October 28, 2009

Skepticism 101

Seeing as we've already gathered a healthy number of atheism-related posts, I'd like to cover another aspect of Freethought: Skepticism.

Much to many a skeptic's chagrin, the terms "skeptic" and "skepticism" have accrued several unfortunate connotations. In general, being a skeptic means being a non-believer in relation to a certain subject. For instance, people who do not believe in anthropogenic global warming call themselves "climate skeptics." If someone makes a claim you find hard to believe, you may tell them you're skeptical of their idea.

On a more idealogical plane, identifying as a skeptic is sometimes seen as identifying as a cynic or nihilist. The three terms all have connotations that suggest a stubborn refusal to believe any sort of positive claim and to shoot down ideas without providing alternatives.

Let me say right now that true skepticism has nothing to do with the above attitudes.

Modern-day skepticism (as opposed to the Skepticism of ancient Greece) is really an assertion of the scientific method; it asks people to withhold belief in things until they can be proven. On the face of it, it seems we should all be skeptics. However, human beings have an undying tendency to jump to conclusions based on intuitions and faith rather than facts and logic. Humans just can't help it. The brain is wired to look for patterns and to assume certain facts. Evolutionarily speaking, it makes perfect sense: a caveman who waited to see whether a moving bush was hiding a squirrel or a lion would not have survived long. A second caveman who immediately assumed the lion's presence and acted accordingly (by running away) would survive to pass on his genes.

Skeptics recognize the underlying illogical tendencies of the human brain and attempt to correct them by relying on logic, facts, and science to reach conclusions about topics. For instance, skeptics don't believe in Big Foot because definitive proof has yet to surface. Similarly, skeptics do not believe in the supernatural because by definition it lies outside the natural world and therefore cannot submit to scientific investigation.

At its heart, skepticism is about one thing: proof. If you can't prove it, I can't believe it.

2 comments:

  1. I'm of the opinion that supernatural isn't a real distinction: supernatural is just a term we use to describe certain things that don't exist. If they did exist, we would call them natural. As a result of this the claim that they cannot submit to scientific investigation is flawed. I plan on writing a post on this topic at some point, which will better state my ideas on the matter.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ha! True. The concept of supernatural is tangled confusion, like 'God'. Without a proper definition, borrowing the term only validates it.

    ReplyDelete