[ POLL ] What is "too much" skepticism?

Post Reply New Topic

I can tell you what this too much "skepticism" looks like:
When e.g. some journalist uses the phrase "scientists say", you don't trust them - but you do trust scientists and their data. So every time such phrase turns up, you dig for peer-reviewed articles, source material and raw data to analyse it yourself. You know journalists routinely write about things they don't understand and summaries writen by scientists are usually bent the way to maximise chances for more funding but raw data are usually okay.
So you search for raw data, methodology, possible systematic biases, etc. until you have clear picture including errorbars and all the uncertainities.

In the meantime, you're unemployed, your bills are not payed and even if you are professionally a scientist, you are always late to publish and your research is not moving forward because you never stop digging for possible errors and biases in your own research, too.

Yup, that's me. I try to fight it, especially that I have my "real life" responsibilities, but it's hard.

How interesting, I thought this was just another case of different American/British spelling. Has the meaning really changed or is it somewhat related to a different cultural view/perception of the term? Can't find much on the subject

Other: defined as when someone has reached a point of skepticism where they no longer have a personality, where nothing anyone else says to them can be interpreted in any other way than a statement to be proven or disproven, where their life revolves around being the guy who says "Well ACTUALLY" and when they finally, at the end of it all, think of themselves as "Skeptics" and die alone blinded by delusions of intellectual superiority.

@BenderRodriguezThe term skeptic has acquired a series of colloquial meanings which don’t really fit with the original one, indeed in the case of the one I typed in as “other” and fnord has added to the poll: the original meaning has been inverted.
An example of that would be “Euroskeptic” when the person in question is referring to the EU as either “the fourth reich” or the “EUSSR” with complete sincerity.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/pl/dic ... sh/skeptic
Bender seems right.

I find use of the word "skeptic" for opponent a form of manipulation.
1. You pretend your idea does not have opponents, just sceptics;
2. (probably more important) You shove real sceptics - people who have doubts and want answers for uncomfortable questions - into one category with all possible freaks and extremists and then you are free to overlook their existence - sceptics are the conspiracy weirdos, not the ones who ask for uncertainities.

Last edited by magz on 13 Mar 2020, 8:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

The folks in my country who use those terms refer to themselves as euroskeptics!

Yeah, according to the dictionary, it's just a different spelling. I was wondering if due to different cultural attitudes towards the term (it's neutral to me, but obviously seen in a positive or negative light by some people), the actual meaning might have been shifting.

The manipulation has advantages on both sides.
For the "skeptics", it presents them are more moderate, thus more acceptable.
For the "enthusiasts", it gives them a pass to dismiss most of reasonable criticism by equating it to unreasonable criticism.
It fits the extremes at the expense of moderate doubtful position.

Umm... I did say where the person in question. I know quite a lot of people who voted out in our referendum, for a variety of reasons which range from valid concerns I happen to disagree with, all the way through to barmy conspiracy theories... hence the use of that phrase



I was referring to the colloquial usage of the term as used in English at present: not seeking to create a category for my own convenience...

For clarity I regard the usage of the word skeptic as a badge of identity by conspiracy theorists of all types (and political persuasions) as an abuse of language.

I also feel like we might be arguing, and I don’t want to argue with you

Ah! Just seen your last post below!
Yes, i agree completely that the misuse of the term skeptic has massive propaganda potential that is very worrying.

I hope we're not arguing, are we?
Sometimes I agree with the idea but hate the propaganda promoting it.
Especially I hate manipulations to silence those asking uncomfortable questions, even if those questions could be validly answered.

^ I wasn’t entirely sure to be honest: but found the thought we might be rather anxiety provoking... Hehe: but if neither of us were seeking to them we weren’t/aren’t, just me having an attack of the old misinterpretation

Yes I agree: noting that there are people in my country who profess to believe that the EU is a big plot cooked up by the Vatican to eliminate Protestantism (I know at least one person who sincerely believes that), does not absolve one of the need to take seriously concerns over the long-term viability of the single currency. For instance.

I’d say especially if those questions can be validly answered!
It’s not just manipulative there: it’s unnecessary manipulation for the sake of a quick lazy win
Bad form, very bad form.

Ahh ... but they are endemic to certain discussions on this very website, as well as the general behavior of certain members (who shall not be named). I am trying to gain a consensus from as many members as possible, as well as opening up a conversation on skepticism -- its meaning and practice. So far, it has all been informative.

No way, they are a big plot of the masonry to defeat catholicism!

My own conspiracy version: I prefer the fight for hegemony in Europe happening at, or even under, the tables in Brussels over the trenches in Carpathian Mountains.

But that's completely off topic.

I stick to the original meaning of "scepticism/skepticism" and say, too much of it is when you spend all your resources on checking all the data you encounter, to the point you can't be productive in anything.

Since about the mid-00s, skeptics have been using the k spelling to distinguish themselves from climate sceptics in particular. I first encountered this in a book although as I read it at least 10 years ago I don’t remember which one. It’s briefly mentioned here: https://www.theguardian.com/science/blo ... s-march-us

Certainly the term is usually just spelled geographically, but there is a subculture where the c or the k conveys a different meaning.

Scepticism is the UK version.
Skepticism is the American version.

Of course, linguistics is a dynamic process. So, it's a bit more than the above.

Fascism with a capital "F" is way different and specific than fascism with a lower-case "f."