Saturday, December 14, 2013

Skepticism vs. Cynicism


Just entering the word Cynicism in google presents me with a problem I see in society at large. A synonym of Cynicism is Skepticism in this narrow google definition, and although they have largely been viewed as similar by many, it is so important that we take a moment and iron out why one is not productive, and the other is the foundation of modern civilization.

Originating in the Greek Skepsis, meaning inquiry, Skepticism is an approach of learning using doubt and critical thinking skills as opposed to authority, faith, or anecdotal evidence. Greek thinkers, such as Pyrrho, Epicurus, and the stoic philosophers such as Zeno, Seneca, Hierocles, tried to work out the best way to learn about the natural world, and in the process, the figured out that people are not necessarily honest to themselves. Richard Feynman astutely noted that the easiest person to fool is one's self, thus we must try to doubt our experiences and what we think we know.

Using Skepticism, we can attempt to verify evidence for our beliefs objectively, by removing human error. Of course this is the basis of the Scientific Method, and remains today the most reliable method of determining truth from fiction.

If I told you there was a UFO in my garage, you would be skeptical, or the world would call you credulous, gullible, or naive without asking for evidence. This is skepticism and modern education at work.

Cynicism on the other hand, is defined as: An attitude of scornful or jaded negativity, especially a general distrust of the integrity or professed motives of others.
In other words, it is an attitude defined by negativity, one of ripping down walls, rather than constructing them. These two are often confused and a rational thinker's attempt to bring reason into a conversation is often perceived as being cynical. 

Let's try to differentiate the two and remember that when someone is skeptical of your position, we should receive it well. When someone is being cynical, we should ask them to ask them to either find the flaw in our logic, or propose a better idea.  We can be very positive skeptics in this world. As for me, I am an optimist, and a hardened skeptic. They are far from mutually exclusive. In fact, I would go so far as to say that skepticism has made me more eager for life, increasing my curiosity and passion for the world, knowing we can move forward together!

Please comment on your experienced between the two concepts. Ten points to who can name the philosopher we get the word Cynic from...




Sunday, December 8, 2013

The Harm of Faith

Christopher Hitchens once called faith the most over-rated virtue. Voltaire described it as what is beyond the power of reason to believe. Personally, I find it to be one of the most destructive forces in the modern world, and yet so many consider it benign.

So what is faith? If all things can be broken down philosophically into beliefs, and knowledge being beliefs of considerable certitude, then where does faith lie? It would seem when one has a belief which is not justified by reason, logic, or evidence, then perhaps we call that faith. Still, there are so many beliefs which are adjusted, altered or dropped due to new evidence.

That is because Faith is a belief that one REFUSES to give up regardless of the evidence against it.  As Nietzsche put it: "Faith: not wanting to know what is true." Faith is the ultimate weapon of religions and is isolated to one thing - God.

You see, despite how loosely the word is used in our every day vernacular, most of those examples are misapplied. Faith and trust are two different things, and since trust relies on experience and evidence, it is most often what people mean. You do not have faith in your spouse, you have trust. The same goes, for that matter, for doctors, the military, technology, transportation, etc... These are all things you have had a lifetime of experience with, and have come to trust them.

If someone has faith in their love, but then the relationship goes wrong, one would be considered crazy to still pursue the relationship with the same vigor afterwards. We often use faith to describe a sense of optimism we might have, however it is not to be confused with the faith of religion.

In a world where we are pushing so hard to improve education, to increase critical thinking skills, we find ourselves shocked by some of the zanier aspects of society and what they are willing to believe, but that does not concern me as much as the troves of people in the US who are simultaneously encouraged to apply skepticism,critical thinking, and faith in god.

So long as society thinks it is OK to believe in something for no reason at all, we will continue to be plagued by ideas which hold us down from progress. Climate change denial, creationism, job-creators, traditions, avoiding vaccines due to paranoia, alternative medicines, trickle-down economics, and so many more are simply held in place because some think it is OK to believe something despite the lack of evidence, or because of a poor application of logic.

Aron Ra described faith as the ultimate test of gullibility, to see how much you are willing to believe with the slightest evidence. So the question is, on the topic of faith, why is there anything encouraged to be believed without sufficient reason?