A Healthy Does of Skepticism: The Effectiveness of Paul Kurtz

1021 WordsFeb 17, 20184 Pages
From an early age I considered myself to be a skeptic of all different subjects. My mother said that I was always asking “why?” in order to find clarity as a child. I believe that this kind of skepticism lives in all human beings, and that a healthy dose of skepticism is a good thing. According to Paul Kurtz, “A skeptic is one who is willing to question any knowledge claim, asking for clarity in definition, consistency in logic and adequacy of evidence.” With that being said to what extent does clarity in definition, consistency in logic, and adequacy of evidence validate a claim in the areas of knowledge such as ethics and history? What does it take to validate a claim to the point where it becomes a personal truth? I can ask “why?” as much as I would like but when will my skepticism be satisfied and is Paul Kurtz process enough to find truth in different knowledge claims? In my opinion, Paul Kurtz has a great system of evaluation but he is leaving out a key component and that is experience. Before the effectiveness of Paul Kurtz process can be evaluated, it is necessary to define skepticism apart from what Paul Kurtz believes. In simple terms a skeptic is anyone with a questioning attitude towards knowledge, facts, or beliefs stated as facts, or doubt regarding claims that are taken for granted elsewhere? By this definition a skeptic could doubt and question something without being willing to receive any clarity on the subject. What I have gathered from the quote by

More about A Healthy Does of Skepticism: The Effectiveness of Paul Kurtz

Open Document