Jump to content

Scientific skepticism: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 18: Line 18:
== Characteristics ==
== Characteristics ==


Scientific skeptics attempt to evaluate [[hypothesis|claim]]s based on verifiability and [[falsifiability]] and discourage accepting claims on [[faith]] or [[anecdotal evidence]]. Skeptics often focus their criticism on claims they consider to be implausible, dubious or clearly contradictory to generally accepted [[science]]. This distinguishes scientific skeptics from professional scientists who often{{Weasel-inline|date=October 2009}} concentrate on verifying or falsifying [[hypotheses]] created by those within their particular field.{{Citation needed|date=October 2009}} Scientific skeptics do not assert that unusual claims should be automatically rejected out of hand on ''[[A priori and a posteriori (philosophy)|a priori]]'' grounds - rather they argue that claims of paranormal or anomalous phenomena should be critically examined and that such claims would require extraordinary evidence in their favor before they could be accepted as having validity.
Scientific skeptics attempt to evaluate [[hypothesis|claim]]s based on verifiability and [[falsifiability]] and discourage accepting claims on [[faith]] or [[anecdotal evidence]]. Skeptics often focus their criticism on claims they consider to be implausible, dubious or clearly contradictory to generally accepted [[science]]. Scientific skeptics do not assert that unusual claims should be automatically rejected out of hand on ''[[A priori and a posteriori (philosophy)|a priori]]'' grounds - rather they argue that claims of paranormal or anomalous phenomena should be critically examined and that such claims would require extraordinary evidence in their favor before they could be accepted as having validity.


Popular targets of criticism among skeptics include [[psychics]], [[parapsychology]], [[dowsing]], [[astrology]], [[creationism]], [[homeopathy]], [[tarot reading]], [[alien abduction]]s, and [[extra-sensory perception|ESP]], which are either [[pseudoscience]]s or unsupported by existing evidence.<ref>{{cite web
Popular targets of criticism among skeptics include [[psychics]], [[parapsychology]], [[dowsing]], [[astrology]], [[creationism]], [[homeopathy]], [[tarot reading]], [[alien abduction]]s, and [[extra-sensory perception|ESP]], which are either [[pseudoscience]]s or unsupported by existing evidence.<ref>{{cite web

Revision as of 13:21, 11 January 2010

For a general discussion of skepticism, see Skepticism.
Part of a series on
Science
Galileo demonstrating his telescope to the Doge of Venice.
General
Branches
In society

Scientific skepticism or rational skepticism (also spelled scepticism), sometimes referred to as skeptical inquiry, is a practical, epistemological position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking empirical evidence. In practice, the term is most commonly applied to the examination of claims and theories which appear to be beyond mainstream science, rather than to the routine discussions and challenges among scientists. Scientific skepticism is different from philosophical skepticism, which questions our ability to claim any knowledge about the nature of the world and how we perceive it. Scientific skepticism uses critical thinking and inductive reasoning while attempting to oppose claims made which lack suitable evidential basis. The New Skepticism described by Paul Kurtz is scientific skepticism[1] and scientific skepticism is a core part of the Brights Movement beliefs.[2]

Characteristics

Scientific skeptics attempt to evaluate claims based on verifiability and falsifiability and discourage accepting claims on faith or anecdotal evidence. Skeptics often focus their criticism on claims they consider to be implausible, dubious or clearly contradictory to generally accepted science. Scientific skeptics do not assert that unusual claims should be automatically rejected out of hand on a priori grounds - rather they argue that claims of paranormal or anomalous phenomena should be critically examined and that such claims would require extraordinary evidence in their favor before they could be accepted as having validity.

Popular targets of criticism among skeptics include psychics, parapsychology, dowsing, astrology, creationism, homeopathy, tarot reading, alien abductions, and ESP, which are either pseudosciences or unsupported by existing evidence.[3] Skeptics such as James Randi have become famous for debunking claims related to some of these. Many skeptics are atheists or agnostics, and have a naturalistic world-view, however some committed skeptics of pseudoscience including Martin Gardner express belief in a god.[4]

From a scientific point of view, theories are judged on many criteria, such as falsifiability, Occam's Razor, and explanatory power, as well as the degree to which their predictions match experimental results. Skepticism is part of the scientific method; for instance an experimental result is not regarded as established until it can be shown to be repeatable independently.[5]

By the principles of skepticism, the ideal case is that every individual could make his own mind up on the basis of the evidence rather than appealing to some authority, skeptical or otherwise.

Perceived dangers of pseudoscience

Skepticism is an approach to strange or unusual claims where doubt is preferred to belief, given a lack of conclusive evidence. Skeptics generally regard it as misguided to believe in extra-terrestrial UFOs and psychic powers as no empirical evidence exists supporting such phenomena. The Ancient Greek philosopher Plato believed that to release another person from ignorance despite their initial resistance is a great and noble thing.[6] Modern skeptical writers address this question in a variety of ways.

Bertrand Russell argued that individual actions are based upon the beliefs of the person acting and if the beliefs are unsupported by evidence then such beliefs can lead to destructive actions.[7] James Randi also often writes on the issue of fraud by psychics and faith healers.[8] Critics of alternative medicine often point to bad advice given by unqualified practitioners, leading to serious injury or death. Richard Dawkins points to religion as a source of violence, and considers creationism a threat to biology.[9] Some skeptics, such as the members of The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe podcast, oppose certain cults and new religious movements because of their concern about what they consider false miracles performed or endorsed by the leadership of the group.[10] They often criticize belief systems which they believe to be idiosyncratic, bizarre or irrational. See also Allegations against cults made by skeptics.

Notable skeptical media

See also: List of Skeptics and skeptical organizations

Magazines

Television programs

Podcasts

See also

References

  1. ^ Kurtz, Paul (1992). The New Skepticism: Inquiry and Reliable Knowledge. Prometheus Books. p. 371. ISBN 0879757663. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  2. ^ http://www.the-brights.net/
  3. ^ "Skeptics Dictionary Alphabetical Index Abracadabra to Zombies". skepdic.com. 2007. Retrieved 2007-05-27. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  4. ^ HANSEN, George P. (1992). "CSICOP and the Skeptics: An Overview". Retrieved 2007-05-27. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  5. ^ Wudka, Jose (1998). "What is the scientific method?". Retrieved 2007-05-27. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  6. ^ See Plato's Allegory of the cave, Plato The Republic, (New CUP translation by Tom Griffith and G.R.F. Ferrari into English) ISBN 0-521-48443-X
  7. ^ Russell, Bertrand (1907). "On the Value of Scepticism". The Will To Doubt. Positive Atheism. Retrieved 2007-05-27. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  8. ^ Fighting Against Flimflam, TIME, Jun. 24, 2001
  9. ^ Better living without God? - Religion is a dangerously irrational mirage, says Dawkins, San Francisco Chronicle, October 15, 2006
  10. ^ Langone, Michael D. (June 1995). Recovery from Cults: Help for Victims of Psychological and Spiritual Abuse. W. Norton. American Family Foundation. p. 432. ISBN 0393313212. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)

Further reading

  • Randi, James (June 1982). Flim-Flam! Psychics, ESP, Unicorns, and Other Delusions. Prometheus Books. p. 342. ISBN 0345409469. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  • Randi, James (1997). An Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, and Hoaxes of the Occult and Supernatural. St. Martin's Griffin. p. 336. ISBN 0312151195. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • Sagan, Carl (1997). The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark. Ballantine Books. p. 349. ISBN 0345409469. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
Wikiquote has quotations related to Scientific skepticism.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Scientific_skepticism&oldid=337185257"