I struggle, here and elsewhere, to explain my violent reaction against unsubstantiated claims. After all, the believer produces testimonals and "scientific" evidence to support their belief. My acceptance of saccharin and aspartame has been challenged, for instance. My general disbelief in conspiracy theories as well. Particularly horrifying for me is the production of videos or YouTube clips to support these claims. At least with the written word, I have the choice of skimming, skipping or dropping it.
But nooo, in order to fully understand the illogical believer, I must be captive audience to a random collection of thoughts and "evidences", carefully strung together. I will try here to explain what is required for me to believe the unbelievable. From the Wikipedia article, an empirical skeptic "merely seeks likely proof before accepting that knowledge".
- Run it through the critical thinking principles. Has "bad logic" been employed to sway my thinking?
- Testimonials are not enough. Was the claim run through a double blind test?
- Ocham's Razor. Is there a simpler explanation? Then that is more likely to be true.
- Are the quotes and claims properly cited so that I can investigate them myself?
I think like this because of my short time with a debating club. As part of our training, we learned to debate both sides of a subject. When I realized that all topics have at least two convincing sides, I went through a minor moral crisis. I wondered then, if anything can be certain. I concluded was that there is usually a more believable side, and to never deny the evidence of my senses.