• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Have we lost the war over the meaning of "skeptic"?

Have we lost the war on the word "skeptic"?

  • Yes, we've lost, people think it means a global warming denier or science denier.

    Votes: 7 77.8%

  • No, we've won, people know what we mean.

    Votes: 2 22.2%
  • Total voters
    9
arthwollipot said:
But skepticism is about more than just debunking. Sure, debunking woo is fun and it can be important, but skepticism is a philosophy, a state of mind, a practice, and an approach to knowledge. Skepticism is epistemology and metacognition, knowing how to find out what is true and what should be debunked.

Yes, the word does a lot of heavy lifting. I think it's still useful, even if it is not a conversation for every occasion.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's useful in the right context, but the general context has been hijacked.
 
(c) none of the above.

Not a fan of the term "skeptic" myself, but if I recall it pretty handily one the membership vote when JREF became no more. Still haven't come up with something better, though I like rationalia!

How about a whole new word .... Reasonality
 
I think it's true, as Orphia suggests, that the term has unfortunately been hijacked. George Santayana defined skepticism as "the chastity of the intellect," which seems a good way to put it, but nowadays it's come to mean more denial than doubt, replacing mindless acceptance with mindless refusal.

Icerat's "reasonality" reminds me of a little tiff C.S. Peirce had with his colleague William James. Peirce had coined the term "pragmatism," but was displeased when James's expansion of the term became its accepted meaning, so for himself he coined the term "pragmaticism," stating that anyone who comes up with a new idea should give it an ugly name to protect it from hijacking.
 
Reasonality has the advantage of clumsiness, especially for its practitioners, who would become, I suppose, reasonalitists, but those come dangerously close to reasonelitists, a corruption whose damage might be hard to repair, and we'll be cast down among the social justice warriors and the woke, the do-gooders and the virtue signallers, the very name discrediting opinions in advance.
 
I think the impact of the incorrect usage of the word "skeptic" is overexaggerated. Most people don't even think about the word. I've never been accused of being a climate change denier when I describe myself as a skeptic.
 
arthwollipot said:
I think the impact of the incorrect usage of the word "skeptic" is overexaggerated. Most people don't even think about the word. I've never been accused of being a climate change denier when I describe myself as a skeptic.
Click to expand...
But do they give you funny looks?
 
Around these here parts, they seem to think skeptic loosely means "universal contrarian who will smirk condescendingly at you"
 
Orphia Nay said:
But do they give you funny looks?
Click to expand...
Not that I've noticed.
Thermal said:
Around these here parts, they seem to think skeptic loosely means "universal contrarian who will smirk condescendingly at you"
Click to expand...
This is the problem, not the word. There is a certain amount of arrogance in skepticism, because we care about the truth and they do not. We can tell people that they're wrong about something, because we have the tools to sort out the true from the false. I think a lot of skeptics forget that skepticism also requires humility, and that's what gives skeptics a bad reputation. Not the word itself.
 
It might help if a description/definition of scepticsm (i.e. scientific scepticism) was added to the intro blurb on the ISF home page. That way, people would know what to expect in a sceptics' forum, that it's about following the evidence, not automatically disbelieving in something, and the definition might also pique the interest of potential new members.
 
Cosmic Yak said:
It might help if a description/definition of scepticsm (i.e. scientific scepticism) was added to the intro blurb on the ISF home page. That way, people would know what to expect in a sceptics' forum, that it's about following the evidence, not automatically disbelieving in something, and the definition might also pique the interest of potential new members.
Click to expand...
Working on this, and a few other articles.
 
arthwollipot said:
Not that I've noticed.

This is the problem, not the word. There is a certain amount of arrogance in skepticism, because we care about the truth and they do not. We can tell people that they're wrong about something, because we have the tools to sort out the true from the false. I think a lot of skeptics forget that skepticism also requires humility, and that's what gives skeptics a bad reputation. Not the word itself.
Click to expand...
It's a very short hop.for someone who doesn't understand what skepticism actually *is* to conflate *a skeptic* as meaning *one of those pricks*. So yeah, it literally becomes the word. If that doesn't get challenged, it will become the *literal* meaning of the word, rather than an association with its wearer.
 
Orphia Nay said:
Reasonality... not bad!

It would certainly get rid of the dead weight of the word "skeptic".
Click to expand...

Reasonality (noun): The quality or state of being reasonable and grounded in reality; the ability to think, act, and make decisions based on logical reasoning, practical considerations, and critical thinking.
  • Example: "Her reasonality in handling complex situations made her an invaluable team leader."
Reasonal (adjective): Pertaining to or characterized by reasonality.
  • Example: "Her reasonal approach to problem-solving impressed everyone."
Reasonally (adverb): In a manner that exhibits reasonality.
  • Example: "He reasonally assessed the situation before making a decision."
Reasonalist (noun): A person who practices or advocates for reasonality. (note: there is an existing word "Reasonist")
  • Example: "As a reasonalist, she always seeks logical and practical solutions."
Reasonalize (verb): To make something reasonable or grounded in reality.
  • Example: "He tried to reasonalize the complex theory for the audience."
 
arthwollipot said:
Not that I've noticed.

This is the problem, not the word. There is a certain amount of arrogance in skepticism, because we care about the truth and they do not. We can tell people that they're wrong about something, because we have the tools to sort out the true from the false. I think a lot of skeptics forget that skepticism also requires humility, and that's what gives skeptics a bad reputation. Not the word itself.
Click to expand...
I suspect most folks care about the "truth" but disagree on what tools you need to get there. Aside from that, the humility thing a big factor. INHO, you can't really be a skeptic without some intellectual humility, a lot of it actually. Seems like lots of self-described skeptics forget that or don't even think it's true. I certainly forget on occasion.
 
icerat said:
Reasonality (noun): The quality or state of being reasonable and grounded in reality; the ability to think, act, and make decisions based on logical reasoning, practical considerations, and critical thinking.
  • Example: "Her reasonality in handling complex situations made her an invaluable team leader."
Reasonal (adjective): Pertaining to or characterized by reasonality.
  • Example: "Her reasonal approach to problem-solving impressed everyone."
Reasonally (adverb): In a manner that exhibits reasonality.
  • Example: "He reasonally assessed the situation before making a decision."
Reasonalist (noun): A person who practices or advocates for reasonality. (note: there is an existing word "Reasonist")
  • Example: "As a reasonalist, she always seeks logical and practical solutions."
Reasonalize (verb): To make something reasonable or grounded in reality.
  • Example: "He tried to reasonalize the complex theory for the audience."
Click to expand...

We already have the word 'rational' and 'rationalist' to describe the issue of reasonableness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom