Skepticism

[DeathCell]

"I am not very skeptical... a good deal of skepticism in a scientific man is advisable to avoid much loss of time, but I have met not a few men, who... have often thus been deterred from experiments or observations which would have proven servicable." - Charles Darwin "Round about the accredited and orderly facts of every science there ever floats a sort of dust-cloud of exceptional observations, of occurrences minute and irregular and seldom met with, which it always proves more easy to ignore than to attend to... Anyone will renovate his science who will steadily look after the irregular phenomena, and when science is renewed, its new formulas often have more of the voice of the exceptions in them than of what were supposed to be the rules." - William James "I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives." -Tolstoy "It is really quite amazing by what margins competent but conservative scientists and engineers can miss the mark, when they start with the preconceived idea that what they are invesigating is impossible. When this happens, the most well-informed men become blinded by their prejudices and are unable to see what lies directly ahead of them." - Arthur C. Clarke, 1963 "It is not uncommon for engineers to accept the reality of phenomena that are not yet understood, as it is very common for physicists to disbelieve the reality of phenomena that seem to contradict contemporary beliefs of physics" - H. Bauer "If a man is in too big a hurry to give up an error he is liable to give up some truth with it." - Wilbur Wright, 1902 "It's like religion. Heresy (in science) is though of as a bad thing, whereas it should be just the opposite." - T. Gold "Almost all really new ideas have a certain aspect of foolishness when they are first produced." - Alfred North Whitehead "The creative person pays close attention to what appears discordant and contradictory... and is challenged by such irregularities." - F. Barron "Genius in truth means little more than the faculty of perceiving in an unhabitual way" - William James "When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong." - Arthur C. Clarke's First Law "There is no better soporific and sedative than skepticism." -Nietzche "The discovery of truth is prevented more effectively not by the false appearance of things present and which mislead into error, not directly by weakness of the reasoning powers, but by preconceived opinion, by prejudice." - Schopenhauer "Daring ideas are like chessmen moved forward; they may be defeated, but they start a winning game." - Goethe "The more important fundamental laws and facts of physical science have all been discovered, and these are now so firmly established that the possibility of their ever being supplanted in consequence of new discoveries is exceedingly remote.... Our future discoveries must be looked for in the sixth place of decimals." - Albert. A. Michelson, speech given in 1894 at the dedication of Ryerson Physics Lab, Univ. of Chicago, "There is no natural phenomenon that is comparable with the sudden and apparently accidentally timed development of science, except perhaps the condensation of a super-saturated gas or the explosion of some unpredictable explosives." - Eugene P. Wigner "It is through science that we prove, but through intuition that we discover." - H. Poincare "Nothing is too wonderful to be true if it be consistent with the laws of nature." - Michael Faraday "It is as fatal as it is cowardly to blink facts because they are not to our taste." - Tyndall "Now, my suspicion is that the universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose... I suspect that there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of, in any philosophy" - J.B.S. Haldane "The whole of science consists of data that, at one time or another, were inexplicable." - B. O'Regan "The only solid piece of scientific truth about which I feel totally conficent is that we are profoundly ignorant about nature... It is this sudden confrontation with the depth and scope of ignorance that represents the most significant contribution of twentieth-century science to the human intellect." -Lewis Thomas "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." -M. Planck Science advances funeral by funeral. (Planck?) "Science for me is very close to art. Scientific discovery is an irrational act. It's an intuition which turns out to be reality at the end of it--and I see no difference between a scientist developing a marvellous discovery and an artist making a painting." - C. Rubbia, Nobelist and CERN director "Scientists are not the paragons of rationality, objectivity, openmindedness and humility that many of them might like others to believe." - Marcello Truzzi, CSICOP "If you restrict the journal to publishing only what pleases the referees, you end up publishing what is popular, and while it does make everyone feel more comfortable, you are guaranteed to miss the occasional breakthrough." - A. Dessler, Editor, Geophysical Research Letters, (regarding small-comet bombardment of Earth.) "One could not be a successful scientist without realizing that, in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers and mothers of scientists, a goodly number of scientists are not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid." -- J. D. Watson _The Double Helix_ "When I examined myself and my methods of thought, I came to the conclusion that the gift of fantasy has meant more to me than my talent for absorbing positive knowledge." - A. Einstein "A man with a new idea is a crank until he succeeds." - M. Twain "Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are that good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." - Howard Aiken "Who never walks save where he sees men's tracks makes no discoveries." - J.G. Holland "Physical concepts are the free creations of the human mind and are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external world." Einstein/Infeld in "The Evolution of Physics" 1938 "A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth." - G. Goebbles Never attribute to conspiracy that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Unnamed Law: If it happens, it must be possible. What I don't understand I despise, what I despise I reject. - THE REFEREE'S CREED "Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible." - Frank Zappa http://www.mountainman.com.au/news98_a.htm In science, the burden of proof falls upon the claimant; and the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded. The true skeptic takes an agnostic position, one that says the claim is not proved rather than disproved. He asserts that the claimant has not borne the burden of proof and that science must continue to build its cognitive map of reality without incorporating the extraordinary claim as a new "fact." Since the true skeptic does not assert a claim, he has no burden to prove anything. He just goes on using the established theories of "conventional science" as usual. But if a critic asserts that there is evidence for disproof, that he has a negative hypothesis --saying, for instance, that a seeming psi result was actually due to an artifact--he is making a claim and therefore also has to bear a burden of proof. – Marcello Truzzi,

[SomeDreamer]

I don't need all your fancy quotes to tell you that there's two side of a story (and actually some of those quotes have nothing to do with being skeptic)... this being: Be too open minded and your brain will fall out. Or should I say, be too open minded and it'll do you more harm than good. So what's your point? Obviously we have to start research with something we do not understand and wanna get to know(I mean duh, that's what makes us progress), but all this needs to lead to a conclusive end to be worth anything, and there's many, many claims out there that do not do this. I'm all in for doing all research possible for anything we don't understand, to discover new exciting things.

[sleepingdog]

(and actually some of those quotes have nothing to do with being skeptic): the quotes relate to how you should deal with information and ideas. it's in full context with the thread title. Be too open minded and your brain will fall out. Or should I say, be too open minded and it'll do you more harm than good. i'd like to know where you got this idea from, or how the harm comes about. maybe it's the young and/or impressionable argument, but i hope you weren't aiming for those narrow limits. maybe it's the 'if i entertain crazy ideas, i'll end up crazy', but i think this only happens if you're already crazy. imo tho. i'd love for you to give one or two examples or some further elaborations to help me understand what you mean. ...but all this needs to lead to a conclusive end to be worth anything... i dont think it needs to reach a conclusive end to be worth something. just me. i see worth in the seemingly worthless pretty often. I'm all in for doing all research possible for anything we don't understand, to discover new exciting things. this seems to contradict your position (to me). could you explain this more? *promises to play nice this time around (conditional)*

[SomeDreamer]

this seems to contradict your position (to me). could you explain this more? I can indeed! And I don't really care how you behave... why would I care? It's the internet dammit..! Anyways! i'd like to know where you got this idea from, or how the harm comes about. maybe it's the young and/or impressionable argument, but i hope you weren't aiming for those narrow limits. maybe it's the 'if i entertain crazy ideas, i'll end up crazy', but i think this only happens if you're already crazy. imo tho. i'd love for you to give one or two examples or some further elaborations to help me understand what you mean. Basically what I mean is, and note that this do not apply to every person of course, is that if you are way too open minded and never think critically about any supernatural/extraordinary claim or whatever you wanna call it, then you will eventually do more harm than good to yourself because with time, it'll be easier for you to go further and further out, stretching things more and more without stopping to think twice about it. If you stop thinking critially about anything, then where will it end? As you said yourself, you'd have to be crazy to do that, or will eventually end up crazy. Surely you too will try and see two sides of things when new claims/ideas is being made? Not only the one side and never question it, just going along with it. Do that, and you will eventually lose yourself. i dont think it needs to reach a conclusive end to be worth something. just me. i see worth in the seemingly worthless pretty often. And that's where you and I see things different, which is also why my other statement seemed, to you, like I was contradicting myself. Either that, or you didn't get the actual meaning behind my statement I'll try to clear it up a bit in that case. So basically since I tend to see things from a scientific viewpoint, claims and ideas will eventually have to lead up to a conclusive end to be "worth" something when linked with science. That doesn't mean stuff like OBE's/astral projection, shared dreaming and so forth isn't worth anything, or that it isn't real for that matter. After all we've seen plenty of cases where scientifically minded people can't explain certain things (like the documentary about OBE's with doctors doing surgery on a patient and the patient being able to tell the whole thing in great detail afterwards even though being put to deep sleep). I just meant that from a scientific viewpoint it isn't worth anything without a conclusive end. It can still be real though, that's what science is there for after all, to research and collect data about things we currently do not know/understand. It isn't there to dismiss what we don't understand, that wouldn't have gotten us anywhere after all! ^^ this seems to contradict your position (to me). could you explain this more? So taking my explanation above into this I hope you realise why I weren't contradicting myself. Science is here so we can eventually try and understand what we don't understand, and that's why I am of course all in for doing all research possible for whatever we don't understand. We wouldn't have reached our current modern ways of living if we didn't at one point or another, questioned and researched crazy ideas My position on things like OBE's and shared dreaming comes from the fact that I have never experienced it myself, and that there really isn't that much trustworthy data(again, looking at it from the scientific side) as of now to support the ideas. That doesn't mean I'm dismissing it though, I couldn't do that. It's a difficult subject to try and understand or take positions in as it seems to be about personal experience VS people who have never experienced it, if you know what I mean. And the fact that it's all things that happens while you're asleep(we know how much our minds can trick us) doesn't make it easier at all. So i'd rather just sit tight and see what happens. I would hope things like shared dreaming and OBE's would be true... because it seems awesome I realise this thread isn't about shared dreaming, OBE's and so forth, but I needed to pull in some different elements to explain my position and in what way I think when being skeptic.

[spaceexplorer]

Odd, Most of these quotes are pro science and rational thinking. It's a mistake to think that these people are using words like "intuition" as some kind of spiritual meaning. It would seem the worst anyone is saying here is "skepticism is good, but don't let it stop you investigating new ideas" Which is exactly what most people who call themselves skeptics would say. Anyway... I notice you seem to be a fan of Nietzche Deatcell (or at least I see you are quoting him in your sig in you anti skepticism campaign) Ao, I'll add my own little Neitzche Quote: “Great intellects are skeptical” Neitzche As for some more quotes on Skepticism: “Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense” Carl Sagan. "The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. " George Bernard Shaw and most importantly: "The skeptic does not mean him who doubts, but him who investigates or researches, as opposed to him who asserts and thinks that he has found. "

[SomeDreamer]

It would seem the worst anyone is saying here is "skepticism is good, but don't let it stop you investigating new ideas" Which is exactly what most people who call themselves skeptics would say. I like that short explanation of it ^^ Most people seem to be of the understanding that skepticism = close minded Too bad really

[moonshine]

I like that short explanation of it ^^ Most people seem to be of the understanding that skepticism = close minded Too bad really Yeah. Its a lazy accusation simply designed to allow the accuser to retire back to their comfort zone of crystals and dream spirits.

[DeathCell]

Odd, Most of these quotes are pro science and rational thinking. It's a mistake to think that these people are using words like "intuition" as some kind of spiritual meaning. It would seem the worst anyone is saying here is "skepticism is good, but don't let it stop you investigating new ideas" Which is exactly what most people who call themselves skeptics would say. Anyway... I notice you seem to be a fan of Nietzche Deatcell (or at least I see you are quoting him in your sig in you anti skepticism campaign) Ao, I'll add my own little Neitzche Quote: “Great intellects are skeptical” Neitzche As for some more quotes on Skepticism: “Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense” Carl Sagan. "The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. " George Bernard Shaw and most importantly: "The skeptic does not mean him who doubts, but him who investigates or researches, as opposed to him who asserts and thinks that he has found. " I'm not anti skepticism. I'm against what people on this forum call skepticism. Here is how I feel about a lot of the participants of this forum in a nutshell. In science, the burden of proof falls upon the claimant; and the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded. The true skeptic takes an agnostic position, one that says the claim is not proved rather than disproved. He asserts that the claimant has not borne the burden of proof and that science must continue to build its cognitive map of reality without incorporating the extraordinary claim as a new "fact." Since the true skeptic does not assert a claim, he has no burden to prove anything. He just goes on using the established theories of "conventional science" as usual. But if a critic asserts that there is evidence for disproof, that he has a negative hypothesis --saying, for instance, that a seeming psi result was actually due to an artifact--he is making a claim and therefore also has to bear a burden of proof.– Marcello Truzzi, People get so anti-believer, that it turns not into skepticism but claiming to understand what caused it..(such as your own delusional claims.)

[spaceexplorer]

I'm not anti skepticism. I'm against what people on this forum call skepticism. Here is how I feel about a lot of the participants of this forum in a nutshell. People get so anti-believer, that it turns not into skepticism but claiming to understand what caused it..(such as your own delusional claims.) I can see where you are coming from. Maybe we just all need to be clear when we say things, Belivers would do well to use the word Unexplained more often. Or say something like "I had this experience I cannot explain... but it seems similar to what people call.....Astral travel/ghosts/telepathy" Skeptics would do well to prefix what they say with "one possible way this could happen is..." Both sides can be equally to extreme on occasions. Unexplained events are just that, Unexplained. If we choose to try and explain events that don't have enough information, on either side, what we are doing is speculating and talking about our own opinions.

[sleepingdog]

thanks for taking so much time in explaining this SomeDreamer. SomeDreamer I can indeed! And I don't really care how you behave... why would I care? It's the internet dammit..! Anyways! i care. for me the BD forum is a place to discuss stuff that's mostly unproven and normally dismissed. if you are not interested in the thread then you shouldn't post. put downs are no good, it's fun i know, for me too, but it gets old. i want to talk and explore this stuff, not hear about how stupid or childish it is (i can decide that for myself). that's not to say there aren't good discussions here on BD (or that you are guilty of any of this) but there's a good amount of pointless and degenerative stuff. DC seems to get the brunt of this, and that's what mostly attracts my responses (sorry DC). when people show consideration the discussion flows and opinions are clarified. those threads i just i like to watch and learn. SomeDreamer ...because with time, it'll be easier for you to go further and further out, stretching things more and more without stopping to think twice about it. the weird thing is that i mostly agree with what you said. but where you say that the example is of someone being too open minded, i instead say it's being closed minded. yet it's the same thing, and that's why i don't like the 'your brain will fall out' stuff. i actually see no harm or danger whatsoever. it's all good for me. ...But if a critic asserts that there is evidence for disproof, that he has a negative hypothesis --saying, for instance, that a seeming psi result was actually due to an artifact--he is making a claim and therefore also has to bear a burden of proof.– Marcello Truzzi, good stuff. that aside, being a skeptic means that you are already considering a claim, topic, idea, etc. the common definitions of skepticism are great. this is the best form of open mindedness. in order to be a skeptic you have to consider the damn thing. this is very different from the more common dismissive stance that a lot of people here on BD seem to take, and who then claim it as some form of skepticism. makes you wonder why they are here instead of 'senseless banter' or some other sub-forum. SomeDreamer I just meant that from a scientific viewpoint it isn't worth anything without a conclusive end. “Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense” Carl Sagan. this is what i mean by worth from the seemingly worthless. you will get something out of it even if you didn't reach a conclusion, like insight. moonshine Its a lazy accusation simply designed to allow the accuser to retire back to their comfort zone of crystals and dream spirits. this is what i mean by being dismissive. it's usually this stuff that i aim for, because it's just knocking someone down with no real substance, and it's so easy to knock down itself. i could do it all day long (and i do irl), but it gets old when you are trying to have a discussion (and this forum is better than rl for one). but if you don't care, then i don't care either. i'll tare it up just for kicks.

[Scatterbrain]

Marcello Truzzi also said: "And when such claims are extraordinary, that is, revolutionary in their implications for established scientific generalizations already accumulated and verified, we must demand extraordinary proof." /thread

[sleepingdog]

good scatterbrain. i hope you bring this up when you think something has not been proven (edit) and verified (like psychics maybe?). be sure to show accumulated verifications tho, so we all know. if something is not disproven, you are forced to accept the possibility, or risk being called closed minded on the issue at hand. im not attempting to prove it to you (tho i know), im just looking for a good explanation within any spectrum you know or see yourself.

[Arutad]

for me the BD forum is a place to discuss stuff that's mostly unproven and normally dismissed. if you are not interested in the thread then you shouldn't post. BD is open to skeptics now, they aren't prohibited to post here. But there's a new Deep Dreaming forum that fits your description, why not post there without interference? Anyway, I think you're searching in a wrong place. Granted I haven't been at this forum for a very long time and haven't checked all the treads, but I haven't seen any serious discussion of the type you want. There's more chances to have it in a purely spiritual forum. Most people I like to talk to were found in such forums. Hoping to see people of the type you like in one particular forum or one particular thread is fruitless most of the time, the world doesn't bend to our wishes like that.

[Scatterbrain]

good scatterbrain. i hope you bring this up when you think something has already been disproven and verified (like psychics maybe?). be sure to show accumulated verifications tho, so we all know. otherwise you are forced to accept the possibility, or risk being called closed minded on the issue at hand. im not attempting to prove it to you (tho i know), im just looking for a good explanation within any spectrum you know or see yourself. Lol, what? If there's nothing to support it, there's nothing to disprove, there's nothing extraordinary in saying that (for example) ESP probably doesn't exist. Contrariwise, saying that ESP is real is quite the claim, and as everyone knows, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

[sleepingdog]

Lol, what? If there's nothing to support it, there's nothing to disprove, there's nothing extraordinary in saying that (for example) ESP probably doesn't exist. Contrariwise, saying that ESP is real is quite the claim, and as everyone knows, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". yea, i was pretty confused too when i read it again. quick change of words; where i said that it's used to 'disprove' instead it's used to show how something is 'not proven'. i fixed it there. i hope i've cleared that part up, or maybe i made it worse. but certainly, no one here is going to prove anything to you. no one here is trying to shake the foundations of science and rebuilt reality for you. also, i can make the claim that ESP is real, as i've experienced it. am i allowed to say that without being pelted with demands of evidence that i can't provide? can you dismiss it with your current standards? would it surprise you to know that i've been forced to dismiss those standards because they don't allow for my experiences? how do i stear my ship now? Arutad. thanks for the info. i was never looking for anything or anyone in particular. not even sure what im doing really. im just a scavenger of thought wasting some time. also, i think i saw that DD thing, but im not really keen to the idea. maybe ill try it tho. im also glad BD is open to skeptics (never knew people where being kept out). im open to any discussion from anyone willing to discuss, and i hope the discussion stays open, always.

[Scatterbrain]

would it surprise you to know that i've been forced to dismiss those standards because they don't allow for my experiences? Yes, it would. Because you discovered a specific unproven concept to be true you've discarded scepticism and now accept every other extraordinary claim without evidence? It's a rather foolish attitude.

[sleepingdog]

rather than leading me to accept every other extraordinary claim, it made me reject nearly all the ordinary ones. i am a skeptic now, about everything. fully willing to accept all kinds of claims as possibilities, but not as truth, because the old rules have been broken (for me). foolish for sure. it would have been smarter to remain on the ground, sure and trusting, with never a doubt. i hope it's a good ride. a checklist for being a skeptic (from wikipedia); √(a) an attitude of doubt or a disposition to incredulity either in general or toward a particular object; √(b) the doctrine that true knowledge or knowledge in a particular area is uncertain; or √(c) the method of suspended judgment, systematic doubt, or criticism that is characteristic of skeptics (Merriam–Webster). in philosophy; √(a) an inquiry, √(b) a method of obtaining knowledge through systematic doubt and continual testing, √(c) the arbitrariness, relativity, or subjectivity of moral values, √(d) the limitations of knowledge, √(e) a method of intellectual caution and suspended judgment. i think i can call myself a skeptic now.

[Scatterbrain]

rather than leading me to accept every other extraordinary claim, it made me reject nearly all the ordinary ones. i am a skeptic now, about everything. fully willing to accept all kinds of claims as possibilities, but not as truth, because the old rules have been broken (for me). foolish for sure. it would have been smarter to remain on the ground, sure and trusting, with never a doubt. i hope it's a good ride. Then you've reached a state where it's impossible to attain and build upon attained knowledge. Congratulations?

[DeathCell]

It's not so much about skepticism for these people as it's about labeling people.

[sleepingdog]

Then you've reached a state where it's impossible to attain and build upon attained knowledge. Congratulations? not really. it's just that you have to accept that these things you're building may come crashing down at any moment. Einstein was a demolitionist, did you know that? hell, he still is. maybe someday, someone will knock his stuff down too. DC; i get that feeling too. i think this one went well tho, for the most part. im really just totally confused about this whole BD forum. strange rules and raining mods and sudden rule changes. im still pretty confident that you can have a good discussion here tho. ill keep trying until something changes my mind. if im wrong, i hope i find out soon.

[Scatterbrain]

not really. it's just that you have to accept that these things you're building may come crashing down at any moment. Einstein was a demolitionist, did you know that? hell, he still is. maybe someday, someone will knock his stuff down too. Einstein didn't demolish anything, newtonian physics didn't go out the window.

[Xetrov]

Einstein didn't demolish anything, newtonian physics didn't go out the window. Actually, for physics concerning near-light velocities, it did go out of the window.

[Scatterbrain]

Actually, for physics concerning near-light velocities, it did go out of the window. .

[Xetrov]

. That was rather pointless ...

[Scatterbrain]

Yes, the real point was in the quote. And here: .