Re: Skeptics..... -- Unofficial Chris Cornell Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4], 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 22:55:51 03/16/06 Thu
Author: amadaun
Subject: Re: Skeptics.....
In reply to: amadaun 's message, "Skeptics....." on 19:05:23 03/15/06 Wed

"Read not to contradict and confute, nor to believe and take for granted, but to weigh and consider."

Sir Francis Bacon

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Re: Skeptics..... -- 23, 09:26:09 03/17/06 Fri [1]

"Read not to contradict and confute, nor to believe and take for granted, but to weigh and consider."

Is that meant as some sort of a lesson to me or something?

skep�tic also scep�tic

1. One who instinctively or habitually doubts, questions, or disagrees with assertions or generally accepted conclusions.
2. One inclined to skepticism in religious matters.

Gallileo was a skeptic. He doubted the generally accepted conclusion that the sun revolved around the earth. The Wright Brothers were skeptics who doubted the generally accepted conclusion that man couldn't fly. Charles Darwin was a skeptic who doubted the generally accepted conclusion that god formed adam and eve out of clay and created all the animals in one day. Thomas Edision was a skeptic who doubted the generally accepted conclusion that light could only be created by gas or oil lamps.

We're obviously both imparting our own biases on who we consider the skeptics in each of these scenarios. As you can see, my perspective doesn't contradict the definition any more than yours. Your are just predisposed, for whatever reason, into thinking of skepticism as a "bad" thing and therefore the heroes in your version of these stories WEREN'T skeptics. From my perspective, they WERE.

It's my opinion that skepticism is the fuel that motivates these great thinkers into over-turning the generally accepted conclusions of their day. It's your opinion that they provide the brakes that slow the same progress that I think they fuel.

Maybe they truth lies somewhere in between, or maybe there are two different, distinct types of skepticism, "good" and "bad" skepticism. Or maybe they are of the same type, but sometimes the skeptic is right, and sometimes they are wrong.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]