There is a definitional problem with the word “Skepticism” that confuses some people.
The idea that skepticism merely entails constant incredulity-with no process by which to assess truth claims- will render the very definition of skepticism an impossible heuristic.
Recently, Jeremy got into an online exchange (and by “exchange”, I mean “drive-by-followed-by-tone-trolling”) with a commenter called “badrescher” on his post Let’s Meet In The Alley: Skeptics vs. Atheists. Let’s look at Skepticism according to Badrescher:
I share Jeff Wagg’s concerns and care little about discussing religion. That said, I am tenacious about secularism and the separation of church and state. It doesn’t work, though, without wide-spread acceptance that we do not all share the same religious (or non-religious) views. Atheists are not exempt from this; we need to accept that others have come to different conclusions.
I totally get what you are saying! I went to ComicCon last year, and there was this group of guys (I bet you guessed they were guys) who were all dressed up as Klingons. This totally pissed me off. Star Trek is totally different from comic books. Sure, some people who like comic books also like sci-fi television programs, but what about the hipster indie comic junkies who totally fancy themselves too cool for Nerd culture? Plus, Trekkies totally have their own Cons already,why can’t they just segregate and stick to COMICS?
But I wanted to comment on something that I noticed that seems to be a pervasive view in this community.
ORLY? Please, by all means, tell me what all my friends are thinking….. Continue reading “Why Skepticism means more than incredulity- A response to an unreasonable “skeptic””