" crowd.

You should be more skeptical. The "Big Pharma is hiding the cure for cancer" fits right into the "black helicopters" and "Get us out of the UN" crowd.

 

[Elixir]

we should always consider it possible we might be mistaken.

I do consider that, but with a healthy dose of skepticism.

 

[WAB]

we should always consider it possible we might be mistaken.

I do consider that, but with a healthy dose of skepticism.

What Jobar said is the very essence of skepticism.