It may seem that I’m against Skepticism, what with post titles such as “Do skeptics hold science back?” Etc. However, I believe a healthy skepticism is a good thing. Uncritical acceptance of hair-brained positions that aren’t supported by much evidence are the domain of the non-thinker. I’m a thinker. And especially given my back ground in Process Thought, along with Whitehead I demand a coherent, logical system of ideas. Science can help here, and so can logic. HOWEVER, my issue is with a more radical Skepticism that is narrow, and even mitigates against speculation. And ultimately, it even gives short shrift to logic if it carries on too much.
