Page 7 of 7

Re: Why Randi, CSICOP, Skeptics are contradictions

PostPosted: 18 Jul 2013, 23:12
by NinjaPuppy
Arouet wrote:
NinjaPuppy wrote:Yes, JT- That all makes sense to me. Well put.


Wait what? really? Are you going to make me have to actually go through that point by point?

I can't make you do anything that you really don't want to do, or can I? Hmmmmm. ;)

Arouet wrote:You first: what exactly do you think in all of that was well put?

OK, I'll show you mine but then you're going to have to show me yours..... Let's start here, shall we?

1. Believers are content to believe their experience is true, but skeptics are not(pause)
Skeptics do not believe their own experiences or not content to believe their experiences are true. Skeptics may even doubt the reliability of their own senses. Does that mean they are more comfortable relying on the senses of others?

If personal experience and/or memory for that fact, are not considered to be true or accurate then obviously any skeptic doubts the reliability of their own senses. You can't tell me they only doubt the reliability of "others" senses because that would be pretty flawed logic right there or one hell of an inflated frickin' ego. Now JT asks if they (skeptical persons) are more comfortable relying on the sense of others? Others meaning (at least to me) a select group of hand picked personal favorite people like other skeptics/scientists/their mom....whoever.

OK, your turn.

Re: Why Randi, CSICOP, Skeptics are contradictions

PostPosted: 19 Jul 2013, 01:34
by NinjaPuppy
justintime wrote:You suffer from extreme disbelief/insecurity and quite visibly not capable of engaging in an interactive discussion hampered by a diminished capacity for intellectual growth.

Once again, very nicely put but I must agree to disagree with you on the accuracy of your response. IMO, Arouet is what I will call a fairly typical skeptic without any extremes and possibly less insecurities than most. As for the capability of engaging in an interactive discussion, he can be a most worthy opponent and even a bit of fun during a good exchange. He tends to keep quiet on topics that are not of his interest rather than throw arbitrary jabs.

He's also kept me waiting a very long time for his response and I want to go to WalMart. Bad Arouet, BAD!

Re: Why Randi, CSICOP, Skeptics are contradictions

PostPosted: 19 Jul 2013, 06:24
by Arouet
NinjaPuppy wrote:If personal experience and/or memory for that fact, are not considered to be true or accurate then obviously any skeptic doubts the reliability of their own senses.


True, a skeptic will assess the reliability of their experience and memory - but it is insulting to believers as a group to suggest that they will not. I'm sure there are some who don't, but stop by Skeptiko sometime- you will see plenty of believers analysing and questioning their own experiences for reliability and accuracy. I give more credit to believers than Justin does I guess.

Re: Why Randi, CSICOP, Skeptics are contradictions

PostPosted: 19 Jul 2013, 06:25
by NinjaPuppy
justintime wrote:I agree, Arouet is a great asset to skeptics. I hope he increases his participation because skeptics can learn from him how to lose and still be gracious in defeat. Most skeptics I encounter have never won an argument but believe the more obnoxious they get the closer they are to claiming that elusive win. That is why we end up with so many skeptics who are both obnoxious and losers.

I don't look at it as a 'win' or 'lose' situation. An exchange of information that provokes more research or thought is always a 'win'.

Re: Why Randi, CSICOP, Skeptics are contradictions

PostPosted: 03 Sep 2013, 01:53
by NinjaPuppy
Nice post. I liked it.

Re: Why Randi, CSICOP, Skeptics are contradictions

PostPosted: 24 Mar 2017, 20:47
by alexa1994
Interesting

Re: Why Randi, CSICOP, Skeptics are contradictions

PostPosted: 17 Jun 2017, 14:18
by jet0987
Hello everyone,
My issue with the Randi challenge is that as a magician he could easily rig the challenges using sleight-of-hand. It is my understanding all challenges have to be Randi approved and I think it is doubtful he would approve anything that he could not be sure of the outcome.

Re: Why Randi, CSICOP, Skeptics are contradictions

PostPosted: 21 Jun 2017, 16:08
by alexa1994
Yes, I think it is a good to approve all challenges by Randi approved. I think it will help the community to make standards.