Skepticism

Doubtful attitude toward knowledge claims

"Skeptic" redirects here. For other uses, see Skeptic (disambiguation).

For denial of uncomfortable truths, see Denialism. For the band, see Skepticism (band).

Skepticism (US) or scepticism (UK) is a questioning attitude or doubt toward knowledge claims that are seen as mere belief or dogma.[1] For example, if a person is skeptical about claims made by their government about an ongoing war then the person doubts that these claims are accurate. In such cases, skeptics normally recommend not disbelief but suspension of belief, i.e. maintaining a neutral attitude that neither affirms nor denies the claim. This attitude is often motivated by the impression that the available evidence is insufficient to support the claim. Formally, skepticism is a topic of interest in philosophy, particularly epistemology.

More informally, skepticism as an expression of questioning or doubt can be applied to any topic, such as politics, religion, or pseudoscience. It is often applied within restricted domains, such as morality (moral skepticism), atheism (skepticism about the existence of God), or the supernatural.[2] Some theorists distinguish "good" or moderate skepticism, which seeks strong evidence before accepting a position, from "bad" or radical skepticism, which wants to suspend judgment indefinitely.[3][4]

Philosophical skepticism is one important form of skepticism. It rejects knowledge claims that seem certain from the perspective of common sense. Radical forms of philosophical skepticism deny that "knowledge or rational belief is possible" and urge us to suspend judgment on many or all controversial matters. More moderate forms claim only that nothing can be known with certainty, or that we can know little or nothing about nonempirical matters, such as whether God exists, whether human beings have free will, or whether there is an afterlife. In ancient philosophy, skepticism was understood as a way of life associated with inner peace.[5]

Skepticism has been responsible for many important developments in science and philosophy. It has also inspired several contemporary social movements. Religious skepticism advocates for doubt concerning basic religious principles, such as immortality, providence, and revelation.[6] Scientific skepticism advocates for testing beliefs for reliability, by subjecting them to systematic investigation using the scientific method, to discover empirical evidence for them.

## Definition and semantic field

[edit]

Skepticism, also spelled scepticism (from the Greek σκέπτομαι skeptomai, to search, to think about or look for), refers to a doubting attitude toward knowledge claims.[2][7] So if a person is skeptical of their government's claims about an ongoing war then the person has doubts that these claims are true. Or being skeptical that one's favorite hockey team will win the championship means that one is uncertain about the strength of their performance.[2] Skepticism about a claim implies that one does not believe the claim to be true. But it does not automatically follow that one should believe that the claim is false either. Instead, skeptics usually recommend a neutral attitude: beliefs about this matter should be suspended. In this regard, skepticism about a claim can be defined as the thesis that "the only justified attitude with respect to [this claim] is suspension of judgment".[8] It is often motivated by the impression that one cannot be certain about it. This is especially relevant when there is significant expert disagreement.[9] Skepticism is usually restricted to a claim or a field of inquiry. So religious and moral skeptics have a doubtful attitude about religious and moral doctrines. But some forms of philosophical skepticism, are wider in that they reject any form of knowledge.[9]

Some definitions, often inspired by ancient philosophy, see skepticism not just as an attitude but as a way of life. This is based on the idea that maintaining the skeptical attitude of doubt toward most concerns in life is superior to living in dogmatic certainty, for example because such a skeptic has more happiness and peace of mind or because it is morally better.[2][10] In contemporary philosophy, on the other hand, skepticism is often understood neither as an attitude nor as a way of life but as a thesis: the thesis that knowledge does not exist.[2]

Skepticism is related to various terms. It is sometimes equated with agnosticism and relativism.[4][11][12] However, there are slight differences in meaning. Agnosticism is often understood more narrowly as skepticism about religious questions, in particular, about the Christian doctrine.[11] Relativism does not deny the existence of knowledge or truth but holds that they are relative to a person and differ from person to person, for example, because they follow different cognitive norms.[13] The opposite of skepticism is dogmatism, which implies an attitude of certainty in the form of an unquestioning belief.[14] A similar contrast is often drawn in relation to blind faith and credulity.[3]

## Types

[edit]

Various types of skepticism have been discussed in the academic literature. Skepticism is usually restricted to knowledge claims on one particular subject, which is why its different forms can be distinguished based on the subject.[2][7][9] For example, religious skeptics distrust religious doctrines and moral skeptics raise doubts about accepting various moral requirements and customs. Skepticism can also be applied to knowledge in general. However, this attitude is usually only found in some forms of philosophical skepticism.[2][7] A closely related classification distinguishes based on the source of knowledge, such as skepticism about perception, memory, or intuition.[15] A further distinction is based on the degree of the skeptical attitude. The strongest forms assert that there is no knowledge at all or that knowledge is impossible. Weaker forms merely state that one can never be absolutely certain.[2]

Some theorists distinguish between a good or healthy form of moderate skepticism in contrast to a bad or unhealthy form of radical skepticism. On this view, the "good" skeptic is a critically minded person who seeks strong evidence before accepting a position. The "bad" skeptic, on the other hand, wants to "suspend judgment indefinitely... even in the face of demonstrable truth".[3][4] Another categorization focuses on the motivation for the skeptical attitude. Some skeptics have ideological motives: they want to replace inferior beliefs with better ones. Others have a more practical outlook in that they see problematic beliefs as the cause of harmful customs they wish to stop. Some skeptics have very particular goals in mind, such as bringing down a certain institution associated with the spread of claims they reject.[2][7]

Philosophical skepticism is a prominent form of skepticism and can be contrasted with non-philosophical or ordinary skepticism. Ordinary skepticism involves a doubting attitude toward knowledge claims that are rejected by many.[8] Almost everyone shows some form of ordinary skepticism, for example, by doubting the knowledge claims made by flat earthers or astrologers.[2][7] Philosophical skepticism, on the other hand, is a much more radical and rare position. It includes the rejection of knowledge claims that seem certain from the perspective of common sense. Some forms of it even deny that one knows that "I have two hands" or that "the sun will come out tomorrow".[8][16] It is taken seriously in philosophy nonetheless because it has proven very hard to conclusively refute philosophical skepticism.[2][8]

## In various fields

[edit]

Skepticism has been responsible for important developments in various fields, such as science, medicine, and philosophy. In science, the skeptical attitude toward traditional opinions was a key factor in the development of the scientific method. It emphasizes the need to scrutinize knowledge claims by testing them through experimentation and precise measurement.[14][17] In the field of medicine, skepticism has helped establish more advanced forms of treatment by putting into doubt traditional forms that were based on intuitive appeal rather than empirical evidence.[3][14] In the history of philosophy, skepticism has often played a productive role not just for skeptics but also for non-skeptical philosophers.[2][7][18] This is due to its critical attitude that challenges the epistemological foundations of philosophical theories. This can help to keep speculation in check and may provoke creative responses, transforming the theory in question in order to overcome the problems posed by skepticism.[2][7] According to Richard H. Popkin, "the history of philosophy can be seen, in part, as a struggle with skepticism". This struggle has led many contemporary philosophers to abandon the quest for absolutely certain or indubitable first principles of philosophy, which was still prevalent in many earlier periods.[7] Skepticism has been an important topic throughout the history of philosophy and is still widely discussed today.[2]

### Philosophy

[edit]

Part of a series on

Pyrrhonism

Pyrrhonists

* Pyrrho
* Timon of Phlius
* Aenesidemus
* Agrippa the Skeptic
* Sextus Empiricus

Concepts

* Ataraxia
* Acatalepsy
* Adiaphora
* Aporia
* Dogma
* Epoché

Similar philosophies

* Academic skepticism

Modern influence

* Münchhausen trilemma
* Benson Mates
* Robert Fogelin

Philosophy portal

* v
* t
* e

Main article: Philosophical skepticism

As a philosophical school or movement, skepticism arose both in ancient Greece and India. In India the Ajñana school of philosophy espoused skepticism. It was a major early rival of Buddhism and Jainism, and possibly a major influence on Buddhism. Two of the foremost disciples of the Buddha, Sariputta and Moggallāna, were initially students of the Ajñana philosopher Sanjaya Belatthiputta. A strong element of skepticism is found in Early Buddhism, most particularly in the Aṭṭhakavagga sutra. However, the total effect these philosophies had on each other is difficult to discern. Since skepticism is a philosophical attitude and a style of philosophizing rather than a position, the Ajñanins may have influenced other skeptical thinkers of India such as Nagarjuna, Jayarāśi Bhaṭṭa, and Shriharsha.[19][full citation needed]

In Greece, philosophers as early as Xenophanes (c. 570–c. 475 BCE) expressed skeptical views, as did Democritus[20] and a number of Sophists. Gorgias, for example, reputedly argued that nothing exists, that even if there were something we could not know it, and that even if we could know it we could not communicate it.[21] The Heraclitean philosopher Cratylus refused to discuss anything and would merely wriggle his finger, claiming that communication is impossible since meanings are constantly changing.[22]: 449 Socrates also had skeptical tendencies, claiming to know nothing worthwhile.[23]

Pyrrho of Elis was the founder of the school of skepticism known as Pyrrhonism.

There were two major schools of skepticism in the ancient Greek and Roman world. The first was Pyrrhonism, founded by Pyrrho of Elis (c. 360–270 BCE). The second was Academic Skepticism, so-called because its two leading defenders, Arcesilaus (c. 315–240 BCE) who initiated the philosophy, and Carneades (c. 217–128 BCE), the philosophy's most famous proponent, were heads of Plato's Academy. Pyrrhonism's aims are psychological. It urges suspension of judgment (epoche) to achieve mental tranquility (ataraxia). The Academic Skeptics denied that knowledge is possible (acatalepsy). The Academic Skeptics claimed that some beliefs are more reasonable or probable than others, whereas Pyrrhonian skeptics argue that equally compelling arguments can be given for or against any disputed view.[22]: 450 Nearly all the writings of the ancient skeptics are now lost. Most of what we know about ancient skepticism is from Sextus Empiricus, a Pyrrhonian skeptic who lived in the second or third century CE. His works contain a lucid summary of stock skeptical arguments.

Ancient skepticism faded out during the late Roman Empire, particularly after Augustine (354–430 CE) attacked the skeptics in his work Against the Academics (386 CE). There was little knowledge of, or interest in, ancient skepticism in Christian Europe during the Middle Ages. Interest revived during the Renaissance and Reformation, particularly after the complete writings of Sextus Empiricus were translated into Latin in 1569 and after Martin Luther's skepticism of holy orders.[24] A number of Catholic writers, including Francisco Sanches (c. 1550–1623), Michel de Montaigne (1533–1592), Pierre Gassendi (1592–1655), and Marin Mersenne (1588–1648) deployed ancient skeptical arguments to defend moderate forms of skepticism and to argue that faith, rather than reason, must be the primary guide to truth. Similar arguments were offered later (perhaps ironically) by the Protestant thinker Pierre Bayle in his influential Historical and Critical Dictionary (1697–1702).[25]: chaps. 1 & 2

The growing popularity of skeptical views created an intellectual crisis in seventeenth-century Europe. An influential response was offered by the French philosopher and mathematician René Descartes (1596–1650). In his classic work, Meditations of First Philosophy (1641), Descartes sought to refute skepticism, but only after he had formulated the case for skepticism as powerfully as possible. Descartes argued that no matter what radical skeptical possibilities we imagine there are certain truths (e.g., that thinking is occurring, or that I exist) that are absolutely certain. Thus, the ancient skeptics were wrong to claim that knowledge is impossible. Descartes also attempted to refute skeptical doubts about the reliability of our senses, our memory, and other cognitive faculties. To do this, Descartes tried to prove that God exists and that God would not allow us to be systematically deceived about the nature of reality. Many contemporary philosophers question whether this second stage of Descartes's critique of skepticism is successful.[25]: 210

In the eighteenth century a new case for skepticism was offered by the Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711–1776). Hume was an empiricist, claiming that all genuine ideas can be traced back to original impressions of sensation or introspective consciousness. Hume argued that on empiricist grounds there are no sound reasons for belief in God, an enduring self or soul, an external world, causal necessity, objective morality, or inductive reasoning. In fact, he argued that "Philosophy would render us entirely Pyrrhonian, were not Nature too strong for it."[22]: 456 As Hume saw it, the real basis of human belief is not reason, but custom or habit. We are hard-wired by nature to trust, say, our memories or inductive reasoning, and no skeptical arguments, however powerful, can dislodge those beliefs. In this way, Hume embraced what he called a "mitigated" skepticism, while rejecting an "excessive" Pyrrhonian skepticism that he saw as both impractical and psychologically impossible.

Hume's skepticism provoked a number of important responses. Hume's Scottish contemporary, Thomas Reid (1710–1796), challenged Hume's strict empiricism and argued that it is rational to accept "common-sense" beliefs such as the basic reliability of our senses, our reason, our memories, and inductive reasoning, even though none of these things can be proved. In Reid's view, such common-sense beliefs are foundational and require no proof in order to be rationally justified.[22]: 456 Not long after Hume's death, the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) argued that human empirical experience has possibility conditions which could not have been realized unless Hume's skeptical conclusions about causal synthetic a priori judgements were false.

Today, skepticism continues to be a topic of lively debate among philosophers.[2] British philosopher Julian Baggini posits that reason is perceived as "an enemy of mystery and ambiguity," but, if used properly, can be an effective tool for solving many larger societal issues.[26]

### Religion

[edit]

Main article: Religious skepticism

Religious skepticism generally refers to doubting particular religious beliefs or claims. For example, a religious skeptic might believe that Jesus existed (see historicity of Jesus) while questioning claims that he was the messiah or performed miracles. Historically, religious skepticism can be traced back to Xenophanes, who doubted many religious claims of his time, although he recognized that "God is one, supreme among gods and men, and not like mortals in body or in mind." He maintained that there was one greatest God. God is one eternal being, spherical in form, comprehending all things within himself, is the absolute mind and thought, therefore is intelligent, and moves all things, but bears no resemblance to human nature either in body or mind.[27]

Religious skepticism is not the same as atheism or agnosticism, though these often do involve skeptical attitudes toward religion and philosophical theology (for example, towards divine omnipotence). Religious people are generally skeptical about claims of other religions, at least when the two denominations conflict concerning some belief. Additionally, they may also be skeptical of the claims made by atheists.

The historian Will Durant writes that Plato was "as skeptical of atheism as of any other dogma". The Baháʼí Faith encourages skepticism that is mainly centered around self-investigation of truth.[28]

### Science

[edit]

Main article: Scientific skepticism

A scientific or empirical skeptic is one who questions beliefs on the basis of scientific understanding and empirical evidence.

Scientific skepticism may discard beliefs pertaining to purported phenomena not subject to reliable observation and thus not systematic or empirically testable. Most scientists, being scientific skeptics, test the reliability of certain kinds of claims by subjecting them to systematic investigation via the scientific method.[29] As a result, a number of ostensibly scientific claims are considered to be "pseudoscience" if they are found to improperly apply or to ignore the fundamental aspects of the scientific method.

### Auditing

[edit]

Professional skepticism is an important concept in auditing. It requires an auditor to have a "questioning mind", to make a critical assessment of evidence, and to consider the sufficiency of the evidence.[30]

## See also

[edit]

* The Amaz!ng Meeting – Annual conference for skeptics, 2003–2015Pages displaying short descriptions of redirect targets
* Critical thinking – Analysis of facts to form a judgment
* Committee for Skeptical Inquiry – Organization focusing on scientific skepticism
* Cynicism – Ancient school of philosophy
* Debunker – Person or group discrediting false claims
* Euroscepticism – Body of criticism of the European Union
* List of topics characterized as pseudoscience
* Pseudoskepticism – Position that appears to be skeptic but is actually dogmatic
* Scientific skepticism – Questioning of claims lacking empirical evidence
* Skeptic – Science education magazinePages displaying short descriptions of redirect targets
* The Skeptic – British magazinePages displaying short descriptions of redirect targets
* Skeptical Inquirer – Bimonthly magazine published by CSI
* Skepticality – Skeptical podcast
* Skeptical movement – Questioning of claims lacking empirical evidencePages displaying short descriptions of redirect targets
* The Skeptic's Dictionary – 2003 essay collection by Robert Todd Carroll
* Skeptics in the Pub – Informal social event for skeptics since 1999
* The Skeptics Society – American nonprofit organization
* Trivialism – Logical theory

## Notes

[edit]

1. ^ Pritchard, Duncan (2006). "Contemporary Skepticism". The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Archived from the original on 13 January 2009. "Philosophical views are typically classed as skeptical when they involve advancing some degree of doubt regarding claims that are elsewhere taken for granted."
2. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o Greco, John (2 September 2009). "Introduction". The Oxford Handbook of Skepticism (1 ed.). Oxford University Press. pp. 3–7\. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195183214.003.0001. ISBN 978-0195183214.
3. ^ a b c d Raynaud, Maurice (1 May 1981). "Skepticism in Medicine: Past and Present". The Linacre Quarterly. 48 (2). ISSN 0024-3639.
4. ^ a b c Sandkühler, Hans Jörg, ed. (2010). "Skepsis/Skeptizismus". Enzyklopädie Philosophie. Meiner.
5. ^ Bett, Richard Arnot Home (28 January 2010). The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Scepticism. Cambridge University Press. p. 289\. ISBN 978-0521874762.
6. ^ "skepticism (noun)". Merriam-Webster. Retrieved 5 February 2016.
7. ^ a b c d e f g h Popkin, Richard H. "skepticism". Britannica. Retrieved 23 August 2022.
8. ^ a b c d Comesaña, Juan; Klein, Peter (2019). "Skepticism". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved 24 August 2022.
9. ^ a b c Blackburn, Simon (1 January 2008). "scepticism". The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199541430.
10. ^

* Vogt, Katja (2021). "Ancient Skepticism". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved 30 August 2022.
* Reed, Baron (2018). "Skepticism as a Way of Life". In McCain, Kevin; Poston, Ted (eds.). The Mystery of Skepticism. Brill Studies in Skepticism. Vol. 2\. Brill. pp. 63–80\. doi:10.1163/9789004393530_006. ISBN 978-9004393530. S2CID 150356547.

11. ^ a b Newton Flew, Antony Garrard. "agnosticism". Britannica. Retrieved 26 August 2022.
12. ^ Sankey, Howard (1 March 2012). "Scepticism, relativism and the argument from the criterion". Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A. 43 (1): 182–190\. Bibcode:2012SHPSA..43..182S. doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2011.12.026. ISSN 0039-3681.
13. ^ Baghramian, Maria; Carter, J. Adam (2022). "Relativism: 4.4 Epistemic relativism". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved 26 August 2022.
14. ^ a b c Laursen, John Christian (2018). "Skepticism". New Dictionary of the History of Ideas.
15. ^ Cohen, Stewart (1996). Craig, Edward (ed.). Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Routledge.
16. ^ Olsson, Erik J. (2005). "Not Giving the Skeptic a Hearing: 'Pragmatism and Radical Doubt'". Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 70 (1): 98–126\. doi:10.1111/j.1933-1592.2005.tb00507.x. ISSN 0031-8205. JSTOR 40040781.
17. ^ Lagerlund, Henrik (29 April 2020). "Non-Philosophical Skepticism". Skepticism in Philosophy: A Comprehensive, Historical Introduction. Routledge. p. 197\. ISBN 978-1351369954.
18. ^ Daly, Chris (2015). "Introduction and Historical Overview". The Palgrave Handbook of Philosophical Methods. U.K.: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 1–30\. doi:10.1057/9781137344557_1. ISBN 978-1137344557.
19. ^ Matilal 2004, pp. 52–75.
20. ^

* Diogenes Laërtius. Lives of the Eminent Philosophers. Book IX.
* Bakalis (2005, p. 86)[full citation needed]

21. ^ Jones, W. T. (1952). A History of Western Philosophy. New York: Harcourt, Brace. p. 60 n. 45.
22. ^ a b c d Popkin, Richard H. (1967). "Skepticism". In Edwards, Paul (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 7\. New York: Macmillan.
23. ^ Hazlett, Allan (2014). A Critical Introduction to Skepticism. London: Bloomsbury. pp. 4–5.
24. ^ Daughtrity, Dyron B. (2017). Martin Luther: A Biography for the People. Abilene Christian University Press. p. 358. ISBN 978-0891124689. Retrieved 11 February 2023.
25. ^ a b Popkin, Richard H. (1979). The History of Skepticism from Erasmus to Spinoza (revised ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press.
26. ^ Radford, Benjamin; Frazier, Kendrick (January 2017). "The Edge of Reason: A Rational Skeptic in an Irrational World". Skeptical Inquirer. 41 (1): 60.
27. ^ McKirahan, Richard D. (2010). Philosophy Before Socrates (2nd ed.). Hackett Publishing Company. pp. 61–63\. ISBN 978-1603841832.
28. ^ Smith, Peter (2000). A Concise Encyclopedia of the Baháʼí Faith. Oxford, U.K.: Oneworld Publications. pp. 266–267\. ISBN 1851681841.
29. ^ Bloomberg, David; Novella, Steven (July 1999). "Scientific Skepticism, CSICOP, and the Local Groups". Skeptical Inquirer. 23 (4). Retrieved 5 July 2018.
30. ^ "AU Section 230: Due Professional Care in the Performance of Work". Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. 1972. Professional Skepticism. Retrieved 28 April 2018.

## Sources

[edit]

* Butchvarov, Panayot (1998). Skepticism About the External World. Oxford University Press.
* Hönigswald, Richard (2008) [1914]. Die Skepsis in Philosophie und Wissenschaft. Göttingen: Edition Ruprecht. ISBN 978-3767530560.
* Keeton, Morris T. (1962). "skepticism". In Runes, Dagobert D. (ed.). Dictionary of Philosophy. Totowa, N.J.: Littlefield, Adams, and Company. pp. 277–278.
* Le Morvan, P. (March 2011). "Healthy Skepticism and Practical Wisdom" (PDF). Logos & Episteme. 2 (1). Institute for Economic and Social Research: 87–102\. doi:10.5840/logos-episteme20112151. ISSN 2069-0533. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 September 2019.
* Liddell, Henry George; Scott, Robert; Jones, Henry Stuart; McKenzie, Roderick (1940). A Greek-English Lexicon (revised and augmented ed.). Oxford, U.K.: Clarendon Press.
* Matilal, B.K. (2004). "Scepticism". Logical and Ethical Issues: An Essays on Indian Philosophy of Religion (2nd ed.). India: Orient Blackswan. pp. 52–75\. ISBN 978-8180280115.
* Neilson, W.A.; Knott, T.A.; Carhart, P.W., eds. (1950). Webster's New International Dictionary of the English Language (Second, Unabridged ed.). Springfield, Mass.: G. & C. Merriam Company.

## Further reading

[edit]

* Burnyeat, Myles (1983). The Skeptical Tradition. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0520037472.
* Bury, Robert Gregg (1933). Sextus Empiricus: Outlines of Pyrrhonism. Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0674993013. `{{cite book}}`: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
* Empiricus, Sextus; Annas, Julia; Barnes, Jonathan (20 July 2000). Sextus Empiricus: Outlines of Scepticism. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521778091.
* Novella, Steven (2018). The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe: How to Know What's Really Real in a World Increasingly Full of Fake. Hodder & Stoughton. ISBN 978-1473696419.
* Pearcey, Nancy (2005). Total Truth:Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity. Crossway Books. ISBN 978-1581347463.
* Popkin, Richard H. (2003). The History of Scepticism: From Savonarola to Bayle. Oxford University Press, US. ISBN 978-0198026716.
* Rosa L; Rosa E; Sarner L; Barrett S (1 April 1998). "A close look at therapeutic touch". JAMA. 279 (13): 1005–1010\. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.592.8130. doi:10.1001/jama.279.13.1005. ISSN 0098-7484. PMID 9533499.
* Thaxton, Charles (1994). The Soul of Science: Christian Faith and Natural Philosophy. Crossway Books. ISBN 978-0891077664.
* Wilson, Richard (2009). Don't Get Fooled Again: A Sceptic's Handbook. Icon. ISBN 978-1848310520.

## External links

[edit]

* Skepticism at PhilPapers
* Skepticism at the Indiana Philosophy Ontology Project
* Klein, Peter. "Skepticism". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
* Vogt, Katja. "Ancient Greek Skepticism". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
* Thorsrud, Harald. "Ancient Greek Skepticism". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
* Bolyard, Charles. "Medieval Skepticism". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
* Pritchard, Duncan. "Contemporary Skepticism". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
* Kleiner, Kurt (30 August 2005). "Most Scientific Papers are Probably Wrong". New Scientist. Archived from the original on 19 September 2008.
* "Skeptical Inquirer Magazine Names the Ten Outstanding Skeptics of the Century". Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. Amherst, N.Y. Archived from the original on 15 July 2007.
* Skepticism in Paranormal Research

Portals:

* Philosophy
* Psychology

Skepticism at Wikipedia's sister projects:

* Definitions from Wiktionary
* Media from Commons
* Quotations from Wikiquote
* Data from Wikidata

Links to related articles

* v
* t
* e

Analytic philosophy

Related articles|

| Areas of focus|

* Metaphysics
* Epistemology
* Language
* Mathematics
* Science

|

Turns|

* Aretaic
* Historical
* Linguistic
* Performative

Logic|

* Classical
* Deviant
* Mathematical
* Non-classical
* Paraconsistent
* Philosophical
* Predicate

Theories|

* Anti-realism
* Causal theory of reference
* Descriptivism
* Emotivism
* Feminism
* Functionalism
* Logical atomism
* Logical positivism
* Marxism
* Neurophilosophy
* Ordinary language
* Pragmatism
* Quietism
* Scientific structuralism
* Sense data
* Analytic theology
* Analytical Thomism

Concepts|

* Analysis (paradox of analysis)
* Analytic–synthetic distinction
* Counterfactual
* Natural kind
* Reflective equilibrium
* Supervenience

| Modality|

* Actualism
* Necessity
* Possibility
* Possible world
* Realism
* Rigid designator

|

Philosophers|

* Noam Chomsky
* Keith Donnellan
* Gottlob Frege
* Edmund Gettier
* Jaakko Hintikka
* Giuseppe Peano
* Russ Shafer-Landau
* Ernest Sosa
* Barry Stroud

| Australian realism|

* David Malet Armstrong
* David Chalmers
* J. L. Mackie
* Peter Singer
* J. J. C. Smart

|

Cambridge|

* Arif Ahmed
* Charlie Broad
* Casimir Lewy
* Norman Malcolm
* G. E. Moore
* Graham Priest
* Bertrand Russell
* Frank P. Ramsey
* Ludwig Wittgenstein

Oxford|

* G. E. M. Anscombe
* J. L. Austin
* Michael Dummett
* Antony Flew
* Philippa Foot
* Peter Geach
* Paul Grice
* R. M. Hare
* Alasdair MacIntyre
* Derek Parfit
* Gilbert Ryle
* John Searle
* P. F. Strawson
* Richard Swinburne
* Charles Taylor
* Bernard Williams
* Timothy Williamson

Logical positivists|

* A. J. Ayer
* Ernest Nagel

| Berlin Circle|

* Carl Gustav Hempel
* Hans Reichenbach

|

Vienna Circle|

* Rudolf Carnap
* Hans Hahn
* Otto Neurath
* Moritz Schlick
* Friedrich Waismann

Harvard|

* Roderick Chisholm
* Donald Davidson
* Daniel Dennett
* Nelson Goodman
* Christine Korsgaard
* Thomas Nagel
* Robert Nozick
* Hilary Putnam
* W. V. O. Quine
* John Rawls

Notre Dame|

* Robert Audi
* Peter van Inwagen

Pittsburgh School|

* Robert Brandom
* Patricia Churchland
* Paul Churchland
* Adolf Grünbaum
* John McDowell
* Ruth Millikan
* Alexander Pruss
* Nicholas Rescher
* Wilfrid Sellars
* Bas van Fraassen

Pragmatism|

* Susan Haack
* Nicholas Rescher
* Morton White

Princeton|

* Alonzo Church
* Jerry Fodor
* Kurt Gödel
* David Lewis
* Jaegwon Kim
* Saul Kripke
* Richard Rorty
* Nathan Salmon
* Michael Walzer

Quietism|

* James F. Conant
* Alice Crary
* Cora Diamond

Reformed|

* Alvin Plantinga
* William Lane Craig
* Nicholas Wolterstorff

Science|

* Paul Feyerabend
* Thomas Kuhn
* Imre Lakatos
* Karl Popper

Stanford School|

* Nancy Cartwright
* John Dupré
* Peter Galison
* Ian Hacking
* Patrick Suppes

Lwow–Warsaw|

* Jan Łukasiewicz
* Alfred Tarski

* Category

* v
* t
* e

Epistemology

Epistemologists|

* William Alston
* Aquinas
* Robert Audi
* Augustine
* A. J. Ayer
* George Berkeley
* Laurence BonJour
* Gilles Deleuze
* Keith DeRose
* René Descartes
* John Dewey
* Fred Dretske
* Edmund Gettier
* Alvin Goldman
* Nelson Goodman
* Paul Grice
* Anil Gupta
* Susan Haack
* David Hume
* Immanuel Kant
* Søren Kierkegaard
* Peter Klein
* Saul Kripke
* Hilary Kornblith
* David Lewis
* John Locke
* G. E. Moore
* John McDowell
* Robert Nozick
* Alvin Plantinga
* Plato
* Duncan Pritchard
* James Pryor
* Hilary Putnam
* W. V. O. Quine
* Thomas Reid
* Bertrand Russell
* Gilbert Ryle
* Wilfrid Sellars
* Susanna Siegel
* Ernest Sosa
* P. F. Strawson
* Baruch Spinoza
* Timothy Williamson
* Ludwig Wittgenstein
* Nicholas Wolterstorff
* Vienna Circle
* more...

Theories|

* Coherentism
* Constructivism
* Contextualism
* Empiricism
* Evolutionary epistemology
* Fallibilism
* Feminist epistemology
* Fideism
* Foundationalism
* Holism
* Infinitism
* Innatism
* Naïve realism
* Naturalized epistemology
* Phenomenalism
* Positivism
* Rationalism
* Reductionism
* Reliabilism
* Representational realism
* Skepticism
* Transcendental idealism

Concepts|

* A priori knowledge
* A posteriori knowledge
* Analysis
* Analytic–synthetic distinction
* Belief
* Certainty
* Common sense
* Descriptive knowledge
* Exploratory thought
* Epistemic injustice
* Epistemic virtue
* Gettier problem
* Induction
* Internalism and externalism
* Justification
* Knowledge
* Meta
* Objectivity
* Privileged access
* Problem of induction
* Problem of other minds
* Perception
* Procedural knowledge
* Proposition
* Regress argument
* Simplicity
* Truth
* Uncertainty

Related articles|

* Faith and rationality
* Formal epistemology
* Metaepistemology
* Philosophy of perception
* Philosophy of science
* Social epistemology
* Virtue epistemology

* Category
* Outline
* Portal
* WikiProject
* Stubs
* Discussion

* v
* t
* e

Philosophical skepticism

Skeptical philosophies|

* Academic Skepticism
* Ajñana
* Cartesian
* Charvaka
* Humeanism
* Pyrrhonism
* Solipsism

Skeptical philosophers|

* Sanjaya Belatthiputta
* Xenophanes
* Xeniades
* Metrodorus of Chios
* Anaxarchus
* Nausiphanes
* Pyrrho
* Timon

| Academic skeptics|

* Arcesilaus
* Diocles of Cnidus
* Lacydes
* Telecles and Evander
* Hegesinus
* Carneades
* Hagnon of Tarsus
* Metrodorus of Stratonicea
* Aristanax
* Clitomachus
* Charmadas
* Aeschines of Neapolis
* Philo of Larissa
* Cicero
* Gaius Aurelius Cotta
* Dio of Alexandria

|

* Aenesidemus
* Favorinus
* Agrippa
* Sextus Empiricus
* Jayarāśi Bhaṭṭa
* Nicholas of Autrecourt
* Montaigne
* Pierre Charron
* Francisco Sanches
* Uriel da Costa
* William Chillingworth
* René Descartes
* Simon Foucher
* Pierre Bayle
* David Hume
* Gottlob Ernst Schulze
* William Drummond
* Benson Mates
* Peter Unger
* Robert Fogelin

Skeptical scenarios|

* Acatalepsy
* Aporia
* Brain in a vat
* Dream argument
* Epoche
* Evil demon
* Five-minute hypothesis
* Münchhausen trilemma
* Ignoramus et ignorabimus
* Problem of the criterion
* Problem of induction
* Reductio ad absurdum
* Regress argument
* Simulation hypothesis
* Suspension of judgment
* Wax argument

Responses|

* Here is one hand
* Semantic externalism
* Process reliabilism
* Epistemic closure
* Contextualism
* Relativism

Skeptical philosophical literature|

* Barhaspatya sutras
* Academica (Cicero)
* Outlines of Pyrrhonism
* Against the Dogmatists
* Against the Mathematicians
* Essays (Montaigne)
* Discourse on the Method
* A Treatise of Human Nature
* Aenesidemus

Types of skepticism|

* Radical
* Local
* Moral
* Scientific
* Religious
* Jewish skeptics
* Pseudoskepticism

* v
* t
* e

Philosophy of science

Concepts|

* Analysis
* Analytic–synthetic distinction
* A priori and a posteriori
* Causality
* Mill's Methods
* Commensurability
* Consilience
* Construct
* Correlation
* function
* Creative synthesis
* Demarcation problem
* Empirical evidence
* Experiment
* design
* Explanatory power
* Fact
* Falsifiability
* Feminist method
* Functional contextualism
* Hypothesis
* alternative
* null
* Ignoramus et ignorabimus
* Inductive reasoning
* Intertheoretic reduction
* Inquiry
* Measurement
* Nature
* Objectivity
* Observation
* Paradigm
* Problem of induction
* Scientific evidence
* Evidence-based practice
* Scientific law
* Scientific method
* Scientific pluralism
* Scientific Revolution
* Testability
* Theory
* choice
* ladenness
* scientific
* Underdetermination
* Unity of science
* Variable
* control
* dependent and independent

Theories|

* Coherentism
* Confirmation holism
* Constructive empiricism
* Constructive realism
* Constructivist epistemology
* Contextualism
* Conventionalism
* Deductive-nomological model
* Epistemological anarchism
* Evolutionism
* Fallibilism
* Foundationalism
* Hypothetico-deductive model
* Inductionism
* Instrumentalism
* Model-dependent realism
* Naturalism
* Physicalism
* Positivism / Reductionism / Determinism
* Pragmatism
* Rationalism / Empiricism
* Received view / Semantic view of theories
* Scientific essentialism
* Scientific formalism
* Scientific realism / Anti-realism
* Scientific skepticism
* Scientism
* Structuralism
* Uniformitarianism
* Verificationism
* Vitalism

Philosophy of...|

* Biology
* Chemistry
* Physics
* Space and time
* Social science
* Archaeology
* Economics
* Geography
* History
* Linguistics
* Psychology

Related topics|

* Criticism of science
* Descriptive science
* Epistemology
* Exact sciences
* Faith and rationality
* Hard and soft science
* History and philosophy of science
* Non-science
* Pseudoscience
* Normative science
* Protoscience
* Questionable cause
* Relationship between religion and science
* Rhetoric of science
* Science studies
* Sociology of scientific ignorance
* Sociology of scientific knowledge

Philosophers of science|

| Precursors|

* Roger Bacon
* Francis Bacon
* Galileo Galilei
* Isaac Newton
* David Hume

|

* Auguste Comte
* Henri Poincaré
* Pierre Duhem
* Rudolf Steiner
* Karl Pearson
* Charles Sanders Peirce
* Wilhelm Windelband
* Alfred North Whitehead
* Bertrand Russell
* Otto Neurath
* C. D. Broad
* Michael Polanyi
* Hans Reichenbach
* Rudolf Carnap
* Karl Popper
* Carl Gustav Hempel
* W. V. O. Quine
* Thomas Kuhn
* Imre Lakatos
* Paul Feyerabend
* Ian Hacking
* Bas van Fraassen
* Larry Laudan

* Category
* Philosophy portal
* Science portal

* v
* t
* e

Virtues

About virtues|

* Endowment
* Moral character
* Nicomachean Ethics
* Positive psychology
* Trait theory
* Virtue ethics

Virtue families|

* Bodhipakkhiyā dhammā
* Brahmavihārās
* Bushidō
* Catalogue of Vices and Virtues
* Emi Omo Eso
* Epistemic virtues
* Five virtues
* Four Cardinal Principles and Eight Virtues
* Intellectual virtues
* Moral virtues
* Nine Noble Virtues
* Omoluwabi
* Pāramīs
* Prussian virtues
* Scout Law
* Seven virtues
* Cardinal
* Theological
* Teachings of the Seven Grandfathers
* Three Treasures
* Values in Action Inventory of Strengths
* Yamas

Individual virtues|

* Accountability
* Alertness
* Altruism
* Authenticity
* Calmness
* Charisma
* Charity
* Chastity
* Chivalry
* Cleanliness
* Compassion
* Conscientiousness
* Courage
* Civil
* Moral
* Courtesy
* Diligence
* Discernment
* Discipline
* Duty
* Empathy
* Endurance
* Equanimity
* Etiquette
* Faith
* Faithfulness
* Fidelity
* Foresight
* Forgiveness
* Frugality
* Generosity
* Glory
* Good faith
* Gratitude
* Heroism
* Honesty
* Honour
* Hope
* Hospitality
* Humanity
* Humility
* Impartiality
* Innocence
* Insight
* Integrity
* Intelligence
* Emotional
* Social
* Judgement
* Justice
* Kindness
* Love
* Loyalty
* Magnanimity
* Magnificence
* Meekness
* Mercy
* Moderation
* Modesty
* Nonattachment
* Patience
* Patriotism
* Perspicacity
* Philanthropy
* Piety
* Filial
* Pity
* Politeness
* Prudence
* Punctuality
* Religion
* Renunciation
* Resilience
* Respect
* Reverence
* Righteous indignation
* Righteousness
* Self-control
* Self-cultivation
* Self-transcendence
* Simplicity
* Sincerity
* Solidarity
* Sportsmanship
* Sympathy
* Taste
* Temperance
* Tranquillity
* Trust
* Wisdom
* Wit
* Workmanship

| Chinese|

* De
* Jing
* Li
* Ren
* Yi

|

Greek|

* Agape
* Arete
* Ataraxia
* Eutrapelia
* Philotimo
* Phronesis
* Sophia
* Sophrosyne

Indian|

* Adhiṭṭhāna
* Ahimsa
* Akrodha
* Aparigraha
* Ārjava
* Asteya
* Brahmacharya
* Dāna
* Dhṛti
* Hrī
* Karuṇā
* Kshama
* Kshanti
* Mettā
* Muditā
* Nishkama Karma
* Prajñā
* Samatva
* Satya
* Shaucha
* Sevā
* Śraddhā/Saddhā
* Upekṣā
* Vīrya

Latin|

* Auctoritas
* Caritas
* Decorum
* Dignitas
* Fides
* Gravitas
* Humanitas
* Pietas
* Virtus

Other|

* Ganbaru
* Giri
* Sadaqah
* Seny
* Sisu
* Virtù

Authority control databases

National|

* Germany
* United States
* Japan
* Czech Republic
* Israel

Other|

* İslâm Ansiklopedisi
* Yale LUX

*[v]: View this template
*[t]: Discuss this template
*[e]: Edit this template
*[c.]: circa