Að vera ,,skeptic''; nú eða neikvæður...

Some people believe that skepticism is the rejection of new ideas, or worse, they confuse “skeptic” with “cynic” and think that skeptics are a bunch of grumpy curmudgeons unwilling to accept any claim that challenges the status quo. This is wrong. Skepticism is a provisional approach to claims. It is the application of reason to any and all ideas — no sacred cows allowed. In other words, skepticism is a method, not a position. Ideally, skeptics do not go into an investigation closed to the possibility that a phenomenon might be real or that a claim might be true. When we say we are “skeptical,” we mean that we must see compelling evidence before we believe.

Skepticism has a long historical tradition dating back to ancient Greece, when Socrates observed: “All I know is that I know nothing.” But this pure position is sterile and unproductive and held by virtually no one. If you were skeptical about everything, you would have to be skeptical of your own skepticism. Like the decaying subatomic particle, pure skepticism uncoils and spins off the viewing screen of our intellectual cloud chamber.

 Ég fékk þennan texta lánaðan af vefsíðu The Skeptics Society (hér). Ég hef stundum rekið mig á að maður er sagður neikvæður eða eitthvað álíka þegar maður er ekki reiðubúinn að samþykkja einhverja skoðun. Nú, eða þegar maður segist ekki trúa hinu eða þessu. 

Það er auðvitað alger steypa að segja að einhver sé neikvæður þó að hann trúi ekki hverju sem er, eða er kröfuharður á rökstuðning.