From: revpk@cellar.org (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Pseudoskepticism (was CFD: New Newsgroup)
Date: 30 Aug 92 00:38:03 GMT
Organization: The Cellar BBS and public access system

pepke@gw.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke) writes:
> 
> We're all familiar with pseudoscience, where the trappings and language of 
> science are used to give apparent substance to an unsupported claim.  What 
> we have here is, I think, an analogous phenomenon: pseudoskepticism, where 
> the trappings and language of skepticism are used to give apparent 
> objective basis to ideology.
> 
        Not to continue the debate or anything-- I'm well aware of how sick 
everyone is of seeing it-- but I ought to add my two cents here. Actually, I 
agree with this business about 'pseudoskepticism;' there are times when I 
think that 'skeptics' gambits' are sometimes employed to ridicule or 
discredit an opinion or position, without an adequate discussion of the 
issues involved.
        There's a bit more to this that I can add, but since it involves 
topics a bit sfield of sci.skeptic, I'll leave it go right here.
> There's nothing inherently wrong with ideology, just as there's nothing 
> inherently wrong with faith.  These things can be useful and enlightening 
> in their own way, as long as they are accepted for what they are.  Most 
> people have the courage to admit that beliefs and opinions are just that.  
> The pseudoskeptic, on the other hand, tries to throw a bad toupee over 
> bald ideology, and the result makes Sam Donaldson look good by comparison. 
>  In the process, the pseudoskeptic winds up doing most of the things that 
> skeptics are supposed to reject: appeals to authority, ad-hominem attacks, 
> guilt-by-association ploys, extensive iron-clad conclusions based on very 
> little evidence, etc.
> 
> In the process, they wind up discrediting both their positions and 
> skepticism itself.  As skepticism has gradually changed from a way of 
> approaching problems to a "movement," pseudoskeptics seem to have grown in 
> number, volume, and influence.  Both Robert and Brian have been published 
> in skeptical publications more often than many people on the net who are 
> far more deserving of the opportunity.  Of course, the published material 
> is of higher quality than what we see here, but the skeptical patina is 
> still pretty patchy.
> 
        I can't speak for Robert, but I've only had two articles in the _SI_, 
and both were book reviews. 
> As pseudoskeptics become more common and their influence and power grows, 
> at some point they will define a significant portion of what skepticism 
> functionally is.  At that point those who hold the basic principles of 
> skepticism as more than tools to pump up an argument will have a difficult
> choice.
>  
> Eric Pepke                                    INTERNET: pepke@gw.scri.fsu.edu

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian "Rev. P-K" Siano                                  revpk@cellar.org
Servo: "Dianetics, by L. Ron Hubbard."
Joel:  "Why is my life messed up? Page 74."
Servo: "When will this movie end? Page 155."
Crow:  "How much money can we get out of Tom Cruise? Page 85."

                                       "Mystery Science Theater 3000,"
                                       during a volcano scene in
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:14964 talk.origins:10051