The people who label themselves "skeptics" seem to me to be some of the least skeptical people of all.
I don't call myself a skeptic, because I don't have that level of self-denial. I know I'm biased. And to be a true skeptic that skepticism has to be applied universally. Instead, it tends to be applied to whatever subjects and ideas a person doesn't wish to believe in, while credulousness is applied to those things in which they wish to believe.
And then there is the "social skeptic", which is a club of like-minded thinkers. They hate cults, yet act as if they are in one. They are all of one mind about crucial matters (to them) and would eject anyone who questions any of their precious dogmas from the group. It's ironic, but I'm sure they don't see the joke.
Any level of self-knowledge would make such folk immediately drop the label "skeptic" and replace it with "true believer", like everybody else.
It's just that their beliefs tend to fit a certain pattern, which to them is "skeptical thought". And this pattern of beliefs makes them feel superior and more intellectual than those who don't share it.
But I think it's fair to say that where there is arrogance (rather than humility) there is also ignorance. For when we are aware of what we don't know, and of our biases, we tend to become more objective in our world view than those who think they already have it all figured out.
No comments:
Post a Comment