Re: [escepticos] Escépticos?

[Miguel Angel Velilla Mula <mvelilla@...>]

Francisco Mercader Rubio wrote:

> "Escepticismo:  Tesis según la cual, la conciencia no puede alcanzar un
> conocimiento verdadero, cierto y completo o una creencia con suficiente
> justificación racional".
> "Escéptico: El que duda [.....].
> 
> Sin embargo,  podría acercarme, con reservas, a la segunda de las
> acepciones del DRAE:
> 
> "Escepticismo:  Desconfianza o duda de la verdad o eficacia de alguna
> cosa".
> 
> Después de esto, estaba claro que, para conjugar la definición de
> escéptico con mis actitudes,  tenía que moldearla a mi medida,
> añadiendole una coletilla parecida a esto:
> 
> Escepticismo: Doctrina que consiste en no aceptar aseveraciones ajenas
> que no vayan acompañadas de las  correspondientes demostraciones
> efectuadas según  un proceso lógico.
> 
> Se me ocurre que podríamos, entre todos, buscar una acepción "a medida"
> del término 'escéptico' aplicable a los habitantes de esta corrala. Sigo
> creyendo que las definiciones "oficiales" son insuficientes o ambiguas.
>         Saludos.


Mercader: talvez este mail enviado pelo CSICOP ayude a tu portera y le
solucione el problema existencial.


Mig
------------------------------------------------------------------- 


 SPECIAL:  THE NEW SKEPTICISM: A WORLDWIDE MOVEMENT
 Paul Kurtz

 Kurtz is Chairman and Founder of CSICOP.  A Professor Emeritus of
Philosophy
at the State University of New York at Buffalo, he is the author or
editor of
thirty books including _The New Skepticism_ and _The Transcendental
Temptation_.  (<A HREF="http://www.prometheusbooks.com/";>
http://www.prometheusbooks.com/</A> )

 Kurtz is considered the leading spokesperson for the international
skeptical
movement, and is a well-recognized intellectual across the globe.
 ______________________

 I.
 The contemporary skeptical movement may be said to have been initiated
with
the founding of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims
of
the Paranormal in 1976. This movement is now growing worldwide and it
provides
a much-needed antidote to the persistence of irrational, paranormal, and
occult systems of belief.

 Skepticism is an ancient philosophical and scientific outlook that
traces its
origins to Greece and Rome. Sextus Empiricus, Pyrrho, Carneades, and
others
advanced the skeptical outlook in the ancient Graeco-Roman world.
Skepticism
went into eclipse in Christian Europe for over a thousand years, but it
was
revived during the modern period when thinkers as diverse as Bayle,
Descartes,
Montaigne, and Hume advocated it. Indeed, in no small measure the
revival of
modern skepticism led to the development of the scientific revolution in
the
sixteenth century. Scientific discovery rapidly advanced when men and
women
were liberated from the blind hold of authority, faith, custom,
revelation,
and mysticism, and when they sought to appeal to inductive evidence and
experiment to test hypotheses and deductive reason and mathematics to
develop
more comprehensive theories.

 There are at least three kinds of skepticism that may be distinguished;
the
first in its extreme form is negative and nihilistic. It has had both
classical and modern defenders. It holds that no knowledge is possible,
and
this applies not only to scientific and philosophical theories, but to
any
kind of moral or political principles. This form of skepticism is
totally
unreliable. A person cannot hope to function in the world if he or she
is in a
state of utter doubt and indecision. A second form of skepticism, which
developed in ancient times and came to fruition in the modern world was
called
by David Hume, "mitigated skepticism." This approach said that we needed
to
act in the world and to formulate beliefs about it. Yet it still
presupposed
an underlying gnawing skepticism about the reliability of knowledge.
Still a
third kind of skepticism had emerged on the philosophical scene in the
early
part of the 20th century. Charles Peirce and the American pragmatists
argued
that skeptical doubt is but one phase within a process of inquiry, but
it can
be overcome when hypotheses are tested by adequate evidence and
justifying
reasons. This form of skepticism is positive and constructive and it is
limited to specific contexts under inquiry. Scientific inquirers realize
that
their formulations may not be fixed or final and may be modified in the
future
by future observations and theories. Nonetheless, science presupposes
the
conviction that reliable knowledge is possible and can be attained by
persistent efforts.

 The kind of skepticism which the Committee for the Scientific
Investigation
of Claims of the Paranormal presents is continuous with the third kind
above.
I have called this "the new skepticism" in my book by that name.[1] This
form
of skepticism is based on the realization that the progress of science
is the
result of the continuing application of the methods of science, and that
skepticism is an intrinsic part of the process of inquiry.

 Permit me to say something about the reasons why I decided to create
such a
movement. I had long been a critic of paranormal (and supernatural)
claims
that could not be supported by the evidence. I was astonished that many
or
most of the claims continued to enjoy widespread public support, even
though
they had been refuted. Moreover, the mass media latched onto paranormal
claims, which they discovered was profitable at the boxoffice. Uri
Geller,
Jeane Dixon, and others were enjoying a huge following with nary a
dissent.
This was in spite of the fact that scientific inquiry, which
investigated
their claims, had rejected them because of a lack of evidence. Astrology
is a
good case in point, for it was refuted by astronomers, physicists,
statisticians, psychologists, and other scientists. There is no
empirical
basis for horoscopes or sun-sign astrology; its cosmology is based on
the
discredited Ptolemaic system; moreover, it is possible to test its
predictions
and forecasts; and the results are invariably negative. Yet very few in
the
general public are aware of these criticisms, and indeed often confuse
astronomy with astrology.

 With this in mind, I helped to draft and issue a statement, "Objections
to
Astrology," with the help of Bart Bok, a noted astronomer, and Lawrence
Jerome, a science writer. This statement was endorsed by 186 leading
scientists, including 19 Nobel Laureates. It received immediate
worldwide
attention, especially after the New York Times did a front-page story.
It
seemed to me that the success of this effort, especially within the
scientific
community, called for the need for a more organized response by the
academic
and scientific community. I decided to create a new coalition comprised
of
scientists, skeptics, philosophers, magicians, and others. Hence, I
invited
several dozen critics of the paranormal to Amherst, New York, to an open
conference to develop an organized opposition to the uncontested growth
of
belief in the paranormal. These included some well-known popular
critics, such
as Martin Gardner, Milbourne Christopher, Marcello Truzzi, Ray Hyman,
James
Randi, and others. I also invited some distinguished philosophers and
scientists, such as Ernest Nagel, Sidney Hook, and W. V. Quine to
endorse the
statement of purpose which I had drafted.

 The conference was held at the new campus of the State University of
New York
at Buffalo, in Amherst, New York. At that time, I was editor of THE
HUMANIST
magazine, one of the leading journals critical of religion. At the
inaugural
meeting of CSICOP, in my opening address ("The Scientific Attitude
versus
Anti-Science and Pseudoscience"), I said that there was a long-standing
conflict in the history of culture between religion and science, but
that
today a new challenge to science has come to the fore because of the
growth of
pseudoscientific and paranormal claims. The apparent popular belief in
exorcism,[2] nouveau witches, and Satanism were symptomatic of the
Aquarian
consciousness then being proclaimed. The mass media also presented as
true and
usually without any dissent accounts of Kirlian photography, the wonders
of
ESP and psychokinesis, UFO sightings, the Bermuda Triangle, Bigfoot, van
Daniken's _Chariots of the Gods_, etc. A great number of quasi-religious
cults
had also emerged at that time. These were symptomatic of a
countercultural
opposition to science that had begun to appear, and it needed, in my
judgment,
to be responded to -- for the public had a right to hear the scientific
critique of the pseudoscientific and fringe claims.

 I raised the following questions:

 * Should we assume that the scientific revolution,
 * which began in the sixteenth century, is continuous?
 * Or will it be overwhelmed by the forces of unreason?

 And I replied:

 * We ought not to assume, simply because ours is an
 * advanced scientific-technological society, that
 * irrational thinking will be overcome. The evidence
 * suggests that this is far from being the case. Indeed,
 * there is always the danger that science itself may be
 * engulfed by the forces of unreason.[3]

 Since that time, postmodernism has emerged, denying the possibility of
scientific objectivity, and considering science one mythic narrative
amongst
others. And much to everyone's surprise there has been widespread
attacks on
the Enlightenment and the ideals of the scientific revolution.

 Today these antiscientific protests are accompanied by a resurgence of
fundamentalist religions. So the challenge to science is not simply from
propagandists for the paranormal, but also from the disciples of many
religions. I should point out that although I personally believe that
skeptics
need to deal with religious claims as well as with paranormal claims, I
recommended that CSICOP concentrate on paranormal and pseudoscientific
claims.
The British and the American Societies for Psychical Research, founded
in 1882
and 1885 respectively, were basically made up of those committed to the
psychical point of view, as was J. B. Rhine's laboratory founded at Duke
University in 1927. Hence, CSICOP would concentrate on paranormal
investigations, though hopefully from a neutral and impartial framework,
and
it would examine religious claims only insofar as they were testable. I
founded FREE INQUIRY in 1980 explicitly to deal with religious claims,
for the
new skepticism needs to be applied across the board.

 As is well known, the first meeting of CSICOP had an enormous impact.
There
was extensive press coverage from the Washington Post and New York Times
to Le
Monde and Pravda, with virtually all of the major science magazines
welcoming
the formation of CSICOP. We had crystallized a perceived need that both
the
scientific community and many in the general public thought had to be
satisfied: a response to the growth of paranormal claims. Within a year
our
new magazine was launched, at first called THE ZETETIC(under the
editorship of
Marcello Truzzi), and thence the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER(under the editorship
of
Kendrick Frazier, who had been the editor of SCIENCE NEWS). Much to our
pleasure, skeptical groups began forming all over the world, so that
today
there are over 75 such groups from Germany, England, and the
Netherlands, to
China, Russia, Spain, and Mexico; and there are networks of such groups
in
Europe ("EuroSkeptics") and Latin America. Moreover, some 50 magazines
and
newsletters have appeared. Indeed, we have worked closely with national
groups
to help get their organizations and magazines started.

 All of these developments have contributed to the formation of a
worldwide
New Skepticism Movement. There is now a vibrant and growing
International
Network affiliated with CSICOP and the SKEPTICAL INQUIRER. We are all
committed to the scientific program, we are skeptical of paranormal and
occult
claims, unless they have been corroborated and replicated by independent
investigators.

 One may ask, After more than two decades of inquiry, what can be
learned
about this entire phenomena? In the rest of this article I wish to sum
up many
of the basic findings and conclusions that the skeptical movement has
reached
about paranormal belief claims.

 ***Look for Part II in next week's SI DIGEST***
 ----------------------