Skeptic: who is he, pros and cons. Understanding the phenomenon

Author of the material:

Inna Trofimova

writer, psychologist, gestalt therapist

For unknown reasons, public opinion portrays the skeptic as a strange, eternally doubting creature without a stable point of view. And skepticism is perceived as a form of pessimism or despondency. But the passion for obtaining comprehensive evidence can be very useful. Without a skeptical assessment, it is impossible to reason sensibly about information from the Internet, protect yourself from scammers, filter gossip and resist the tricks of marketers.

In this article we will talk about the facets of skepticism, the benefits of critical thinking, and strategies for those who want to learn to trust common sense.

Who is a skeptic in simple words?

A skeptic is a type of person who tends to question both the conclusions of others and his own, knows how to see weaknesses in every argument and tries to check and confirm every detail in the picture of the world. It is difficult to influence the opinion of a skeptic using unfounded statements without irrefutable evidence. Moreover, they are not prone to unjustified optimism and allow their primary feelings to prevail over common sense.

The thought process in the skeptic's head does not stop. He or she constantly thinks about issues that he considers important, argues and reasons with himself, and reconsiders his attitude towards life. He also regularly rethinks his own actions and past mistakes. Perhaps this explains Honoré de Balzac's famous statement that “skeptics are the most conscientious people.”

It is interesting that the skeptics themselves are not ready to claim that they have accurate or sufficiently complete information. They analyze everything, look for arguments and evidence, and only after detailed self-examination do they express their own opinion. Of course, it is difficult for one person to study all the necessary information. The skeptic understands this, so he sees no problem in changing his point of view after receiving new significant facts.

A skeptical person has a very difficult time believing the information around him.

Skeptical as it is?

In the ordinary sense of the word, to be a skeptic is to doubt something. The philosophical type of skepticism is distinguished by the fact that it allows for the possibility of reliable knowledge. Scientific skepticism is a clear and consistent opposition to theories that have not received experimental confirmation.

Any new information can be perceived in different ways:

• with negative distrust (definitely negative);
• with a reasonable amount of skepticism;
• with unconditional trust (absolutely positive).

However, it is recommended not to go to extremes and take a balanced middle position (this is where skepticism lies).

Portrait of skeptics

A skeptic always stands out in a company or group of people. Therefore, we can highlight those features that correspond to the image (portrait) of a skeptic:

1. This personality is characterized by weak emotionality. A skeptic does not give in to emotions, is able to suppress them, and conduct cold analysis;
2. A skeptical person can almost always be seen with a collected and serious face, and a smile is very rare;
3. Outside the sphere of understanding of such a person are extraterrestrial forces and supernatural events, representatives of other planets;
4. Such a person cannot calmly accept religious beliefs;
5. Finding himself in an extreme situation, such a person will be in a stupor, because in order to make a decision, it is necessary to conduct a deep analysis, and there is no time for this;
6. The traits of a skeptic left a direct imprint on his relationships with people. At work he is considered a nerd. His willingness to criticize everyone around him and question everything causes a negative reaction from his colleagues. This leads to loneliness for the skeptic;
7. An arrogant, inflated sense of self-worth may develop;
8. A skeptical person will not rely on other people's opinions and will not compromise;
9. Building a romantic relationship with a pronounced skeptic is very problematic. A person who doubts everything will repeatedly check every action of a potential partner. It will be extremely difficult for a skeptic to trust someone and open up.

The positive qualities of such a character include:

Inability to manipulate such a person, techniques of suggestion are ineffective against him

The need for evidence allows them to develop the nature of the discovery

Such people strive for precision and diligence.

A skeptic will almost never become a victim of scammers; he can easily expose any deception

They do not commit impulsive actions and are free from rash decisions.

Such a person will never follow the crowd, so as not to deviate from the mainstream; he can go against established opinion

Strengths of a Skeptic

Having a critical attitude towards everything has its advantages.
It is difficult to manipulate such a person; techniques of suggestion are not effective. A skeptic rarely becomes a victim of scammers, is critical of advertising gimmicks, and reveals deception. He strives to get to the bottom of the truth, no matter how deeply it is buried.

Protected from impulsive actions, as he will definitely weigh the pros and cons in advance. His strong point is logical thinking.

A skeptic does not follow the crowd just to be like everyone else. He is capable of single-handedly going against a firmly established opinion or stereotype if he does not consider it proven. Thereby opening up the possibility of a new look and obtaining additional important information.

The need for comprehensive evidence leads to the development of research skills and encourages the search for new information and its systematization.

The judgments and conclusions of skeptics are based on deep analysis. They are driven by the desire for accuracy and understanding of risks. These qualities are very valuable for specialists in such professions as auditor, auditor, controller, and inspector.

How did the term come about?

Skepticism originally appeared as a doctrine in ancient Greek philosophy. Xenophanes was one of its founders. Significant contributions to the doctrine were made by Pyrrho, Aeneasides, Agrippa, Arcselaus and Sextus Empiricus. Philosophical skepticism means doubt about the possibility of reliable knowledge. Proponents of this doctrine were of the opinion that one should be guided by “reasonable probability” rather than by the pursuit of truth. In any situation you need to rely on common sense, which is formed in everyday life.

During the Renaissance, a new interest in ancient Greek philosophical teachings arose, and philosophers again became interested in ancient skepticism. This was a period when knowledge increased at an unprecedented rate. Therefore, a skeptical attitude towards testing knowledge and a balanced approach to their interpretation and systematization are necessary.

At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, a scientific and technological revolution began, which contributed to the revival of interest in philosophical skepticism. If earlier this trend was used mainly in philosophy, now it has spread to all scientific research due to the urgent need for reliable knowledge.

Scientific skepticism emerged in the 1970s, driven by growing interest in the paranormal. Around this time, the understanding of what a skeptic is took on its modern form. The word came to be used not only to refer to philosophical skeptics, but to anyone who believed that any information must be verified and confirmed to be considered reliable.

In 1992, the International Society of Skeptics was founded, dedicated to refuting various anti-scientific and pseudoscientific theories. They publish their own magazine, Skeptic, organize conferences, and are active on the Internet. Their main task is to expose astrologers, ufologists, homeopaths and other supporters of unconventional scientific trends.

The edges of skepticism.

The vibrant, rich phenomenon of skepticism is directly related to human nature. This is a powerful ancient philosophical movement, a method of scientific knowledge and a part of human life. In the 21st century, several approaches to classifying forms of skepticism have emerged. Here is one of the classifications based on the characteristics of the thought process:

Philosophical skepticism does not involve doubt for the sake of doubt. The initial goal of the new direction was to refrain from decisive and final statements. Therefore, skepticism is precisely the search for truth, and not its denial, as this philosophical trend is often interpreted.

Scientific skepticism is needed in order to test and criticize convenient but unsubstantiated pseudoscientific theories. The complex and multifaceted phenomenon of scientific skepticism contains two components of scientific research: on the one hand, the desire for evidence, on the other, doubt.

Do you want to make better decisions, find your ideal career, realize your maximum potential and receive instructions for individual development?

?
All this can be done using the Human Design
. Build your map and get basic decryptions for free.

Religious skepticism is doubt about the truth of religious teachings or in relation to religious figures, not associated with the denial of religion in general. People become religious skeptics for various reasons. Some have had unpleasant experiences with religious teachings in the past. The latter are skeptical about unproven spiritual truths. Still others study all the dogmas and remain perplexed by contradictory creeds.

Neutral skepticism neither affirms nor refutes anything. He simply expresses his point of view without waiting for others to agree or disagree with the arguments. To put it another way, he prefers to remain silent rather than speak.

Healthy skepticism is more of a person’s thinking style or worldview. It is the involvement and activity of the mind. So being a skeptic is a wise choice. If you want to build a career, earn respect, make the world a safer and smarter place, critical thinking will help you.

How to recognize a skeptic?

People with a skeptical attitude are not particularly emotional. They deliberately suppress their emotions so that they do not interfere with the analysis of information. The skeptic's face is usually calm and serious. They rarely smile because they tend to think more carefully about what they hear and see. A skeptic can be quite harsh in communication. He or she is not afraid to offend because he or she believes that honesty and directness are more important than emotions. The personality type of a skeptic is generally phlegmatic or melancholic.

Some researchers say that skeptical people have certain facial features: they are thin, their faces are pointed. However, you should not focus your attention on these baits, since a skeptic is about character and personality, and not about appearance.

Sometimes a skeptic is credited with the traits of a pessimist. This is an erroneous judgment because a pessimist does not trust good news and readily believes bad news. A skeptic, on the other hand, tends to doubt any information that comes from outside. He strives to establish the truth, while a pessimist looks for the negative.

Skeptics usually deny religious beliefs because no one can provide them with rational arguments to support the dogmas proposed by the religion. They also deny all supernatural and extraterrestrial phenomena that cannot be supported by material evidence.

There is also the concept of “religious skepticism.” She allows doubt in individual statements, but does not deny religion as a whole.

A skeptic accepts only those arguments whose truth is beyond doubt. He is able to accept the existence of aliens or other supernatural beings and phenomena, but only after receiving comprehensive evidence. He also never follows his own intuition and carefully considers all arguments when making a decision. This leads to some slowness in action, even in emergency situations.

Skeptics do not believe in inexplicable things, they are agnostics and require evidence

Ushakov's Dictionary

skeptical
skeptical , skeptical, skeptical; as a short used

skeptical, skeptical, skeptical.

1. only full. adj.

to skepticism in 1
value.
(
philosophy
). Skeptical philosophy.

2.adj.

to skepticism in 2
meanings.
, critically incredulous, doubtful.
“He said all this with a skeptical (
adv. ) grin.”
M. Gorky
. Skeptical view. Skeptical attitude. Skeptical grin.

Models of interaction between a skeptic and others

The characteristics of a skeptic are reflected in the nature of his relationships with other people. It is often referred to as an environmental nuisance. The tendency to criticize and doubt regularly causes negative reactions from others and leads to loneliness. Against this background, skepticism is accompanied by the development of arrogance and increased self-esteem.

It is difficult for a skeptic to rely on the opinions of other people. He rarely accepts authority without a compelling reason that he can verify personally. He doesn't compromise. However, if a person gains respect in his eyes for good reasons, he shows loyalty and devotion. Building a lasting romantic relationship with a true skeptic is quite problematic. Such a phenomenon as love at first sight can be immediately forgotten. A doubter will repeatedly check and double-check every step and gesture of a potential partner. It is unlikely that he will be able to completely open up and trust another person.

How to communicate with a skeptic?

If we understand who the skeptic is, then establishing contact with him is not difficult. Let's remember that a skeptic is always interested in an interlocutor who is ready to argue and defend his point of view with the help of arguments and facts. He loves clear arguments and justifications that do not raise doubts. Before you propose to him, think carefully about the pitfalls.

Having a skeptic on your team is always helpful. He calculates all possible scenarios, so it is much more difficult to get into trouble with him. The romantics and idealists in your team may feel offended by how harshly he speaks of them. However, this is a rational approach to avoid unfavorable developments.

Skeptic: types

Each skeptic has a set of similar traits, he also has a certain worldview, but, nevertheless, such individuals can be divided into three groups. We would like to separate each type separately and describe the key points of their behavior and vision of the world around them.

Cynical people

A cynical person is a personality type called a skeptic. This person does not believe that people do things for selfless reasons. Cynicism develops in adulthood as a reaction to the situations we encounter. A skeptic has a different opinion and is characterized by mistrust and a search for ulterior motives. Children are never cynical.

Nihilism

Nihilism is another extreme form of skepticism. It is an approach to life that denies everything the skeptic knows or learns. Adherents of this type of thinking reject all truths, even proven ones. They don't form their own opinions because they don't trust everything. Nihilism is destructive because it implies a negative attitude towards all aspects of social life.

Scientific skepticism

Scientific skepticism is the most productive type. This is what all science is based on. This type is characterized by the denial of everything that is not confirmed by experience. Such a skeptic is a good scientist. Believe me, society needs such people, but communicating with them is very difficult.

Depending on personality characteristics, there are three main types of skeptics:

Types are the essence and principles of skepticism.

At the moment, we can clearly distinguish three main directions in the course of skepticism, which in turn are based on one basic principle: if there is no reliable evidence for something, then it cannot be a fact. It follows that any information should be treated as doubtful until it is confirmed or refuted.

Three types of skepticism:

• Scientific skepticism;
• Philosophical skepticism;
• Religious skepticism.

Areas of action for skeptics

As a rule, skepticism is pronounced in the following areas of public life.

Everyday skepticism

As for skepticism in everyday life, the basic one can be considered a purely philosophical approach, which recommends doubting the reliability of knowledge. Even what is recognized by authoritative scientific circles! However, we are not talking about complete denial or unwillingness to recognize the achievements of scientists.

On the contrary, this concept allows for unique research and new results in areas that once seemed “fully explored.” This is a very valuable quality of skepticism - the ability for introspection and self-improvement, which allows you to avoid stagnation.

Unfortunately, at the level of the average person, skepticism often develops into satisfied disbelief. The person adopts a position of disbelief and refuses to accept any arguments, calling his behavior an “extension of cognitive experience.” But isn't doubting the truth of any proposition self-contradictory?

Religious skepticism

When it comes to religious skepticism, the issue is quite simple. Religious skeptics are people who doubt certain religious claims or dogmas. For example, they may doubt the reality of certain miracles or the veracity of the “facts” described in sacred texts. It is worth noting that religious skeptics are not always atheists. A person can be quite religious, but at the same time disagree with some statements from the concept of his faith.

Philosophical skepticism

Philosophical skepticism has a more abstract meaning than scientific skepticism. Philosophical skeptics refrain from asserting the absolute truth of things, believing that everyone can be wrong. Sometimes this type of skepticism is called Pyrrhonism, since the ancient Greek philosopher Pyrrho of Elis is considered its founder.

Simply put, the concept of philosophical skepticism can be defined as doubt that reliable knowledge exists at all.

Scientific skepticism

This branch of skepticism is based on doubts about various scientific or near-scientific statements. For example, scientific skeptics ask:

• The effectiveness of homeopathy and alternative methods of treatment;
• The existence of telekinesis, telepathy and so on;
• The existence of various supernatural entities (spirits, spiritualists, angels, deities, etc.);
• Usefulness of cryptozoology and ufology;
• Popular Psychology Claims;
• The reality of pseudoscientific myths and much more.

The main goal of scientific skepticism is to prove or disprove information that is presented under “scientific sauce.”

The meaning of the word Skepticism according to the Brockhaus and Efron dictionary:

Skepticism - I.S. is one of the main philosophical movements that is opposite to dogmatic philosophy and denies the possibility of constructing a philosophical system. Sextus the Empiricist says: “The skeptical trend essentially consists in comparing the data of the senses and the data of reason and their possible opposition. From this point of view, we skeptics, by virtue of the logical equivalence of opposition in objects and arguments of reason, first come to abstinence from judgment, and then to perfect peace of mind” (“Pyrrho’s Principles,” I, § 4). In modern times, Aenesidemus (Schulze) gives the following definition of S.: “skepticism is nothing more than the assertion that philosophy is not able to give firm and generally accepted positions either regarding the existence or non-existence of objects and their qualities, or regarding the boundaries of human knowledge.” A comparison of these two definitions, ancient and new, shows that ancient skepticism was practical in nature, while the new one was theoretical. In various studies on skepticism (Steidlin, Deschamps, Kreibig, Sasse, Owen), various types of skepticism are established, and, however, the motives from which skepticism follows are often confused with skepticism itself. In essence, only two types of S. should be distinguished: absolute and relative. the first is the denial of the possibility of all knowledge, the second is the denial of philosophical knowledge. Absolute skepticism disappeared along with ancient philosophy, while relative skepticism is developed in the new in very diverse forms. The distinction between skepticism as a mood and skepticism as a complete philosophical movement has undoubted power, but this distinction is not always easy to make. Skepticism contains elements of denial and doubt and is a completely vital and complete phenomenon. So, for example, Descartes' skepticism is a methodological technique that led him to dogmatic philosophy. In any research, scientific skepticism is a life-giving source from which truth is born. In this sense, skepticism is completely opposite to the dead and deadening S. Methodological skepticism is nothing more than criticism. Such skepticism, as Owen notes, is equally contradicted by both a positive affirmation and a definite denial. S. grows out of skepticism and manifests itself not only in the philosophical sphere, but also in the religious, ethical and scientific sphere. The fundamental question for S. is epistemological, but the motives for denying the possibility of philosophical truth can be drawn from various sources. S. can lead to the denial of science and religion, but, on the other hand, conviction in the truth of science or religion can lead to the denial of all philosophy. Positivism, for example, is nothing more than the denial of philosophy on the basis of confidence in scientific knowledge. The main reasons used by skeptics of various times to deny the possibility of knowledge are as follows: a) the difference in opinions of philosophers served as a favorite topic for skeptics. This argument was developed with particular zeal by Montaigne in his Essays and by French skeptics who imitated Montaigne. This argument has no significance, because from the fact that the opinions of philosophers are different, nothing follows in relation to the truth and the possibility of finding it. The argument itself needs proof, because perhaps the opinions of philosophers differ only in appearance, but in essence they converge. The possibility of reconciling philosophical opinions did not turn out to be impossible, for example, for Leibniz, who argued that all philosophers are right in what they affirm and differ only in what they deny. b) Limitations of human knowledge. Indeed, human experience is extremely limited within space and time. therefore conclusions drawn from such experience must seem ill founded. This argument, for all its apparent persuasiveness, has, however, not much more significance than the previous one. knowledge deals with a system in which each individual case is a typical representative of an infinite number of others. General laws are reflected in particular phenomena, and the task of human knowledge is exhausted if it succeeds in deducing from particular cases a system of general world laws. c) The relativity of human knowledge. This argument has philosophical significance and is the main trump card of skeptics. This argument can be presented in various forms. Its main meaning is that cognition is the activity of the subject and cannot in any way get rid of the stamp of subjectivity. This basic principle breaks down into two main motives: one, so to speak, sensualistic, the other rationalistic. the first corresponds to the sensory element of knowledge, the second to the intellectual. An object is cognized by the senses, but the qualities of the object are not at all similar to the content of the sensation. Sensory cognition delivers to the subject not an object, but a phenomenon, a subjective state of consciousness. An attempt to distinguish two kinds of qualities in an object - primary, belonging to the object itself and repeated in sensory knowledge, and secondary (subjective, like color) - leads to nothing, because the so-called primary qualities, i.e. definitions of space and time, turn out to be just as subjective as secondary ones. But since, the skeptic-sensualist continues, the entire content of the mind is given by sensations, and only the formal side belongs to the mind, then human knowledge can never deal with objects, but always only with phenomena, that is, with the states of the subject. The rationalist skeptic, inclined to recognize the primary importance of reason and its independence from the senses, directs his arguments against the activity of reason itself. He argues that reason, due to the principles inherent in it, in its activities falls into fundamental contradictions, from which there is no outcome. Kant tried to systematize these contradictions and presented them in the form of four antinomies of reason. In the very activity of the mind, not only in its results, the skeptic finds a contradiction. The main task of reason is to prove, and any proof ultimately rests on obvious truths, the truth of which cannot be proven and therefore contradicts the demands of reason. - These are the main arguments of skeptics against the possibility of philosophical knowledge, based on the relativity of human knowledge. If we recognize them as solid, then we must at the same time recognize the futility of any attempt at philosophical quest within the sensualistic and rationalistic area. in this case, only S. or mysticism remains, as an affirmation of the possibility of supersensible and superintelligent knowledge. Perhaps, however, the strength of the skeptic's arguments is not as great as it seems at first glance. The subjective nature of sensations is beyond doubt, but it does not follow from this that nothing in the real world corresponds to sensations. From the fact that space and time are forms of our contemplation, it does not follow that they are only

subjective forms.
As for reason, the unresolved nature of antinomies does not imply their insoluble nature. The unprovability of axioms does not in the least speak against their truth and ability to serve as the basis of evidence. Many authors have worked to refute S. with greater or lesser success, for example. Crousaz in his "Examen du pyrrhonisme". II. S.'s history represents a gradual decline and exhaustion. S. originated in Greece, played a small role in the Middle Ages, was revived again during the restoration of Greek philosophy during the Reformation, and was reborn into softer forms (positivism, subjectivism) in the new philosophy. In history, the concept of S. is often too widespread: for example. Saisse, in his famous book about S., classifies Kant and Pascal as skeptics. With such an expansion of the concept of S., the entire history of philosophy could be squeezed into its framework, and those followers of Pyrrho who, according to Diogenes Laertius, classified Homer and the Seven Wise Men as skeptics, would have been right. Cicero laughs at such a dissemination of the concept of S. in his “Lucullus”. S. appeared in Greece. True, Diogenes Laertius says that Pyrrho studied in India, and Sextus Empiricus mentions the skeptic Anacharsis Scythians (“Adversus logicos”, VII, 55), but there is no reason to attach significance to this information. It is also unreasonable to classify Heraclitus and the Eleatics as skeptics for the reason that the younger sophists associated their negative dialectics with the above-mentioned philosophers. The Sophists prepared skepticism. Their subjectivism naturally should have led to an affirmation of the relativity of knowledge and the impossibility of objective truth. In the sphere of ethics and religion, the teaching of Protagoras contained elements of S. The younger generation of sophists - for example. Gordius of Leontinus and Hypnia of Elis serve as representatives of the purest denial, although their denial was of a dogmatic nature. The same should be said about Thrasymachus and Callicles, described by Plato. they lacked only the seriousness of conviction to be skeptics. The founder of the Greek school of skeptics was Pyrrho, who gave S. a practical character. S. Pirrhon tries to give a person complete independence from knowledge. Not because little importance is attributed to knowledge because it can be erroneous, but because its usefulness for the happiness of people - this goal of life - is doubtful. The art of living, the only valuable one, cannot be learned, and such art in the form of certain rules that could be transmitted does not exist. The most expedient thing is to limit knowledge and its role in life as much as possible. but it is obvious that it is impossible to completely get rid of knowledge. While a person lives, he experiences coercion from sensations, from external nature and society. All the “paths” of skeptics therefore do not have meaning in themselves, but represent only indirect indications. - The practical direction of Pyrrhonism indicates a small connection between sophistry and S.. this is confirmed by historical information, which makes Pyrrhon dependent on Democritus, Metrodorus and Anaxarchus, and not on the sophists. Sextus Empiricus (in Pyrrho's Principles, Book I, § 32) clearly points out the difference between the teachings of Protagoras and Pyrrho. Pyrrho did not leave behind any writings, but created a school. Diogenes Laertius mentions many of his students, such as Tychon from Phlius, Aenesidemus from the island of Crete, systematizer S. Nausifan, teacher Epicurus, and others. Pyrrho's school soon ceased to exist, but S. was adopted by the academy. The first skeptic of the new academy was Arcesilaus
(about half of the third century BC), who developed his skeptical teaching in the fight against Stoic philosophy.
The most brilliant representative of the new academy was Carneades
of Cyrene, the founder of the so-called third academy.
His criticism is directed against Stoicism. He tries to show the impossibility of finding a criterion of truth either in sensory or rational knowledge, to undermine the possibility of proving the existence of God and to find an internal contradiction in the concept of the Divine. In the ethical sphere, he denies natural law. For the sake of peace of mind, he creates a kind of probability theory that replaces truth. The question of how much Carneades enriched S. and how much he is an imitator is not sufficiently clarified. Zeller believes that S. Aenesidemus owes a lot to Carneades. but this is contradicted by the words of Sextus Empiricus, who strictly distinguishes the systems of the Academicians from the Aenesidemic teaching. The works of Aenesidemus have not reached us. Associated with his name are the so-called ten “paths,” or 10 systematized arguments against the possibility of knowledge. Here the concept of causality is analyzed in particular detail. The meaning of all paths is proof of the relativity of human knowledge. The paths are listed in Sextus Empiricus' Pyrrhonian Principles, Book I, § 14. They all refer to facts of perception and habit. Only one (8th) path is devoted to thinking, where it is proven that we do not know the objects themselves, but only objects in relation to other objects and to the cognizing subject. Younger skeptics propose a different classification of paths. Agrippa puts forward five of them, namely: 1) the endless variety of opinions does not allow the formation of a firm conviction. 2) every proof rests on another, also in need of proof, and so on ad infinitum. 3) all ideas are relative depending on the nature of the subject and the objective conditions of perception. The 4th path is only a modification of the second. 5) The truth of thinking rests on the data of perception, but the truth of perception rests on the data of thinking. Agrippa's division reduces the tropes of Aenesidemus to more general points of view and does not stop exclusively or almost exclusively with the data of perception. The most important skeptical writer for us is Sextus Empiricus, a physician who lived in the 2nd century. according to R.H. He is not very original, but his writings are an irreplaceable source for us. In the Christian era, S. acquired a completely different character. Christianity, as a religion, did not value scientific knowledge, or at least did not recognize knowledge as an independent and guiding principle. Such S. on religious grounds still has its defenders (for example, Brunetière, “La science et la religion”, Par., 1895). Under the influence of religion, the doctrine of double truth appeared - theological and philosophical, first proclaimed by Simon of Tournai at the end of the 12th century. (see Magw a ld. “Die Lehre von d. zweifachen Wahrheit”, Berl., 1871). Philosophy is not completely free from it to this day. During the Renaissance, along with attempts at independent thinking, ancient Greek systems reappeared, and with them S., but it could no longer acquire its former meaning. S. first appeared in France. Michel de Montaigne (1533-92) with his “Experiences” evoked a number of imitators, such as: Charron, Sanchez, Girnheim, La Mothe Le Vaye, Huet, Glanville (English), Baker (English), etc. All Montaigne’s arguments are contained in his great experience about the philosophy of Raymond of Sabunda: Montaigne does not have anything fundamentally new. Montaigne is a skeptic in mood rather than a skeptic in the sense of Epesidemus. “My book,” says Montaigne, “contains my opinion and expresses my mood. I express what I believe, and not what everyone should believe in... Maybe tomorrow I will be completely different if I learn something and change.” Charron essentially follows Montaigne, but in some ways he tries to extend his skeptical mood even further. eg he doubts the immortality of the soul. The closest to the ancient skeptics is La Mothe Le Vaillé, who wrote under the pseudonym Oratius Tubero. of his two students, one, Sorbier, translated part of Sextus Empiricus into French. language, and another, Fouche, wrote the history of the academy. The largest of the French. skeptics - Pierre Daniel Huet (1630-1721). his posthumous work “On the Weakness of the Human Mind” repeats the arguments of Sextus, but he has in mind the contemporary philosophy of Descartes. The work of Bishop Hue is the largest work of skeptical philosophy after Sextus Empiricus. Glanville was Hume's predecessor in the analysis of the concept of causality. In the history of S., an extensive place is usually given to Peter Bayle (1647-1706). Deschamps even dedicated a special monograph to him (“Le scepticisme é. rudit chez Bayle”). but Bayle’s real place is in the history of religious education, and not in the history of S.. he is in the 17th century. was what Voltaire was in the 18th. S. Bayle appeared in his famous historical dictionary, published in 1695. The main problem that led him to S. was the problem of the source of evil, which intensely occupied the 17th century. His skeptical principles are set out in an article on Pyrrho and the Pyrrhonists , from which it is clear that S. is important to him mainly as a weapon against theology. Around the same time, refutations of S., written by Martin Schock (Schoock, “De scepticisme”, Groningen, 1652), Sillon (“De la certitude des connaissances humaines”, Par., 1661) and de Willemandou (“Scepticismus”) also date back to debellatus", Leiden, 1697). In new philosophy, starting with Descartes, there is no place for absolute S., but relative S., that is, the denial of the possibility of metaphysical knowledge, is extremely common. The study of human cognition, starting with Locke and Hume, as well as the development of psychology, should have led to increased subjectivism. in this sense, one can talk about S. Hume and find skeptical elements in the philosophy of Kant, since the latter denied the possibility of metaphysics and knowledge of objects in themselves. Dogmatic philosophy also arrived at a somewhat similar result on this point in a completely different way. Positivism, represented by Comte and his followers, affirms the impossibility of metaphysics, like Spencer's evolutionism, which stands for the unknowability of being in itself and for the relativity of human knowledge. but it is hardly fair to put these phenomena of new philosophy in connection with S. The work of E. Schulze, “Aenesidemus oder ü. ber die Fundamente der von H. Reinhold geliferten Elementarphilosophie” (1792), in which the author defends the principles of S. by criticizing Kant’s philosophy. Wed. St ä.udlin, “Geschichte und Geist des Scepticismus, vorzü.glich in Rü. cksicht auf Moral u. Religion" (Lpts., 1794). Deschamps, “Le scepticisme é. rudit chez Bayle" (Liège, 1878). E. Saisset, “Le skepticisme” (P., 1865). Kreibig, "Der ethische Scepticismus" (Vienna, 1896). E. Radlov
.

Skepticism in philosophy

Skepticism appeared in philosophy around the 5th century BC. However, it is believed that its creator was the ancient Greek philosopher Pyrrho of Aelis (c. 360 - c. 270 BC).

Since ancient times, skeptical philosophy has shaped arguments against the dogmatic claims of philosophers, scientists, and others. Thus, during the development of ancient philosophy and science, doubts arose about the truth of the basic worldviews of that period.

Skepticism is considered one of the most important philosophical schools of the Hellenistic period. Epicureanism and Stoicism were also very important.

Representatives of skepticism

Famous skeptical philosophers include names such as:

• Pyrrho of Aelis;
• Timon from Phliuntu;
• Rene Descartes;
• Marcus Tullius Cicero;
• Aenesidemus;
• Carneades;
• Sextus Empiricus;
• Arcesilaus.

Skepticism and agnosticism

The connection between skepticism and agnosticism is that agnosticism is similar to skepticism about anything related to religion.

Agnosticism is a worldview in which knowledge of the existence or non-existence of God(s) is impossible; it can be seen as a cross between theism and atheism.

Agnosticism advocates a worldview in which our knowledge is limited to the physical world and is incapable of knowing anything beyond the supernatural.

Hume's skepticism

Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711 - 1776) left his mark on the history of philosophy with his rather bold, skeptical approach to many philosophical topics. In epistemology, for example, he challenged accepted worldviews about personhood. According to Hume, there is no permanent self that does not change over time.

David Hume did not accept traditional explanations of causation; he argued that our ideas about causation are based not on the simple perception of causal forces in the external world, but on our standards of thinking.

Montaigne's skepticism

In the 16th century, the French writer and philosopher Michel de Montaigne (1533 - 1592) contributed to the revival of skepticism. He greatly influenced such important figures in philosophy as René Descartes and Blaise Pascal.

In his writings on human knowledge, Montaigne notes that “in different ways a person achieves the same goal:

1. the same human behavior can lead to opposite results;
2. Opposite patterns of behavior can lead to the same result.

He also believed that a person is always guided by selfishness in his actions and thoughts. Montaigne already argued that the main goals of every person’s existence are to achieve harmony and happiness.

Questions of skepticism in philosophy are raised quite often

What is skepticism?

Skepticism is a tendency to refrain from categorical judgments, a critical and distrustful attitude towards any generally accepted phenomenon or information imposed from outside that is not confirmed and proven. The word comes from the Greek words “Scepsis” - “doubt” and “Scepticos” - “looking at, observing”. That is, skepticism encourages not so much to doubt as to study and investigate. To be a skeptic means to have a healthy dose of mistrust and common sense to distinguish the real from the fake.

Skepticism began with the teachings of the ancient Greek philosopher Pyrrho, founded in the first century BC. The teaching is based on the statement: “To think means to doubt. It is not human nature to be sure of anything.” The skeptic follows the path of doubt: he comprehends all the answer options, then comes to the conclusion that all options are equivalent. As a result, the skeptic withholds judgment because he does not know which statement is true. According to modern scientists, this is the most tolerant teaching that does not deny the correctness of other ideologies.

Skepticism has its advantages and disadvantages . Conservatism and a thirst for truth coexist in him at the same time. On the one hand, this is a kind of force field that protects people from pseudo-facts, bad ideas, excessive gullibility, and manipulation. But a skeptical view can be a manifestation of passivity, cynicism, suspicion, and fear of losing one’s point of view.

So the main disadvantage is in extremes. Lack of criticality makes a person an easy target for scammers. Unhealthy skepticism trusts nothing without proof. Therefore, he does not believe in God, love, friendship.

Take a personality type test

Is it good or bad to be a skeptic?

The main question of this topic is: is it good to be a skeptic? Definitely better than a naive simpleton. Perhaps constant doubts periodically complicate life, but they protect a person from rash actions.

Pros of being a skeptic

The critical thinking of a skeptic gives him certain advantages. It is almost impossible to manipulate him, it is impossible to impose wrong views on him. Skeptics almost never become victims of scammers; they do not trust advertising and quickly detect poorly disguised scams and deceptions. They are constantly in search of the truth and are willing to spend enormous effort to find it. These qualities often help them succeed in life.

A skeptic thinks logically, trying to subordinate every action to common sense, so he is not alien to impulsive actions and decisions. He does not strive to “be like everyone else” and does not follow trends. He is a skeptic who usually swims alone against the tide, resisting established stereotypes and trying to open the eyes of others. The ability to deeply analyze information makes skeptics excellent auditors, inspectors, investigators, lawyers and, of course, scientists.

Cons of being a skeptic

The most problematic area for skeptics is human relationships. They are suspicious and distrustful and do not hesitate to openly express their doubts. Their pettiness often irritates their interlocutors. When they encounter a questionable statement, they ask, “Where did you read that? Such questions cause a negative reaction because people are not ready to answer them and perceive them as a sign of mistrust.

The skeptic himself understands perfectly well that his meticulousness spoils his relationships with people, but he cannot do anything about it. He is also aware of his slowness in making important decisions and sometimes envies impulsive people who do not have time to think. Skepticism is useful when making long-term plans for the future, but interferes with making urgent decisions.

How to become a skeptic

To become a skeptic, you need to learn to filter all the information you hear, stop being gullible, and check everything.

In order to develop skepticism, you need to follow certain guidelines.

1. When you are given information, you must check it, find some arguments, check everything.
2. It is worth considering that when communicating with any person you can come across fairy tales, people can invent something, fantasize. Therefore, you must learn to ask follow-up questions that will allow you to get to the truth. For example, if someone tells you that they heard something somewhere, they should explain where and when they heard it, and who exactly was the source of the information.
3. If a suspicious person decides to share information with you, you should not trust his words. Be sure to double-check everything, ask people you trust, or you can check from additional sources.
4. You should not be deceived by any promotions or discounts. Then you will understand that you were wrong. If you want to take part in any lottery, get full information about the organizer, the results of previous promotions, and what gifts were given.
5. To become a skeptic, you need to develop skeptical thinking. You must understand that scientific theories can also turn out to be wrong after some time. A skeptic constantly analyzes and verifies what he hears. This helps to be careful and identify misinformation. You have to think about everything you hear.
6. You should only check the veracity of other people's statements if it makes sense to do so. If someone claims that it is impossible to jump out of a moving car and then jump back into it, you should not test that claim by attempting those actions. There are many ideas that can be strange or dangerous. Skepticism helps protect against possible negative factors.

Sometimes skepticism can be useful in a certain profession or area of ​​human activity

How to learn critical thinking?

Critical thinking means analyzing information, the ability to distinguish the highest truth from lies, consider all arguments, reason impartially and come out of a situation in your favor. Where to begin?

Recognize problems in your thinking

The starting point for learning is self-reflection. You must learn to observe yourself from the outside, analyze your decisions. You can start by analyzing unpleasant situations that happen regularly: not only describe your thought process, but also identify logic and the role of emotions in decision making.

At the same time, you need to train your memory. Poor memory can distort events beyond recognition and make them seem real. On the other hand, trained memory provides all the necessary material for comparing the information received with your experience.

It is important to consider the barriers to critical thinking. This is a fear of expressing your judgment, a reluctance to think about information. It's a lack of self-confidence, being too quick to criticize your own ideas, or simply being cowardly. It is also a lack of knowledge, a lack of experience.

Apply critical thinking guidance to problem solving

Make it a habit to think about one problem a week. You can use the sample format:

• Problem. Make sure it exists.
• Situation. Describe the problem from different points of view: chronological, logical, emotional.
• Analysis. Think about what really happened, get to the bottom of it.
• Brainstorm. Make a list of possible solutions, no matter how risky or unlikely they may be.
• Solution. Make an informed decision when choosing what is right for you in your specific case.
• Actions. Act strictly according to plan, if only to test critical thinking in action.
• Grade. Evaluate the result, your mistakes, the experience gained.

Develop the qualities necessary for critical thinking

1. Observation is noticing details, collecting information;
2. Skepticism means questioning any information, even from the most reliable sources;
3. Objectivity means limiting the influence of emotions where a cool mind is needed;
4. Curiosity - being interested in the world and people;
5. Accuracy - judge how accurate the conclusion is or whether there are still weak points;
6. Analytical thinking - making decisions based on observation, collection and evaluation of evidence;
7. Empathy - taking into account the human factor;
8. Openness to new solutions - keep an open mind to alternative interpretations;
9. Impartiality - consideration of all evidence, points of view, information;
10. Communication - follow the other person's train of thought.

How to raise a skeptic?

First, you need to answer the question, why raise a skeptic at all? Or, more precisely, why develop skepticism in a person? Of course, it is right to teach children not to trust strangers. But developing cynicism and distrust of everyone and everything is also not an option.

Human socialization is based on interaction with other people. Trust is an important part of this process. Without this, it is impossible to build a normal family, friendship and cooperation. Of course, trusting everyone uncritically is a mistake. But pushing people away with excessive suspicion is also fraught with bad consequences. It is best to raise a child in the spirit of harmony with himself and the world around him, developing in him, in addition to critical thinking skills, the ability to trust people.

Do not think that a skeptic is necessarily a callous and rude person. It all depends on the degree of expression of this quality. Sometimes the ability to doubt helps to avoid fraud and deception. This type of people is less susceptible to external influences and therefore always has their own opinion. On the other hand, excessive doubts interfere with establishing contacts and building relationships, causing everyone to be considered distrustful people. It is better to trust in moderation and not oppress others with your suspicion.

Pathological condition

Excessive skepticism can lead to pathological conditions. Such a person often suffers from constant doubts and searching for arguments. Over time, the conflict with the immediate environment may escalate. Strongly expressed skepticism leads to isolation, excessive suspicion, complaints, and a schizoid personality is formed.

A deep expression of skepticism can completely consume a person. All reasons to believe in anything disappear, and a person does not even admit the possibility of the existence of any truth. Morality, law and ethical standards no longer serve their role; they cease to be a deterrent.

In real life, a person’s complete capitulation to skepticism is a rare mental phenomenon. As a rule, people are characterized by healthy skepticism towards unverified information.

Excessive skepticism can be dangerous for what, like many other extremes of human personality

Definition of the word “Skepticism” according to TSB:

Skepticism (French scepticisme, from Greek skeptikos, literally - considering, exploring) is a philosophical position based on doubt about the existence of any reliable criterion of truth. The extreme form of S., based on the assertion that there is nothing in our knowledge that corresponds to reality and reliable knowledge is in principle unattainable, is Agnosticism. Emphasizing the relativity of human cognition, S. played a positive role in the fight against various forms of dogmatism and posing a number of problems in the dialectics of cognition, although he was unable to resolve them. Revealing the incompleteness and imperfection of our knowledge, their connection with the historical conditions of the process of cognition, S. absolutizes this relativity and ultimately comes to doubt the possibility of reliable objective knowledge in general. In principle, proclaiming the rejection of final judgments, S. at the same time is constantly forced to make certain judgments in fact. S.'s historical role in the ideological struggle and public life was different depending on what was the subject of his criticism and was questioned. In ancient Greek philosophy, S. was represented by a special school, the development of which was divided into three periods: early S., the founder of which was Pyrrho. S., developed at the Platonic Academy under its leaders Arcesilaus and Carneades. late S., represented by Aenesidemus, Agrippa, Sextus Empiricus (See Sextus Empiricus) and others. The futility of attempts to find a criterion for the truth of both sensory knowledge and thinking, emphasizing the differences in moral norms among different peoples, the diversity of religious beliefs, clarifying how different theories refute each other, the idea that every truth is proven by another, and this leads either to a vicious circle in the proof, or to an arbitrary choice of axioms, or to an infinite regress, arguments showing that the existence of causality is unprovable - these are the most important arguments (“tropes”) with which ancient skeptics substantiate the equivalence of opposing statements and the principle of refraining from judgment. But the need to act, making certain decisions, forces the ancient S. to admit that although there may be no criterion of truth, there is a criterion of practical behavior. This criterion must be based on “reasonable probability” (Arkesilaus). Ancient S. encourages us to follow what sensations and feelings attract us to (eat when we feel hungry, etc.), follow the laws and customs of the country, engage in certain activities (including scientific ones), etc. Leaving a position that equally distrusted sensation and thinking, ancient S. gave preference to feelings and knowledge, coming closely to empiricism and experimental science. Experimental science—medicine—is practiced by the last representatives of ancient Greece: Menodotus, Theodos, Sextus and Saturninus. In the 16th-18th centuries. S. was the name given to any criticism of religion and dogmatic metaphysics in general. S. becomes synonymous with freethinking. Its starting point is a rebellion against the power of authorities and the dogmatism of generally accepted opinions, a demand for freedom of thought, a call not to take anything for granted. Skeptical ideas were most fully and clearly expressed in the works of the French thinkers M. Montaigne, P. Bayle and others. These ideas were the starting point of the philosophical development of P. Gassendi, R. Descartes, Voltaire, D. Diderot. S. received a different form in the subjective idealistic philosophy of D. Hume, who questioned the very existence of the objective world. In the further development of bourgeois philosophy, agnosticism plays a large role, and S. occurs only as a tendency (“fictionalism” by H. Vaihinger and others). Lit.: Richter R., Skepticism in philosophy. lane from German, vol. 1, St. Petersburg, 1910. Shlet G. G., The Skeptic and His Soul, M., 1919. Boguslavsky V. M., At the Origins of French Atheism and Materialism, M., 1964. Coedeckemeyer A. , Die Geschichte des Griechischen Skeptizismus, Lpz., 1905. Patrick M. M., The Greek skeptics, NY, 1929. Robin L., Pyrrhon et ie skepticisme grec. P., 1944. Bevan E. R., Stoics and skeptics, NY, [1959]. Brochard V., Les sceptiques grecs, P., 1887. Stough C h. L., Greek skepticism, Berk., 1969. Rodhe SE, Zweifelund Erkenntnis. &UUML.ber das Problem des Skeptizismus und den Begriff des Absoluten, Lund - Lpz., [1945]. Smith T. G., Moralische Skepsis, Freiburg, 1970. V. M. Boguslavsky.

The dangers of skepticism and cynicism

Therefore, it’s time to sum up some results and also say why it is dangerous to be a skeptic and a cynic.

From the above it is clear that skepticism and cynicism do not do anything special; they simply call for approaching everything from the point of view of reason, and not faith. Therefore, if someone asks us, a skeptic is a person of what beliefs, we can answer that he is a person who does not take anyone’s word for it and tests everything with the power of his intellect.

However, there is a certain subtlety to this worldview. It's that you can't put a building on anything. In other words, no matter how cynical and skeptical a person may be, he still has some secret faith that feeds his courageous mind. When it is not there, it will soon appear, and then the current skeptic will become a believer. We can say: what if the conviction in the existence of something higher does not come to a person? Then the believer in cynicism will fall into the clutches of nihilism. The latter is also not very good; let us at least remember the fate of Bazarov, and everything will immediately become clear to us.

Skepticism pros and cons

Let's look at the pros and cons of skepticism. Critical thinking is part of the process of scientific knowledge, and up to a certain extent there is nothing wrong with it. In some situations, he can really save. This quality will keep a person from investing money in a financial adventure.

However, excessive suspicion can prevent the development of new relationships and taking profitable risks. In the second case, we are talking about unhealthy skepticism, in which the level of distrust of people is unreasonably high. The pathological fear of falling into the clutches of scammers makes a person refuse sensible offers.