What is Skepticism, a primer for understanding reality
What does it mean to be skeptical?
What does it mean to cast doubt on something you feel is not right, despite popular consensus?
What does one refer to when judging whether or not something is real?
The following is a crash course on common claims that have failed under proper scientific scrutiny.
Homeopathy
Reiki
Magnetic Healing
Applied Kinesiology
Iridology
Vertebral Subluxations (meaning having your back cracked by a Chiropractor)
Acupuncture
Chi
(Pretty much every form of alternative medicine)
Childhood Vaccinations Causing Autism
The plausibility and existence of supernatural entities
(such as ghosts, poltergeists, angels, and gods. this includes any and all gods) creationism/intelligent design, miracles and the power of prayer
As well as the existence of:
ESP/telekinesis
Psychic Powers
Telepathy
Thus the Credibility of Parapsychology
Any form of:
Spoon Bending
Tarot Card Reading
Palm Reading
Fortune Telling
Astrology
Clairvoyance
Dream Premonitions
Topics in crypto-zoology:
Bigfoot
The Loch Ness Monster
Chupacabra
Mothman
Rod Insects
Yetti
Unicorns
Fairys etc
Alien Visitations
UFOs
Crop Circles
Repressed Memories
Dowsing
Conspiracy Theories and the list goes on
No one wants to be called gullible.
When all else fails you must ask yourself , “how likely is the claim”. “who is informing me of this claim and is their a chance they could be biased towards it”. “what natural laws or scientific theories does the claim bend or completely defy in order to be possible?”. “has real scientific evidence been presented, or does it rely on testimonial evidence, or any subjective evidence”?
consider this a primer for a greater understanding of reality. It might be difficult at first to look skeptically at a commonly accepted claim or belief system, but you owe it to yourself to find the truth as it is based in reality. The scientific method is our legacy, it is a testament to the need to really know why and to the many great thinkers who came before us and cleared a path through the think entanglement of superstitions and pseudo-science. It’s in our nature to as “Why” and we developed the discipline of skepticism to make sure our answers are based in reality. Because if our answers aren’t based in reality, then they are just bullshit.
Duration : 0:9:22
[youtube wtCsstLXL9M]
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
but there we go …
but there we go again-
i am asking for 1 shred of real evidence, all you have to offer is anecdotal / personal experience.
if there is any truth to that stuff it will manifest itself when tested. which it never does.
your baby analogy and the mysterious court cases without evidence based solely on the memory of some party aren’t proof either.
let me ask you this-
if testimonial evidence is good enough for you, how can you tell if they are lying, misguided or delusional based on their word?
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
“some court cases …
“some court cases rest on subjective retelling of events from memory”
like what?
also, when you mention “experiencing ESP” you are talking about subjective personal experiences. how would you separate coincidence from genuine ESP? would you remember the misses and not just the hits?
personal testimony is the very worst type of evidence. it doesn’t hold any water. if you feel you have ESP then allow proper scientific testing to prove if it’s true, or if you are fooling yourself.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
that only applies …
that only applies if there were witnesses, evidence, probable cause, but some court cases rest on subjective retelling of events from memory. that puts those court cases also at the same level as leprechaun sightings. I am not talking about choosing to believe in ESP, but rather experiencing it. If you had experienced ESP yourself, how would you convince a skeptic it was real?
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
nope.
a courtcase …
nope.
a courtcase can not rely on subjective retelling alone. you need evidence of a crime, you need motive, probable cause, etc. eye witness testimony is 1 part of it and everyone knows eye witness testimony is problematic.
with ESP there is nothing outside of some anecdotal evidence. which puts it at the same level as leprechaun sightings.
if (you) choose to believe in ESP you are doing so with no good reason. ESP contradicts many known facts, so i would need a very good reason to believe it
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
So the baby is …
So the baby is objective evidence something happened, it was born. But there never will be proof other than its existence. if someone receives ESP or a ‘premonition’ and they respond to that and it was correct they have evidence forever that the ESP was correct. but it will always be subjective, but in many venues that type of evidence counts. Millions of people have experienced these types of phenomenon, and they have an explanation, we just do now know the mechanism yet. but will someday.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
you are correct, my …
you are correct, my wording did make the assumption ESP was true. My point is not changed however and I don’t think you have ruined the analogy entirely. There is evidence of ESP but it is subjective, so the issue comes down to whether or not to believe subjective reports. We believe many subjective reports, if you were in court relying on someone’s memory of an event you have to decide if their subjective report is valid.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
since you assume …
since you assume esp has at some time been measured (which it hasn’t it, it is indistinguishable from fairy tale) your analogy about the baby obviously isn’t comparable, since we know baby’s exist and they only exist because of known biological effects. the baby itself is evidence of the birth, it’s indistinguishable.
there is zero evidence from esp. so as you can see, the analogy doesn’t make sense. not even a little.
can you see how you assumed esp was true as is evident in your analogy?
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
i’m trying to help …
i’m trying to help you see the assumptions you are making in your arguments
in this case you said “Just because ESP is not often measured one can not make the assumption it can be dismissed” – key word (often) you are assuming esp has been measured in the first place. this is crucial for you to understand, it has never been measured, NEVER, ZERO, never ever even came close. every single claim for esp has always failed. so what do you think? can we dismiss it yet?
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
Anecdotal evidence …
Anecdotal evidence is usually the beginning of the scientific process. Just because ESP is not often measured one can not make the assumption it can be dismissed. So do you just dismiss anything you have not evidence for? So perhaps an orphan who just appears on a doorstep actually was never really born? After all, there is no evidence of their birth.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
yea i love reading …
yea i love reading about designed sham needles for testing acupuncture.
acupuncture says the following:
insertion of needles into very specific points to cause specific results.
when shams are done needles are not inserted and they are not targeting any specific point-
the telling thing here is that it still achieves an effect in some test subjects who claim some sort of pain relief or what have you. see it doesn’t prove acu- it proves placebo & subjectivity.
acu people think it proves acu!
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
personifying a …
personifying a concept- that’s great! good point.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
Actually we do know …
Actually we do know. Its been demonstrated how to create crop circles overnight. So, no they are quite probable…they just are terrestrial in origin. =)
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
How do you temper …
How do you temper science with reason and “humanity”? What does that mean? You make observations that people generally agree on but then try to tie them to inappropriate conclusions.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
religion does in …
religion does in fact have a well described survival theory in darwinian evolution, but it doesnt make any point in supporting it’s veracity. We do not need to believe in unproven ideas to be inventive or creative. You seem to be making statements containing loose associations and although sounds articulate, it doesnt make coherent sense. humans are pattern seekers. NONE of what your post said makes an argument for truth.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
no it is not …
no it is not arrogance. It is not up to science to disprove every crackpot idea out there. IE; is there a floating teapot orbiting the sun? We cant prove it isnt, but that doesnt mean the idea is valid. Dont go trying to explain the fundamentals of science to scientists my friend. We already know what we are talking about. Science is not arrogant. You are personifying a concept when you say this. People can be, but science cannot be…its designed to be UNbiased.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
You cannot do …
You cannot do double blinded control trials for acupuncture. Not possible…when you find a way please let me know. So, I can already tell that the most respected study design in science will not be in any of those 14, 829 studies.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
what can be …
what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. The onus is on ESP supporters to prove it. Im afraid anecdotal evidence is the lowest form of evidence in science (next to appeal to authority).
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
“to insist that …
“to insist that humans believe nothing that they can not prove would create a world of hopelessness”
humans need to believe in fairies or else they will be hopeless is basically what you are saying. if humans can’t believe in things that are scientifically untrue they will sink into depression? that’s a bit presumptuous and a bit pathetic don’t you think?
religion isn’t in our genes, fear is and an innate need to know why. when we didn’t have an answer we invented religion and alt medicine
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
you said it again ” …
you said it again “other paranormal claims are based on phenomenon are real and will eventually be measurable, once science catches up.”
how do YOU know they are real? and what do you mean by catching up? by what means can you say it is real but science can’t? i don’t understand that. almost as if you just decided to believe it, and since science doesn’t just pick and choose what it want’s to be true, you are waiting for a testing method that could some day prove what you believed…
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
and belief in the …
and belief in the paranormal is perhaps one of the ways that nature communes with humans. dreams, visions, intuitions, spiritual quests, these may reflect the philosophy of the time, but there appears to be subtle consistencies across all cultures and times, an evolving ethic that guides humans slowly forward. science is just the latest belief system. and science has a lot to offer, as long as it is tempered with reason and humanity. and a realistic understanding of its limits.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
to insist that …
to insist that humans believe nothing that they can not prove would create a world of hopelessness. humans are designed to believe things, and to hope for things they can’t yet see. without that we could not invent, design, imagine, and discover new things. it is ironic that if you follow this logic religion itself must have an evolutionary survival advantage, and in fact it does. evolution would create religion if none existed. it is in our genes.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
the most difficult …
the most difficult to elicit under controlled experimental conditions and therefore hard to measure. therefore you see these spotty experimental results, such as with acupuncture, ESP, etc. To say that there is no real experimental evidence is simply false. there is evidence, but it is very weak at this point.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
my point is that …
my point is that while some paranormal claims ARE probably bogus, other paranormal claims are based on phenomenon are real and will eventually be measurable, once science catches up. paranormal is not magic, it is simply the threshold of what we don’t know yet. all real paranormal phenomenon work through some type of natural means that we simply do not understand. there are many powers in the universe that we have not yet discovered scientifically. and those that work through humans are
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
that’s not what I …
that’s not what I meant, not from the philosophy of the time, but rather from philosophy itself. Look at the history of the scientific method. it comes from philosophy and reflects a philosophy of empiricism, which does have great value, but only within a narrow framework of what is measurable. scientists regularly make the error of over-generalization. and meta analysis weeds out studies based on many factors, including methodological congruence. sometimes very good studies get weeded out.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:36 am
if anyone is making …
if anyone is making a claim about the nature of something in reality, it MUST be scientifically tested.
to say that science can’t prove it yet, or that science is a slave to philosophy is just a way to push a philosophy based view of reality. science is the best tool we have at testing reality. if you can’t prove your claim, your claim fails. you can’t blame science, or the nature of reality for that.