Thursday, July 7, 2011

Policing The Psuedoskeptics

In an effort to counterbalance the mindless naysaying coming from the likes of CSI (formerly CSICOP) and James Randi, an equally acronymic entity has arisen.  From

"Furthermore, oddly enough, [psuedoskeptics] treat Science as if it were some kind of authoritarian "entity" that takes positions and views on issues (their own of course), when it is in fact merely a tool and method of inquiry based on logical principles. In reality, science does not take positions or hold dogmatic beliefs on paranormal or conspiratorial subjects. People take positions, not Science, which holds no more views than my computer does. Science is not a living entity. These pseudoskeptics are projecting their own views and Atheistic philosophy into Science, which they hold as the ultimate authority, aka Scientism. (Oh well, I guess pseudoskeptics need something to worship too)"


Ken Summers said...

I like the idea of taking a critical look at skepticism as much as I enjoy being unbiased on claims of the paranormal. Too often, both sides have an "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude. I think that's been the problem with so many books on skepticism I've read... that and pigeonholing people into absurd categories of gullible fools who believe anything you tell them.

I see science as trying to find answers to questions, no matter what those answers are. Most of us know that a huge number of paranormal claims have completely logical explanations. It's the other chunk which we can't quite explain yet that interests me and should be the primary focus when it comes to research and investigation.

Cullan Hudson said...

You're right: the psuedoskeptic (aka denouncer or naysayer) tends to look at only those cases that can be easily debunked to support their conclusions. And a true believer is equally guilty of embracing the most irrelevent absurdity as proof of his own pet theories. It's what I must imagine an argument between warring Bill O'Reilly's must be like.