It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Healthy skeptism or just plain stubborness?

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 11:49 AM
link   
This is a discussion about skeptism and stubborness, more specifically, where goes the limit when healthy skeptism becomes stubborness?

Not to leave believers without their share of flame, where does it comes close to insanity when one is stubborningly holding in their (mis-)beliefs, even though they themselves may not consider their objects of belief false?

I think that skeptism and stubborness goes hand in hand. On the other hand, skeptism is kind of stubborness in it's refusal to believe "out there" stories. Yet on the another hand, holding to one's beliefs when the proofs show contrary (in eyes of the public), is another kind of skeptism, but stubborness nonetheless.

I see that certain stubborness or skeptism can be healthy for mankind, otherwise we would be easily abused (which we nonetheless are, as the current reality shows), but then again, is there really need for belief? Or could a belief be somekind of motivator to achieve anything. If we don't believe that we are capable of something, we most likele are not.

In the end, I think that those overly skeptics and on the other hand, believers in irrational things, are ultimately of the same wood, that is stubborness. But certainly there must be good qualities on that as well. Without certain stubborness, mankind wouldn't achieved some of it's greatest achievements. Some call this ambition.

-v
edit on 19-11-2010 by v01i0 because: 1175




posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by v01i0
 

On the other hand I posit: to accept things at face value out of context is complete foolishness.How many ufo videos are on youtube? 16 year old kids can produce very lifelike imagery with our level of personal computers and software. Does that mean video evidence is worthless? In my book it is fast approaching that. Hoaxers just add noise and ruin the credibility of any real information out there.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 


That is true. Stubborness can also be foolishness. And indeed it may have caused more harm than good.

But how about a child who takes heed on his parents advice to not stick her tonque on frozen iron (just as an example)? If the child believes her parents wihtout knowing, just believing, she would be spared of harm? So you see, this ain't such simple issue?

-v
edit on 19-11-2010 by v01i0 because: 9212



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 12:06 PM
link   
skepticism is usually backed by empirical reason and the need for it, whereas stubbornness is typically deeply held bias and bound to be singularly opinionated. at least that is where i draw the line.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by asperetty
 


That's a good one. Skeptism is backed up with reasonable knowledge. But also our knowledge is not infinite, so...

What about skeptism being doubtful alignment towards things that doesn't fit our worldview?

-v
edit on 19-11-2010 by v01i0 because: 0905



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by v01i0
 


Skepticism is for those who have not had their own experience with something that science cannot currently explain.

Stubborness can also be seen with the non skeptic too, so too much stubborness is unhealthy either way.

Most skeptical people cannot think for themselves, scientists have already done the thinking for them, the basics of a skeptic (About 95% of them,like we didnt already know what we saw or experienced wasnt possible according to "science") is to disagree with anything that doesnt agree with their view point, they find a scientific article which can "disprove" what you saw or experienced, post it, then proceed to sit back and feel good about themselves.

This is basically trolling, albiet a very subtle form, but trolling nonetheless. So yeah....

Skeptic = Stubborn Troll.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Neither stubbornness nor skepticism is necessarily a bad thing.

You need stubborn people to change the world. Reasonable people wont do it, they roll over.

Skepticism is needed to not fall for every fad or scam that comes along. Its only a problem when good empirical evidence is discounted out of hand because it pushes beyond the comfort zone. Thats not skepticism though, thats a form of closed minded delusion. Its adherence to dogma.

I can be stubborn and skeptical at times. Doesn't mean my mind is closed.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by v01i0
I think that skeptism and stubborness goes hand in hand.


And what is wrong with being stubborn when one is skeptical? ... nothing. Unless that point of view is based on ignorance.
In my experience, believers are often more ignorant and refuse to think rationally and take into account human nature and it's fallability.


On the other hand, skeptism is kind of stubborness in it's refusal to believe "out there" stories.


Which is a GOOD thing. Don't forget that some skeptics also choose to believe the "out there" stories, but only as possibilities not fact because usually there is weak evidence and no proof.

I'd rather be a skeptic living from a realistic point of view than a believer living in a fantasy.
edit on 19/11/2010 by nerbot because: kjhgkjhg



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by markjaxson

Most skeptical people cannot think for themselves, scientists have already done the thinking for them, the basics of a skeptic (About 95% of them,like we didnt already know what we saw or experienced wasnt possible according to "science") is to disagree with anything that doesnt agree with their view point, they find a scientific article which can "disprove" what you saw or experienced, post it, then proceed to sit back and feel good about themselves.


Your above defination makes a believer (religious, spiritual) people skeptics too. It wasn't long ago when priests of religions oh so many done the thinking for the rest of the people... And they still do. Because these religious people (for exampe the creationists) are skeptical about evolution theory or dismiss it all together.

I wouldn't define skeptics as people who cannot do independent thinking. Not all religious people are that either. But there are people in both groups who are just stubborn and cannot do thinking by theirselves and believe in worldview given them by authorities.

And for the closing, I don't have to have empirical experience with a shot in the head to know to avioid it


I'd say that in everyone there lives small skeptic and small believer (or huge in some instances). We just don't easily buy stories that contradict our experience of nature. As pointed out earlier, it has lot to do with evolution. In fact, both skeptism and believing do. They are really like cousins to each other.

-v
edit on 19-11-2010 by v01i0 because: 1454



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by nerbot
 



Originally posted by nerbot

I'd rather be a skeptic living from a realistic point of view than a believer living in a fantasy.
edit on 19/11/2010 by nerbot because: kjhgkjhg


Well that emphasizes your skeptism. You are so skeptical that you think you'd be rather skeptical than a believer, which in fact is another belief. Do you know how happy people religious people are?


But yeah, I know what you meant. There is absolutely no reason to believe in spiritual dogmas of anykind. Because of lack of the physical necessity to believe, religions have developed artificial need for it. If you don't, you are doomed and if you do, you are saved. And if you pay close attention, the new age religion(s) does that as well. For me, it is the last sign that "not to be touched" except in scientifical purposes.

But faith is also a human quality. We believe that we die if we put a bullet in the head (which of course there is plenty of proof), but that belief prevents many of us doing it. And in this sense, some believers even have experiences that back up their faith.

Personally I advocate empricism in all spiritual and philosophical matters, it is the only way to find out.

-v



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by v01i0
 


Arrogance keeps secrets.

Just look at my life. My life has proven that electronic mind control was being used in schools in 1992. They could also take your memories back then too.

Have you heard about this tech, no. Plus if you tell someone, they will try and say its some sort of scifi, lol. My life proved this. Its open knowledge now that uk where using this tech on me all these years, for my family and people who know me.

See how arrogance keeps secrets. People think if something was real they would know.

So tell me how many know about electroinc mind control? Virtually no one, and people do not want to accept it exists, still even though my life proved it, and people who know me know this.

Arrogance is what best keeps secrets.

Arrogance too is probably how they keep secrets with regard to alien stuff too.


edit on 11/19/2010 by andy1033 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by andy1033
 


Yes, quite often ignorance leads to arrogance.

While I doubt your story, I wouldn't know. However I know there are so many other manipulation methods that bends human psyche so no need for electrical measures... Unless you mean that giving electrical shocks to excert certain discipline to human beings like they did with the dogs.

While I doubt your story, I still think it might be possible. Anyhow, regardless of your example, your point is solid.

-v
edit on 19-11-2010 by v01i0 because: 545



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by v01i0
 


Arrogance you can say leads to ignorance, as people think they would know.

Remember people if they where using technologies i descibe on school kids back in uk in 1992, that means the same is going on in usa schools.

Its amazing how peoples arrogance, will just keep them uninformed to what really is happening.

Look at how they use hollywood, to tell us anything other than nuclear weapons is some sort of scifi. Nukes where made in 1940's, and we still think as a whole human race that all the money spent has made nothing since then lol.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by v01i0
 


It's all belief in the end my friend. Even when someone considers their belief "knowledge". People build semantic labyrinths to hide from this very simple fact for obvious reasons. You just never know though.
edit on 21-11-2010 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


Pretty much so. Yet some people are more stubbornly holding in their beliefs, yet the reality may tell contrary. Other people change their direction according the winds, which again is the opposite and it is like a ship drifting in the winds.

In this there must be some kind of rational middle, it is good to be on the course, but it is wise to change direction if your destination is unlikely. Not holding too tighly on your beliefs, yet not to be gone with every blowing gust.

-v



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by v01i0
 


"Consider everything. Believe nothing."



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


Exactly. I too tend to keep every possibility open for consideration. Almost everything is possible, yet not necessarily propable.

-v



posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by v01i0
This is a discussion about skeptism and stubborness, more specifically, where goes the limit when healthy skeptism becomes stubborness?
In the scientific community it used to be detrimental to your career, and severely, if you referred to the intentions, emotions, thoughts of animals. This was seen as mere speculation and projection. Now, it is seen as OK and is the norm. Those scientists were in a culture of diseased skepticism. They remain so in other areas.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join