Skepsisforumet

Skeptivisme => Spør en skeptiker => Emne startet av: Neptun på 22. desember 2015, 22:33:11

Tittel: Steven Novella definerer vitenskapelig skeptisisme
Skrevet av: Neptun22. desember 2015, 22:33:11
Fra: The definition of “Skeptic” (http://theness.com/roguesgallery/index.php/skepticism/the-definition-of-skeptic/)
Skeptic – The Name Thing Again (http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/11/17/skeptic-the-name-thing-again/)

Sitat fra: Steven Novella
A skeptic is one who prefers beliefs and conclusions that are reliable and valid to ones that are comforting or convenient, and therefore rigorously and openly applies the methods of science and reason to all empirical claims, especially their own. A skeptic provisionally proportions acceptance of any claim to valid logic and a fair and thorough assessment of available evidence, and studies the pitfalls of human reason and the mechanisms of deception so as to avoid being deceived by others or themselves. Skepticism values method over any particular conclusion.


Hva mener ni om dette?
Tittel: Hva synes om Steven Novellas definisjon av skeptisisme?
Skrevet av: Neptun04. juni 2017, 15:41:24
The definition of “Skeptic” (http://theness.com/roguesgallery/index.php/skepticism/the-definition-of-skeptic/)

Sitat
A skeptic is one who prefers beliefs and conclusions that are reliable and valid to ones that are comforting or convenient, and therefore rigorously and openly applies the methods of science and reason to all empirical claims, especially their own. A skeptic provisionally proportions acceptance of any claim to valid logic and a fair and thorough assessment of available evidence, and studies the pitfalls of human reason and the mechanisms of deception so as to avoid being deceived by others or themselves. Skepticism values method over any particular conclusion.
Tittel: Sv: Steven Novella definerer vitenskapelig skeptisisme
Skrevet av: Gnisten04. juni 2017, 18:28:03
Hei Neptun, flott at du tar denne definisjonen opp til diskusjon igjen!

Forrige gang var i kategorien "Filosofi, kritisk tenkning og logikk", men dessverre kom det ingen svar. Jeg har derfor slått dine to innlegg sammen i én tråd her under "Spør en skeptiker".

Jeg håper at det kommer kommentarer denne gangen, f.eks. fra Asbjørn Dyrendal.
Tittel: Sv: Hva synes om Steven Novellas definisjon av skeptisisme?
Skrevet av: Asbjørn Dyrendal04. juni 2017, 21:22:30
The definition of “Skeptic” ([url]http://theness.com/roguesgallery/index.php/skepticism/the-definition-of-skeptic/[/url])

Sitat
A skeptic is one who prefers beliefs and conclusions that are reliable and valid to ones that are comforting or convenient, and therefore rigorously and openly applies the methods of science and reason to all empirical claims, especially their own. A skeptic provisionally proportions acceptance of any claim to valid logic and a fair and thorough assessment of available evidence, and studies the pitfalls of human reason and the mechanisms of deception so as to avoid being deceived by others or themselves. Skepticism values method over any particular conclusion.



En helt utmerket innstilling, og noe å etterstrebe. Jeg er redd den er litt "comforting and convenient" heller enn en pålitelig empirisk påstand, men den er da også ment å skulle være det første heller enn det andre.