tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) (07/24/85)
Several people have taken issue with my statements about skepticism, journalism, and atheism. With all due respect, I feel that these objections stem from a lack of comprehension of skepticism. Atheism is a valid skeptical position, not a dogmatic one. Or perhaps I should say that it can be: certainly there are dogmatic atheists around. A true skeptic is skeptical even about his or her own beliefs. She or he never places a 100% certainty on anything, and does not believe in absolute truth or falsehood. To say "There is no God" for a true skeptic is equivalent to saying "I think there is probably no God." You see, a skeptical position demands that ALL statements be treated as false until they are proven to be true; and even then, only a provisional judgment of truth is rendered. This says nothing about the statement's absolute truth or falsehood, poorly-defined concepts that should be treated with skepticism in any case. In short, anyone who says either "There certainly is no God" or "There certainly is a God" is NOT, NOT, NOT a skeptic. On the other hand, someone who says "There is no God" and understands that this is simply a provisional judgment based on possibly inadequate information, like every other human judgment, IS a skeptic. Agnosticism is redundant for a true skeptic. If it isn't clear now why this is, then it never will be. -=- Tim Maroney, Carnegie-Mellon University, Networking ARPA: Tim.Maroney@CMU-CS-K uucp: seismo!cmu-cs-k!tim CompuServe: 74176,1360 audio: shout "Hey, Tim!"