I know the difference between cynism and scepticism. English is not my
mother-language, so I make mistakes. Forgive me for that.
Like you say: we are skeptical when we must see compelling evidence before
we believe. We are pseudoskaptical when we say something is not true or
doesn't exist, BEFORE we have done some solid research to find out whether
it's correct or not.
Isaac
-----Opprinnelig melding-----
Fra: Barrett Dorko [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sendt: 17. april 2001 13:51
Til: [log in to unmask]
Emne: Re: SV: Pseudoscience
At 10:57 AM 4/17/01 +0200, you wrote:
>Be a sceptic, Mel, not a pseudosceptic.
To my knowledge, skepticism is not a position, but a method. When we say
that we are skeptical we mean that we must see compelling evidence before
we believe. This evidence must conform to the scientific ideal, a well
known idea that seems easily forgotten by those in our community
overwhelmed by postmodernism. Typically, they confuse skepticism with
cynicism. I presume this is what you mean by "pseudoskeptic", and Mel Siff
is no cynic.
Barrett L. Dorko, P.T.
"The Clinician's Manual" <http://barrettdorko.com>
Also at <http://rehabedge.com>
And <http://prorehabonline.com>
And <http://physicaltherapist.com>
And <http://rehabmax.com>
|