I don't know about psychic media.
I keep an open mind, but I don't believe in anything paranormal or anything supernatural. If it exists, hey, it may be abnormal! But if it exists it's natural and if it exists, we - homo sapiens sapiens, I mean - is going to get it. As in, "get" it. Grasp hold, drag it kicking and if need be screaming into the light of our comprehension. Probably take a pass or two to fine tune the description slash theory on some of the most abnormal shit there is, but we'll do it. We'll get it, or die trying. We'll grasp it or - as they used to threaten in the old books, "...or I'll know the reason why."
You'll say I have too much faith in humanity, too much faith in the method. You would be wrong. I assure you I'm the strongest skeptic yet met. I suspect I am a stronger skeptic than any of you.
We haven't really talked philosophy, though. It's possible my strong suspicion here will prove unfounded! In any case, skepticism is no contest. It's a moral position, one whose survival value and adaptive benefit has been tested and proved again and again and again.
My faith in humanity is not faith at all, really - faith is a pure figure of speech, here. Same with my faith in the scientific method. Such "faith" is no more than justified confidence based on track record. Again and again and without exception yet, the method is proved sound. It is made to run on human error, and to advance by falsification. Again and again we have proved equal to its good use. Confidence justified - compellingly so, as I hope anyone with a decent brain and half a mind to use it would agree.
Anyway, I do enjoy the topic of psychic media, things of that nature. I don't believe in that stuff based on current studies and facts in evidence, but that doesn't mean I'm not curious about what others believe! Damn curious, what others believe.
But then what do you want, belief is not suspicion, belief is not conjecture. It's a feeling, and sometimes, an irrational one. Maybe sometimes justified, too! But a lot of the time you don't know. You know what I believe?
I believe skepticism is the strongest moral position you can stake out.
One should not believe in the truth value of any proposition whose validity is not compellingly established. For me, for phenomena, that pretty much means the method. Reality - if you please, reality ought to be demonstrable and repeatable, or else we ought to suspend judgment.
Huh. Bit of a tangent there, but very clear I believe. I don't imagine any of you will find any claim in it you'd care to contest. There never was a claim I made I couldn't back up - except the one that I will take back down. I love the test best when I'm proven wrong. I don't understand why anyone would not crave disproof, thrive upon being proven wrong. I love human error, and especially my own!
It's how we advance.
I keep an open mind, but I don't believe in anything paranormal or anything supernatural. If it exists, hey, it may be abnormal! But if it exists it's natural and if it exists, we - homo sapiens sapiens, I mean - is going to get it. As in, "get" it. Grasp hold, drag it kicking and if need be screaming into the light of our comprehension. Probably take a pass or two to fine tune the description slash theory on some of the most abnormal shit there is, but we'll do it. We'll get it, or die trying. We'll grasp it or - as they used to threaten in the old books, "...or I'll know the reason why."
You'll say I have too much faith in humanity, too much faith in the method. You would be wrong. I assure you I'm the strongest skeptic yet met. I suspect I am a stronger skeptic than any of you.
We haven't really talked philosophy, though. It's possible my strong suspicion here will prove unfounded! In any case, skepticism is no contest. It's a moral position, one whose survival value and adaptive benefit has been tested and proved again and again and again.
My faith in humanity is not faith at all, really - faith is a pure figure of speech, here. Same with my faith in the scientific method. Such "faith" is no more than justified confidence based on track record. Again and again and without exception yet, the method is proved sound. It is made to run on human error, and to advance by falsification. Again and again we have proved equal to its good use. Confidence justified - compellingly so, as I hope anyone with a decent brain and half a mind to use it would agree.
Anyway, I do enjoy the topic of psychic media, things of that nature. I don't believe in that stuff based on current studies and facts in evidence, but that doesn't mean I'm not curious about what others believe! Damn curious, what others believe.
But then what do you want, belief is not suspicion, belief is not conjecture. It's a feeling, and sometimes, an irrational one. Maybe sometimes justified, too! But a lot of the time you don't know. You know what I believe?
I believe skepticism is the strongest moral position you can stake out.
One should not believe in the truth value of any proposition whose validity is not compellingly established. For me, for phenomena, that pretty much means the method. Reality - if you please, reality ought to be demonstrable and repeatable, or else we ought to suspend judgment.
Huh. Bit of a tangent there, but very clear I believe. I don't imagine any of you will find any claim in it you'd care to contest. There never was a claim I made I couldn't back up - except the one that I will take back down. I love the test best when I'm proven wrong. I don't understand why anyone would not crave disproof, thrive upon being proven wrong. I love human error, and especially my own!
It's how we advance.
Comments