Science and Skepticism: The New Compromise

Historically those who question and check facts and figures have been called skeptics, but not any more.  These days people who think they are on the side of “science” (which has no side) call themselves skeptics.  The only checking is that of official blogs of known and trusted sources and the belief that if science says so it is true.

There are checks and balances, these new skeptics argue, that science is “peer reviewed” and that there are all kinds of bad sources that should not be considered.  So if a source is good then the science is good then you can believe what is said by that source and call yourself a skeptic.

At this point it becomes difficult to track the various reasoning paths since some of the new skeptics are capable of individual critical thinking and will deny they follow the source and not the idea.  Anyone who examines this dynamic sees the error  but the dynamic is so entrenched at this point it becomes difficult for those who recognize critical thinking to separate themselves from the herd.  Reactions to facing this error in ones own thinking are always some form of denial, but rarely a grudging acceptance to look at re-examine the issue just this once.

Perhaps there is also some fear that if these new skeptics actually try to follow a complicated argument they will be fooled and confounded and ridiculed for their error.

This dynamic is most visible with hot-button items like Climate Change or Vaccines or Chemtrails.  Skeptics are emotionally involved in those matters and have made their decisions and will not consider any point of view that might challenge what they believe to be true, from whatever source.

When the self identified new skeptic hears allusions to something for which they have made an emotional attachment, like climate, vaccines or chemtrails, they shut down and will use all manner of insult and scorn to stop any consideration of the subject.  This is why we see a sharp dichotomy between Deniers and Alarmists or the Antivaxers and Provaxers and those who investigate Chemtrails and the rest of the world.  It is a politically partisan divide which a traditional skeptic would be able to maneuver.

But the new skeptic becomes partisan for one or more of the various reasons stated above and chant “scientific consensus” and “vaccines save lives” and chemtrails have been debunked.   There is nothing to consider, the decisions have been made, the issues are solved there is no one to turn to if you have a question or wish a fair examination of some part of the issue.  Try the courts.

About Kent

Professional writer and aspiring publisher.
This entry was posted in Economics, News, Stupid Laws. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*