Skeptics: Sopisticated Lazy Thinkers

Part II

Yesterday, we looked at the argument of Skeptics and found them to be based on the very certain belief that all knowledge is uncertain. We stated that since this is a certainty, the premise of Skepticism is self-refuting. Here's why.

In order to make the above claim, one must make one of two assumptions. First, that either reality as it is, in incapable of being known as qua reality, or two, our it is impossible for our minds to fully know its subject. In either case, we must have absolute knowledge, of reality and its knowable-ness, or our minds, and its ability to know. It is a fallacy of Borrowing where you take the premise you deny and borrow it to make your argument work. It's a type of circular reasoning which only makes people dizzy. If you like being dizzy, that is up to you.

As I said, a skeptic most likely will not care if he refutes himself or not, unless he or she is an honest skeptic. I have not YET run into an honest skeptic, though I am still looking. I have never had a skeptic tell me "Thank you, UL, you have shown me the error of my thinking. I am going to take some time in rethinking my entire orientation to reality, especially moral and theological reality." Never has happened.

In some cases, skeptics have become angry, for their false argument is exposed for what it is. This tells me they have NO intention of changing, or listening to more argument. At this point, I identify the prevailing problem they have in their thinking and stop the discussion. You cannot convince anyone of something they don't want to admit. They like their skepticism.

Other observations I make regarding skeptics is their approach to subjects of morality, on topics of "right and wrong." Invariably, they take this "not-knowing" approach when the challenge is directed to them, yet have sufficient means to debunk the thoughts of others. It's a gutless approach that seeks to avoid ANY criticism yet gives them perceived "safety" to attack others. It is a loser philosophy that makes sissies out its adherents.

If you are a skeptic and you are reading, please feel free to explain how it may be otherwise. Show me the courage you have in being a skeptic. You certainly don't have a logical basis for your belief; and since you deny our ability to know for certain what is morally right or wrong, how do you know you are courageous?

My advice to you all: Face it! The human being cannot avoid absolutes. Be virtuous enough to admit it! Be the courageous absolutist you REALLY are and let's engage in why you are the absolutist you are. Embrace the truth, no matter what. You'll find a freedom you never felt before and you'll rid yourself of the tiring sissified game of skepticism. Pax!