Psychology of the Skeptic

The intensity of dogmatism of many of the critics, their violent responses and seeming inability to connect with our reasoning, makes us suspect that there is such a thing as a skeptical psychology. It's not just the believer who is special - there's an awful lot going in skeptics' heads as well. Where skeptics see their automatic dismissal of paranormal claims, even when made by serious scientists, as a necessary and healthy reaction, we often see it as dogmatic, intolerant, and religious in its intensity, indicating a deep emotional commitment to the mechanist worldview. Some even see it as a rerun of the Reformation in a secular setting - with dissenters beating at the gates of the establishment, and embattled scientists defending orthodoxy against their heresies.

Strictly speaking, this isn't skepticism at all, at least in its original sense. Where skepsis, in the original Greek, means rational doubt and probing, the word skeptic has increasingly come to mean defensive and doctrinaire, and a skeptic as someone who identifies with a position and defends it to the bitter end, often striving to downplay, misrepresent or simply ignore the evidence.

Psychology of the Skeptic
SPR Study Day - The Psychology of the Sceptic
There is a major difference between being skeptical based on rational scientific thought, and a "knee-jerk" response to instantly discredit anything outside the mainstream scientific "norm" as crackpot beliefs.

In my opinion someone who goes on a witchhunt to burn anything outside their neat, orderly little box they call reality is just as bad or worse than someone who would believe something truly outlandish without any basis in the real world at all.

As I have stated many times in these forums I truly believe that for some people their "inquisition" style skepticism stems from the fact that their fragile little psyche can't handle anything outside of their accepted view of reality.

One example I love is "the double slit experiment" where quantum mechanics proves that the very act of observing something can change it's outcome. Even with scientific evidence proving this, some people look at this as hokey pseudoscience. (usually because they can't grasp what they are actually witnessing)

I like to compare it to religious diehards who will argue until they are blue in the face that Jesus existed without having any cold, hard evidence that he actually did. Their single-minded fanaticism tells them that the bible is the infallible and literal word of god, eventhough it has been misinterpreted, edited, and rewritten by human hands again and again.

I think it's sad that some people try so hard not to believe anything, that their refusal to believe anything outside of their preconceived box called reality, in some cases makes their skepticism more outlandish and fanciful than the supposed "bad science" they are attempting to prove wrong.

Just who are these "some people?" Oh, there he is out in the cornfield, filled with straw, keeping away the crows.

I think an awful lot of people get being a sceptic mixed up with being a debunker!
Sceptics want to see the evidence, test it and evaluate it before deciding what side of the fence they are on. Debunkers see themselves as the last bastion of the current scientific paradym. No matter what evidence is presented, or by which respected scientist, if it goes against the grain then the evidence, and usually the presenter of said evidence, are unduly criticised.
Its right to be sceptical. Its the sane approach to a mystery. To question the evidence is the right thing to do. To dismiss everything without checking the facts and to heap scorn and derision on those presenting the facts is the actions of a frightened imbecile.

Originally posted by ashamedamerican
I think it's sad that some people try so hard not to believe anything, that their refusal to believe anything outside of their preconceived box called reality, in some cases makes their skepticism more outlandish and fanciful than the supposed "bad science" they are attempting to prove wrong.

I flagged this earlier, just now getting around to reply. I'm with you on that some skeptics don't have enough validation to "not believe", they have every reason to, but those reasons sound more like an excuse to not be associated with the believer's base. After all, their reputation is at stake!

skepticism can also be aided in explanation by the psychological theory of scarcity, or that things that are seemingly hidden or blocked off are assumed to be more truthful or better. there have been a lot of tests done to prove this idea. that said, i still am interested in a lot of conspiracy theories and keep an open mind.

reply to post by ashamedamerican


this is such an interesting subject - I am dying to see where and how far this goes

I can see the inevitable has already begun

the most fascinating part of the whole concept is not just the psychology of the skeptic (which is endlessly fascinating to me) but also the psychology involved whenever any of our minds is up against an alien concept - and how far any of us will go to defend our own little corner of reality

how personal and nearly violent it can get in no time at all - just talking over ideas

it's almost as if some people feel their very identity will dissolve if they so much as think about something that isn't currently accepted as fact - or something that doesn't agree with what they personally believe

it's not like we're fighting over the last of the food and water - they're just ideas

star and flag -

It's important to keep a little skepticism of everything you hear. I don't think it's good to deny everything or deny anything that you see but for those ideas that are just so far out there that's where skepticism comes in. I believe skepticism can be good and bad.

''the most fascinating part of the whole concept is not just the psychology of the skeptic (which is endlessly fascinating to me) but also the psychology involved whenever any of our minds is up against an alien concept - and how far any of us will go to defend our own little corner of reality

how personal and nearly violent it can get in no time at all - just talking over ideas

it's almost as if some people feel their very identity will dissolve if they so much as think about something that isn't currently accepted as fact - or something that doesn't agree with what they personally believe

it's not like we're fighting over the last of the food and water - they're just ideas ''


Totally,totally agree!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

''As I have stated many times in these forums I truly believe that for some people their "inquisition" style skepticism stems from the fact that their fragile little psyche can't handle anything outside of their accepted view of reality.

One example I love is "the double slit experiment" where quantum mechanics proves that the very act of observing something can change it's outcome. Even with scientific evidence proving this, some people look at this as hokey pseudoscience. (usually because they can't grasp what they are actually witnessing)

I like to compare it to religious diehards who will argue until they are blue in the face that Jesus existed without having any cold, hard evidence that he actually did. Their single-minded fanaticism tells them that the bible is the infallible and literal word of god, eventhough it has been misinterpreted, edited, and rewritten by human hands again and again. ''

totallly,totally agree!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply to post by cutiepie


"''As I have stated many times in these forums I truly believe that for some people their "inquisition" style skepticism stems from the fact that their fragile little psyche can't handle anything outside of their accepted view of reality."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Uni we called it the Boggle Threshold. That imaginary line in our minds that we dare not cross for fear of what damage may be done to our belief systems.
What does baffle me on ATS is how sceptics, not debunkers, are vilified because they wont simply accept new ideas based on flimsy if none existent evidence. To some it's like what thay guy on Mythbusters states at the beginning of every show;
"I deny your reality and replace it with my own. . . " Or something like that.