- Dec 25, 2003
- 42,070
- 16,820
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
EDIT - THIS THREAD IS 14 YEARS OLD AND MANY RESPONDENTS ARE NO LONGER HERE.
It's time for my annual "pilgrimage" to the James Randi Educational Foundation's Amazing Meeting being held for the second year in Las Vegas. I've been thinking about some of the discussion at last years meeting and it's fallout on the JREF message board. Some attendees, both religious and not, felt the tone of the conference at times was akin to an atheist tent revival. Much debate followed on the message board as to whether one could be a "true skeptic"[sub]tm[/sub], and be religious. Since I'm posting this to CF, and part of this essay will discuss Creationists my focus will be on Christians and I will argue in the affirmative.
A lot of the more militant atheists on the JREF forum insisted that one was not a "true" or "complete" skeptic unless one were an atheist. This of course flies in the face of what "true" skepticism really is, an irony not lost on those of us who did not agree. I argue that if there are 29 issues myself and a religious person are both skeptical of, and the 30th is religion, then that person is just as much a skeptic as I am.
What Skepticism Is And Is Not
Skepticism is a process, not a position. It's questioning things you see or hear about, not accepting them prima face. As the Skeptic Society says, Missouri's motto -"Show Me" is the guiding principle of skepticism. Skepticism is not about debunking, although exposing willful fraud is something many skeptics proudly endeavor to. Skepticism also is not cynicism where everything is denied in a knee jerk manner. Skepticism is also not atheism because at it's heart, skepticism uses the scientific method to investigate and science cannot address the supernatural.
I've grouped claims and areas of investigation into four general categories.
- Supernatural
These are things relating to deities and other beings associated with them like angels, demons and avatars. For the most part this area is outside the purview of scientific inquiry, but some claims like ghosts, exorcisms, faith healing and apparitions can be tested.
- Paranormal
Extra Sensory Perception, UFOs, Cryptozoology, Spirit Mediums, Telekinesis and such would fall under this category. One thing to keep in mind about areas of paranormal inquiry is that should be ever capture a Bigfoot or uncover the mechanism of ESP, it would become normal and an area of scientific study.
- Alternative
Free Energy, Homeopathy, Therapeutic Touch, Creationism and Historical Revisionism are examples of areas where claimants will say they have arcane knowledge that is being hidden by big business, big medicine or the government and that they can fill you in on the real story. One thing to keep in mind about "alternative medicine" is that it really doesn't exist. Either it's medicine, and it works, or it's quakery, and it doesn't.
- General
AKA Common Sense. Is the widow of a dead Congolese warlord really going to give you a million to help her get his 30 million out of Nigerian bank? Are people really waking up in bathtubs full of ice missing their kidneys? Do you really need an engine overhaul, or might it only be a bad spark plug. I stopped getting spam from my friends after they'd send me an urban legend and I'd reply with a link showing it was bogus.
Selective Skepticism
Considering yourself a skeptic means applying the process to everything, even things you want to be true. I personally would find it wild if Dinosaurs still roamed the Earth or that there really is a giant underground alien base at Area 51, but without evidence, I have to reject the hearsay. In the Creation and Evolution forum, I see a lot of selective skepticism. People who reject geologists explanations for the formation of the Grand Canyon will accept basking shark corpses as dead Plesiosaurs. People who reject faith healing claims will accept chi and acupuncture. To be a "true" skeptic, you can't just reject or accept based on your wants or biases. You have to, at the very least, investigate both the claim for flaws, and if there is a counterclaim, investigate that too.
Is There A Biblical Basis For Skepticism?
I think that not only is there a basis, it's a sound doctrine. How many times have you seen, heard or been a part of a theological discussion when "chapter and verse please?" comes up? That's skepticism in action. The Arians or Gnostics might be running Christianity today were it not for those who questioned and tested their claims against Scripture. Even Jesus himself seems to advocate skepticism:
[bible]John 20:27[/bible]
In the final balance, I just don't see how anyone can make the case that because someone believes in God or experiences Gifts of the Holy Spirit, but questions UFO abductions, Psychic spoon bending, Bigfoot, Therapeutic touch, Holocaust denial, devices to make their cars run on tap water, and deletes every Nigerian scam spam they get isn't a "true" skeptic.
It's time for my annual "pilgrimage" to the James Randi Educational Foundation's Amazing Meeting being held for the second year in Las Vegas. I've been thinking about some of the discussion at last years meeting and it's fallout on the JREF message board. Some attendees, both religious and not, felt the tone of the conference at times was akin to an atheist tent revival. Much debate followed on the message board as to whether one could be a "true skeptic"[sub]tm[/sub], and be religious. Since I'm posting this to CF, and part of this essay will discuss Creationists my focus will be on Christians and I will argue in the affirmative.
A lot of the more militant atheists on the JREF forum insisted that one was not a "true" or "complete" skeptic unless one were an atheist. This of course flies in the face of what "true" skepticism really is, an irony not lost on those of us who did not agree. I argue that if there are 29 issues myself and a religious person are both skeptical of, and the 30th is religion, then that person is just as much a skeptic as I am.
What Skepticism Is And Is Not
Skepticism is a process, not a position. It's questioning things you see or hear about, not accepting them prima face. As the Skeptic Society says, Missouri's motto -"Show Me" is the guiding principle of skepticism. Skepticism is not about debunking, although exposing willful fraud is something many skeptics proudly endeavor to. Skepticism also is not cynicism where everything is denied in a knee jerk manner. Skepticism is also not atheism because at it's heart, skepticism uses the scientific method to investigate and science cannot address the supernatural.
I've grouped claims and areas of investigation into four general categories.
- Supernatural
These are things relating to deities and other beings associated with them like angels, demons and avatars. For the most part this area is outside the purview of scientific inquiry, but some claims like ghosts, exorcisms, faith healing and apparitions can be tested.
- Paranormal
Extra Sensory Perception, UFOs, Cryptozoology, Spirit Mediums, Telekinesis and such would fall under this category. One thing to keep in mind about areas of paranormal inquiry is that should be ever capture a Bigfoot or uncover the mechanism of ESP, it would become normal and an area of scientific study.
- Alternative
Free Energy, Homeopathy, Therapeutic Touch, Creationism and Historical Revisionism are examples of areas where claimants will say they have arcane knowledge that is being hidden by big business, big medicine or the government and that they can fill you in on the real story. One thing to keep in mind about "alternative medicine" is that it really doesn't exist. Either it's medicine, and it works, or it's quakery, and it doesn't.
- General
AKA Common Sense. Is the widow of a dead Congolese warlord really going to give you a million to help her get his 30 million out of Nigerian bank? Are people really waking up in bathtubs full of ice missing their kidneys? Do you really need an engine overhaul, or might it only be a bad spark plug. I stopped getting spam from my friends after they'd send me an urban legend and I'd reply with a link showing it was bogus.
Selective Skepticism
Considering yourself a skeptic means applying the process to everything, even things you want to be true. I personally would find it wild if Dinosaurs still roamed the Earth or that there really is a giant underground alien base at Area 51, but without evidence, I have to reject the hearsay. In the Creation and Evolution forum, I see a lot of selective skepticism. People who reject geologists explanations for the formation of the Grand Canyon will accept basking shark corpses as dead Plesiosaurs. People who reject faith healing claims will accept chi and acupuncture. To be a "true" skeptic, you can't just reject or accept based on your wants or biases. You have to, at the very least, investigate both the claim for flaws, and if there is a counterclaim, investigate that too.
Is There A Biblical Basis For Skepticism?
I think that not only is there a basis, it's a sound doctrine. How many times have you seen, heard or been a part of a theological discussion when "chapter and verse please?" comes up? That's skepticism in action. The Arians or Gnostics might be running Christianity today were it not for those who questioned and tested their claims against Scripture. Even Jesus himself seems to advocate skepticism:
[bible]John 20:27[/bible]
In the final balance, I just don't see how anyone can make the case that because someone believes in God or experiences Gifts of the Holy Spirit, but questions UFO abductions, Psychic spoon bending, Bigfoot, Therapeutic touch, Holocaust denial, devices to make their cars run on tap water, and deletes every Nigerian scam spam they get isn't a "true" skeptic.
Last edited:
