scott@spectra.COM (Tim Scott) (06/22/89)
Newsgroups: sci.misc,sci.philospophy.meta Subject: Comments on "Skeptical" Group Proposals (2) Expires: References: Sender: t.scott@spectra.com Reply-To: scott@spectra.UUCP () Followup-To: Angry of Mayfair Distribution: world Organization: Spectragraphics, Corp., San Diego, CA Keywords: skeptic belief science philosophy (Reply to Angry of Mayfair -- excerpts of that person's post below) Hold on there amigo, take a cold shower. The misunderstanding is that what *YOU* regard as the definition of skepticism (sancitioned by better dictionaries anywhere) is sadly not that commonly understood. I refer you to any copy of The Skeptical Enquirer or the collected para-bashing works of Martin Gardner. If these works are "neutral" then perhaps I need a new dictionary. >Belief and disbelief are NOTHING to do with enquiry, so >do us all a favour and LEAVE IT OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is again very idealistic (see Polanyi). Belief and disbelief have EVERYTHING to do with inquiry. The history of science bears this out as has been clearly shown by Thomas Kuhn. The questions: what shall be studied, and how shall it be studied, are dictated rigidly by either the dominant paradigm or the individual's personal belief structure. I'm afraid your view of the "purity of scientific inquiry," if I may guess at your personal belief structure, is a wishful phantasm. Judging by actions rather than idealism, the self-styled "skeptics'" sole charter appears to be synonymous with "debunking;" i.e., saving the world from the superstitions of astrology, parapsychology, and non-materialistic philosophies (sentence ending with sarcasm). And now for a couple of personal observations. As I pointed out in another posting (the disposition of which I have no idea) I detect non-subtle levels of prejudice and hostility in the would-be "skeptics." The original posting contained something about "alarmed" and "New Ageism" I believe. The present posting ("Angry of Mayfair") is full of EXCLAMATION POINTS AND CAPITAL LETTERS. I'm afraid I just don't get a sense of the "neutral", "scientific", or "dispassionate." The newage group sounds somewhat interesting for balance, but I can't justify asking for it on merely that basis. Please, flaming skeptics and other Closet Cartesians: start with _The Structure of Scientific Revolutions_ by T. S. Kuhn, and _The Tacit Dimension_ by Michael Polanyi. Leave philosophy to the professionals: don't try this at home. Sorry for the somewhat inchoate nature of this, but there is no room to develop these ideas here. And most of you could probably care less anyhow --- end of t.scott comments --- [Some excerpts of posting replied to:] >From: rant@moncam.co.uk (Angry of Mayfair) >Newsgroups: news.groups,news.misc,sci.misc,talk.religion.newage,talk.philosophy.misc Subject: Re: *** CALL FOR DISCUSSION *** Creation of newsgroup sci.skeptic Summary: SKEPSIS != [DIS]BELIEF. Keywords: LET'S GET IT RIGHT FIRST TIME, EH?????? Message-ID: <207@marvin.moncam.co.uk> Date: 20 Jun 89 12:02:55 GMT Organization: Monotype ADG, Cambridge, UK Lines: 27 Xref: spectra news.groups:3993 news.misc:1279 sci.misc:834 > [inclusion of part of previous article] > those of you who defend the null hypothesis can't really object to > those who are vehemently skeptic about skepticism. It's getting a bit boring, seeing the same old carp written about skepsis, over and over again. At worst, bashing should be incidental; the argument should simply be given a different direction, with **** NO **** judgement for or against an idea. That is the purpose of skepsis - enquiry. I know we're only human, but do you think we could get this one right FROM THE START????? We've already had one complete cockup going in the direction of BELIEF with mail.skeptics [some stuff omitted] BTW, skepsis is NOT inherently negative; it is NEUTRAL, and it would NOT be fine if it were negative. There are ALWAYS three aspects of `polarity' - positive, negative and neutral. Belief and disbelief are NOTHING to do with enquiry, so do us all a favour and LEAVE IT OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [end of excerpt]