Some might call you a skepdick if you question everything people claim to be true and do so in a mean belittling way. That’s someone who’s just being a plain old dick. Which isn’t good. At all.
Our version of a skepdick is a person who politely attempts to convince people of the truth using evidence and good science, but, despite best efforts, leads them to believe they are being personally attacked. Arguing through condescension and haughtiness means you’re being a dick. Arguing by finding common ground and sticking to the evidence means you are doing the right thing, even though people still may label you a skepdick.
Is it better to hurt some people’s feelings or step on some toes if it gets them to question whether their beliefs are built on quicksand or should you just sit back and let them believe in nonsense? Stay polite and expose how people’s belief despite lack of any credible evidence is the wrong way to live and perhaps the world will be a better place because of it. Carl Sagan said it best, “nonsense is reassuring but I can’t believe in it and I can’t allow anyone else to believe either.”
Have some thoughts about the skepdick or a comment about one of the posts? Or is there a topic you’d like the skepdick to discuss? Please send me an email or post a comment.
8,537 total views, 6 views today