Scientific skepticism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Scientific skepticism or rational skepticism (Imperial spelling: scepticism) sometimes referred to as skeptical inquiry, is a scientific, or practical, epistemological position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking empirical evidence. In practice, a scientific skeptic generally focuses on critically examining claims and theories which they believe to be far beyond the mainstream of science.
Scientific skepticism is different from philosophical skepticism, which questions our right to claim knowledge about the nature of the world and how we perceive it. Scientific skepticism utilizes critical thinking and attempts to oppose claims made which lack suitable evidential basis. The New Skepticism described by Paul Kurtz is scientific skepticism (Kurtz 1992).
Contents |
[edit] Characteristics
Like a scientist, a scientific skeptic aims to decide claims based on verifiability and falsifiability rather than accepting claims on faith, anecdotes, or relying on unfalsifiable categories. Skeptics often focus their criticism on claims they consider to be implausible, dubious or clearly contradictory to generally accepted science. This distinguishes the scientific skeptic from the professional scientist, who often concentrates their enquiry on verifying or falsifying hypotheses created by those within their particular field of 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 favour before they could be accepted as having validity.
Popular targets of criticism among skeptics include dowsing, astrology, alien abductions, ESP and other psychic powers, which skeptics allege are pseudosciences. Skeptics such as James Randi have become famous for debunking claims related to some of these. Many self-professed skeptics are atheists or agnostics, and have a naturalistic worldview, however Martin Gardner is an example of a committed skeptic with a theistic world-view.
The following is a definition of scientific skepticism from Skeptic magazine:
- What does it mean to be a skeptic? Some people believe that skepticism is rejection of new ideas, or worse, they confuse skeptic with cynic and think that skeptics are a bunch of grumpy curmudgeons unwilling to accept any claim that challenges the status quo. This is wrong. Skepticism is a provisional approach to claims. It is the application of reason to any and all ideas—no sacred cows allowed. In other words, skepticism is a method, not a position. Ideally, skeptics do not go into an investigation closed to the possibility that a phenomenon might be real or that a claim might be true. When we say we are skeptical, we mean that we must see compelling evidence before we believe. Skeptics are from Missouri, the "show me" state. When we hear a fantastic claim we say, "that's nice, prove it."...Modern skepticism is embodied in the scientific method, that involves gathering data to formulate and test naturalistic explanations for natural phenomena. A claim becomes factual when it is confirmed to such an extent it would be reasonable to offer temporary agreement. But all facts in science are provisional and subject to challenge, and therefore skepticism is a method leading to provisional conclusions. Some claims, such as dowsing, ESP, and creationism, have been tested (and failed the tests) often enough that we can provisionally conclude that they are not valid. Other claims, such theories concerning the origins and dissemination of language, gravity waves, or the diet of Tyrannosaurus rex have been tested but results are inconclusive, so we continue formulating and testing hypotheses and theories until we can reach a less provisional conclusion.
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. A certain 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.
[edit] 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. This is a personal principle -- it does not, on the surface, imply that skeptics should attempt to convert other people to their beliefs. The question is often asked: what is the danger of "magical thinking" and pseudoscience? Skeptics may regard it as misguided to believe in UFOs and psychic powers.
The Ancient Greek philosopher Plato believed that to release another person from ignorance despite their initial resistance is a great and noble thing. Modern skeptical writers address this question in a variety of ways.
James Randi, for instance, often writes on the issue of fraud. On a case by case basis, he attempts to show how some promoters of pseudoscience make money from their claims, while secretly knowing them to be false. This is generally known as a "profit motive". 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. Some skeptics[citation needed] support opposition to some cults and new religious movements because of their concern about what they consider false miracles performed or endorsed by the leadership of the group. They often criticize belief systems which they believe to be idiosyncratic, bizarre or irrational. See also Allegations against cults made by skeptics.
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.
[edit] Criticism
Naturally, many targets of skeptical criticism are themselves critical of scientific skepticism. These and other critics may claim that scientific skeptics are biased and rigid in their analysis, use propaganda techniques like ridicule and mere assertion of fact, and do not actually use the scientific method to support their arguments. The term Pseudoskepticism is often used by the opponents of skepticism as a way of summarizing their critique.
According to critics, self-described skeptics (as a broad generalization) favor established, consensus science and normally would reject any claim to the status of skeptic by anyone indulging in paranormal or supernatural beliefs, though religious belief (e.g. as in the case of Martin Gardner) seems to be allowable, perhaps because they are often explicitly based on faith. A common criticism of skepticism therefore is that it is, in effect, not an epistemological position at all, but a belief system which rejects certain alleged phenomena as real possibilities. Skeptics can counter that scientific skepticism has frequently attempted to investigate claims outside the mainstream of science while retaining reliance upon the scientific method and evidence - and that scientific skepticism, properly carried out, uses the same tools and concepts as science.
Non-skeptics sometimes argue that in history, it has been pointed out that what is "substantial evidence" to one skeptic may be dismissed as trash by another. Because of the often flexible nature of scientific observations, the elusive quality of nature, and the humanity of the actors involved, scientific change has rarely been a simple process of logical proofs and acceptances. This point of view is not generally accepted by mainstream philosophy of science.
[edit] Quotations
- Scientific skepticism is considered good. ... Under this principle, one must question, doubt, or suspend judgment until sufficient information is available. Skeptics demand that evidence and proof be offered before conclusions can be drawn. ... One must thoughtfully gather evidence and be persuaded by the evidence rather than by prejudice, bias, or uncritical thinking. PDF in American Psychologist
- Isaac Asimov was a famous scientific skeptic. He had this to say:
Don't you believe in flying saucers, they ask me? Don't you believe in telepathy? — in ancient astronauts? — in the Bermuda triangle? — in life after death?
No, I reply. No, no, no, no, and again no.
One person recently, goaded into desperation by the litany of unrelieved negation, burst out "Don't you believe in anything?"
"Yes", I said. "I believe in evidence. I believe in observation, measurement, and reasoning, confirmed by independent observers. I'll believe anything, no matter how wild and ridiculous, if there is evidence for it. The wilder and more ridiculous something is, however, the firmer and more solid the evidence will have to be." (Issac Asimov 1997:43)
- "To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient truths; both dispense with the necessity of reflection." - Henri Poincaré
[edit] Famous skeptics and Skeptical Organizations
[edit] Television programs
[edit] Podcasts
[edit] Magazines
[edit] See also
- Anomalous phenomenon
- Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (formerly CSICOP)
- Critical thinking
- Cudos (Acronym for foundations of scientific research, includes skepticism)
- Fideism
- David Hume
- Intellectual dishonesty
- Magical thinking
- Pathological science
- Philosophical skepticism
- Karl Popper
- Protoscience
- Pseudoscience
- Pseudoskepticism
- Quackery
- James Randi
- Scientific method
- Scientific consensus
- Scientific revolution
- Skepticism
- Robert Todd Carroll's Skeptic's Dictionary
[edit] References
- ^ Isaac Asimov (1997). The Roving Mind. Prometheus Books. ISBN 1-57392-181-5.
- Robert Todd Carroll (2003). The Skeptic's Dictionary: A Collection of Strange Beliefs, Amusing Deceptions, and Dangerous Delusions. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 0-471-27242-6.
- Paul Kurtz (1992). The New Skepticism: Inquiry and Reliable Knowledge. Prometheus Books. ISBN 0-87975-766-3.
[edit] External links
- The Skeptic's Dictionary - Carroll, Robert Todd, contains many articles on science, alternative medicine, pseudoscience, etc
- A skeptical manifesto, Shermer, Michael, A philosophical analysis of scientific skepticism
- Some notes on Skepticism". 2003. - Delineating skeptics, disbelievers, nonbeliever, and pseudoskeptics.
- Proper Criticism. (csicop.org) - Hyman, Ray, Suggestions to upgrade the quality of Scientific skepticism
- Strategies for dissenting scientists. Martin, Brian, Society for Scientific Exploration. Journal of Scientific Exploration, Volume 12 No 4. 1998. (PDF), Strategies available for dissenting scientists.
- Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit. Operation Clambake. 1998. Based on the book "The Demon Haunted World: Science as a candle in the dark". (ISBN 0-345-40946-9)
- New England Skeptical Society Newsletter Articles - Includes articles on such topics as Homeopathy, Intelligent Design, and other pseudoscientific topics
- sci.skeptic FAQ
- Topics that are commonly discussed in the newsgroup sci.skeptic
- UK-Skeptics - the UK's rational skeptics organisation.
- Skeptic annotated bibliography
