Aren't you now agreeing with me that scepticism about everything is a tall order? You disagreed then.
-
-
Replying to @pogsurf
I don't think so. Or I didn't mean to. I mean that when I need to assess whether something true or not, I do so sceptically.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @pogsurf
I certainly decide on a case by case basis whether I'm going to investigate something enough to have a position on it.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
There is a massive problem labelling anyone as a sceptic then. All you can ever show is they did it in particular cases.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @pogsurf
I don't think so. We can label someone 'faithful' if this is the predominant attitude they take to positions they hold.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @pogsurf
I don't think we need to require someone to have investigated every truth claim sceptically to be a sceptic.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @pogsurf
Any more than we'd need someone to have faith in every god or spiritual belief to be a person of faith.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @pogsurf
Very much the approach you take to determining whether something is true, regardless of how many things you hold to be true/untrue.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
But earlier you said you get to determine who the sceptics were. Couldn't you and they just have different priorities?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I don't know what you mean. They either make their truth claims based on evidence or not.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.