Should skeptics be skeptical of their skepticism?

[Flail]

Jester proposed this on another thread and I found it to be a compelling challenge we should all take into consideration. Many in this forum profess to be skeptics, some more so than others, myself included. It has now been pointed out that skeptics are often the last to question their own position on a matter, perhaps to their detriment. It was suggested that we should all challenge our own positions on all matters and be skeptical of our particular positions and beliefs regardless of how strongly we hold them. This, to me seems not only logical, but a reasonable approach to relating to and communicating with one another on any topic no matter how divisive and emotional. Not only should skeptics check their positions, but non-skeptics should at least become skeptical of their own beliefs whenever possible IMO.

Question for debate:

Should skeptics be skeptical of their skepticism?

[EduChris]

Should skeptics be skeptical of their skepticism?

What's the alternative? Isn't being dogmatic about one's skepticism sort of self-defeating?

[Flail]

Should skeptics be skeptical of their skepticism?

What's the alternative? Isn't being dogmatic about one's skepticism sort of self-defeating?

Perhaps the point of the issue is that skeptics by nature just doubt everything from the beginning and never question a premise beyond that initial reaction. If we all, skeptics and believers included, were willing to 'self test' our positions and beliefs in light of reason, logic and available evidence, we might all eventually reach somewhat different conclusions and even some agreements; or realize that non of us knows much about what we believe or posit in the first place....and we could all begin to 'get over ourselves'...

[LiamOS]

I should hope that most sceptics are sceptical of their ability to objectively analyse information, and as such should make sure that their interpretations meet their standards.
I try to.

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to Flail in post #1]
But christians and muhammadans are being hold and required to be absolutely nonsceptical about their doctrine.

It is part of their belief system that theyr duty is to belief that scepticism on their own religion is bad,bad,bad.

So they are not sceptics to spiritual adversarys, but they think it is duty to KNOW that them are wrong, or else the believer might join the unbeliever in hell.

[1213]

...
Should skeptics be skeptical of their skepticism?

I would rather say, it would be good, if everyone would once in a while think, "could I be wrong". In some cases it may be difficult to say, therefore, in addition to that a good question is, "is it bad, if I am wrong in this matter".

[TRANSPONDER]

It is quite clear to me, and it has been said often enough, that science is based on questioning itself "Science is always changing its' mind" is the Theist accusation (which is true and why it is better than Theist think which refuses to question itself. Instead of saying 'could I be wrong?' is rejects the evidence on any pretext like 'there could be other explanations' or suggesting that scientists are pressurised to find particular answers.
This only shows what's wrong with theist -thinking, not with science. Or indeed 'skeptics'. Yes, it really seems to be that the Theist thinkers persistently nag the skeptical side to consider they might be wrong (which we do (or I do) constantly. But they never, ever, consider they may be wrong, even when they contradict themselves.

From where I stand (I could be wrong) it looks like everything from Cosmology and human evolution to ancient history and Bible credibility. Debate, discussion, disagreement and dispute all the time, and the Believers see that as just a clamour of indoctrinated or paid scientific shills denying the undisputed fact of Jesusgod being real and the Bible being true, and if the evidence questions that, the evidence is wrong.

[bjs1]

[Replying to Flail in post #1]
But christians and muhammadans are being hold and required to be absolutely nonsceptical about their doctrine.

It is part of their belief system that theyr duty is to belief that scepticism on their own religion is bad,bad,bad.

So they are not sceptics to spiritual adversarys, but they think it is duty to KNOW that them are wrong, or else the believer might join the unbeliever in hell.

For whatever it is worth, this is a uniquely atheist position. I have never encountered an adult Christian (or a Muslim for that matter) who would agree with anything in this post.

[bjs1]

Should skeptics be skeptical of their skepticism?

People should always apply healthy skepticism (what used to be called self-examination) to their own positions.

That said, it is impossible to be skeptical of skepticism because skepticism is not a position a person can hold.

A person can be skeptical of other beliefs while holding to their own beliefs. However, skepticism itself is a response to other positions, not a position itself.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to Flail in post #1]
But christians and muhammadans are being hold and required to be absolutely nonsceptical about their doctrine.

It is part of their belief system that theyr duty is to belief that scepticism on their own religion is bad,bad,bad.

So they are not sceptics to spiritual adversarys, but they think it is duty to KNOW that them are wrong, or else the believer might join the unbeliever in hell.

For whatever it is worth, this is a uniquely atheist position. I have never encountered an adult Christian (or a Muslim for that matter) who would agree with anything in this post.

I'm not sure of that.I would argue that, doctrinally, Christians must believe that anyone who doubts (is skeptical of) their doctrines (holding others as theist or rejecting all as an atheist) are going to catch it hot, possibly in a literal sense for their disbelief (skepticism) otherwise their doctrines have nothing to offer as a price for abrogation of their right to have doubts and questions as skepticism of the doctrine.