Editing Scientific skepticism (section)

== Debunking and rational inquiry ==
{{See also |Debunking}}

[[File:25 Wendy PB Picture.jpg|thumb|upright|[[Center for Inquiry|Independent Investigations Group]] testing [[Power Balance]] bracelet in 2010]]
The verb "to debunk" is used to describe efforts by skeptics to expose or discredit claims believed to be false, exaggerated, or pretentious. It is closely associated with skeptical investigation or rational inquiry of controversial topics (compare [[list of topics characterized as pseudoscience]]) such as [[Unidentified flying object|U.F.O.s]], claimed [[paranormal]] phenomena, [[cryptid]]s, [[conspiracy theories]], [[alternative medicine]], [[religion]], or exploratory or [[Fringe science|fringe]] areas of scientific or [[pseudoscientific]] research.<ref name="dict">{{cite web|url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Debunker|title=Debunker|access-date=2007-09-26|work=Dictionary.com Unabridged|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070821043533/http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/debunker|archive-date=2007-08-21}} "to expose or excoriate (a claim, assertion, sentiment, etc.) as being pretentious, false, or exaggerated: to debunk advertising slogans."</ref>

Further topics that scientifically skeptical literature questions include health claims surrounding certain foods, procedures, and [[alternative medicine]]s; the plausibility and existence of [[supernatural]] abilities (e.g. [[tarot reading]]) or entities (e.g. [[poltergeists]], [[angels]], [[deity|gods]]—including [[Zeus]]); the monsters of [[cryptozoology]] (e.g. the [[Loch Ness monster]]); as well as [[creationism]]/[[intelligent design]], [[dowsing]], [[conspiracy theory|conspiracy theories]], and other claims the skeptic sees as unlikely to be true on scientific grounds.<ref>{{cite book|title=Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science|last=Gardner|first=Martin|publisher=Dover|year=1957|isbn=978-0-486-20394-2|author-link=Martin Gardner|title-link=Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://skepdic.com/contents.html|title=Skeptics Dictionary Alphabetical Index Abracadabra to Zombies|year=2007|publisher=skepdic.com|access-date=2007-05-27|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070528204928/http://skepdic.com/contents.html|archive-date=2007-05-28}}</ref>

Skeptics such as [[James Randi]] have become famous for [[debunker|debunking]] claims related to some of these. Paranormal investigator [[Joe Nickell]] cautions, however, that "debunkers" must be careful to engage paranormal claims seriously and without bias. He explains that open minded investigation is more likely to teach and change minds than debunking.<ref>{{citation|last=Nickell|first=Joe|author-link=Joe Nickell|title=Skeptical inquiry vs debunking|url=http://www.pointofinquiry.org/joe_nickell_skeptical_inquiry_vs_debunking/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160324160704/http://www.pointofinquiry.org/joe_nickell_skeptical_inquiry_vs_debunking/|archive-date=2016-03-24|date=2005-12-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.tricksterbook.com/ArticlesOnline/CSICOPoverview.htm|title=CSICOP and the Skeptics: An Overview|last=Hansen|first=George P.|year=1992|access-date=2010-05-25|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100510120707/http://www.tricksterbook.com/ArticlesOnline/CSICOPoverview.htm|archive-date=2010-05-10}}</ref>

A striking characteristic of the skeptical movement is the fact that while most of the phenomena covered, such as [[astrology]] and [[homeopathy]], have been debunked again and again, they stay popular.<ref name = Hammer/> Frazier reemphasized in 2018 that "[w]e need independent, evidence-based, science-based critical investigation and inquiry now more than perhaps at any other time in our history."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Frazier |first1=Kendrick |author-link=Kendrick Frazier|title=In Troubled Times, This Is What We Do |journal=[[Skeptical Inquirer]] |date=2018 |volume=42 |issue=2 |pages=14–15 |url=https://www.csicop.org/si/show/in_troubled_times_this_is_what_we_do |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180606235847/https://www.csicop.org/si/show/in_troubled_times_this_is_what_we_do |url-status=dead |archive-date=2018-06-06 |access-date=7 June 2018}}</ref>

The scientific skepticism community has traditionally been focused on what people believe rather than why they believe—there might be psychological, cognitive or instinctive reasons for belief when there is little evidence for such beliefs.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.csicop.org/si/show/why_do_people_believe_in_gods|title=Why Do People Believe in Gods?|website=CSICOP|publisher=Center for Inquiry|last1=Bakker|first1=Gary|access-date=4 October 2015|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151019031943/http://www.csicop.org/si/show/why_do_people_believe_in_gods|archive-date=19 October 2015|date=January 2015}}</ref> According to Hammer, the bulk of the skeptical movement's literature works on an implicit model, that belief in the irrational is being based on scientific illiteracy or cognitive illusions. He points to the skeptical discussion about astrology: The skeptical notion of astrology as a "failed hypothesis" fails to address basic [[anthropological]] assumptions about astrology as a form of ritualized [[divination]]. While the anthropological approach attempts to explain the activities of astrologers and their clients, the skeptical movement's interest in the cultural aspects of such beliefs is muted.<ref name = Hammer>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Bm-7DH2bZ8QC&pg=PA395|title=Handbook of New Age|last1=Kemp|first1=Daren|last2=Lewis|first2=James R.|year=2007|publisher=Brill|isbn=978-9004153554|pages=382, 390, 395–396|language=en}}</ref>

According to sociologist David J. Hess, the skeptical discourse tends to set science and the skeptical project apart from the social and the economic. From this perspective, he argues that skepticism takes on some aspects of a sacred discourse, as in [[Emile Durkheim]]'s ''[[The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life|Elementary Forms of the Religious Life]]''—Science, seen as pure and sacred (motivated by values of the mind and reason), is set apart from popular dealings with the paranormal, seen as profane (permeated by the economic and the social); obscuring the confrontation between science and religion.<ref name=":32">{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=8oVwJwSPjLQC&pg=PA63|title=Science in the New Age: The Paranormal, Its Defenders and Debunkers, and American Culture|last=Hess|first=David J.|year=1993|publisher=Univ of Wisconsin Press|isbn=978-0299138202|pages=63–64|language=en}}</ref> Hess states as well a strong tendency in [[Other (philosophy)|othering]]: both skeptics and their opponents see the other as being driven by materialistic philosophy and material gain and assume themselves to have purer motives.<ref name=":32" />

=== Perceived dangers of pseudoscience ===

While not all pseudoscientific beliefs are necessarily dangerous, some can potentially be harmful.<ref name=Hammer/> [[Plato]] believed that to release others from ignorance despite their initial resistance is a great and noble thing.<ref>[[Allegory of the cave]], Plato ''[[The Republic (Plato)|The Republic]]'', (New [[Cambridge University Press|CUP]] translation by Tom Griffith and G.R.F. Ferrari into English) {{ISBN|0-521-48443-X}}</ref> Modern skeptical writers address this question in a variety of ways. [[Bertrand Russell]] argued that some individual actions based on beliefs for which there is no evidence of efficacy can result in destructive actions.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/russell4.htm|title=On the Value of Scepticism|last=Russell|first=Bertrand|author-link=Bertrand Russell|year=1928|publisher=Positive Atheism|work=The Will To Doubt|access-date=2007-05-27|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070927222658/http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/russell4.htm|archive-date=2007-09-27}}</ref>
[[James Randi]] often wrote on the issue of [[fraud]] by psychics and faith healers.<ref>[http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,149448,00.html Fighting Against Flimflam] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121102130115/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,149448,00.html |date=2012-11-02 }}, [[Time (magazine)|TIME]], Jun. 24, 2001</ref> Unqualified medical practice and alternative medicine can result in serious injury and death.<ref>{{cite news|title=Cancer patients who use alternative medicine more than twice as likely to die|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/cancer-patients-who-use-alternative-medicine-are-more-than-twice-as-likely-to-die-a7893541.html|access-date=18 February 2018|work=[[The Independent]]|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180219090232/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/cancer-patients-who-use-alternative-medicine-are-more-than-twice-as-likely-to-die-a7893541.html|archive-date=19 February 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|author-link=Ranjana Srivastava|last1=Srivastava|first1=Ranjana|title=What do doctors say to 'alternative therapists' when a patient dies? Nothing. We never talk|url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/03/what-do-doctors-say-to-alternative-therapists-when-a-patient-dies-nothing-we-never-talk|access-date=18 February 2018|work=The Guardian|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180219090139/https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/03/what-do-doctors-say-to-alternative-therapists-when-a-patient-dies-nothing-we-never-talk|archive-date=19 February 2018}}</ref> Skeptical activist [[Tim Farley]], who aims to create catalogue of harmful pseudoscientific practices and cases of damage caused by them, estimates documented number of killed or injured to be more than 600,000.<ref>{{cite web|title=counter|last1=Farley|first1=Tim|author-link=Tim Farley|url=http://whatstheharm.net/index.html|website=[[What's The Harm?]]|access-date=18 February 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171219112730/http://whatstheharm.net/index.html|archive-date=19 December 2017}}</ref> [[Richard Dawkins]] points to religion as a source of violence (notably in ''[[The God Delusion]]''), and considers [[creationism]] a threat to biology.<ref>[[Richard Dawkins]], ''The God Delusion'', Black Swan, 2007 ({{ISBN|978-0-552-77429-1}}).</ref><ref name="sfgatedawkins">[http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/10/15/RVGH2LN2021.DTL&type=books Better living without God? – Religion is a dangerously irrational mirage, says Dawkins] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120525031459/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fc%2Fa%2F2006%2F10%2F15%2FRVGH2LN2021.DTL&type=books |date=2012-05-25 }}, [[San Francisco Chronicle]], October 15, 2006</ref> Some skeptics, such as the members of ''[[The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe]]'' podcast, oppose [[Anti-cult movement|certain new religious movements]] because of their cult-like behaviors.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9xJDszg7cuwC&pg=PA5|title=Recovery from Cults: Help for Victims of Psychological and Spiritual Abuse|last=Langone|first=Michael D.|year= 1995|publisher=W. Norton. American Family Foundation|isbn=978-0-393-31321-5|page=432|author-link=Michael Langone}}</ref>

[[Leo Igwe]], Junior Fellow at the Bayreuth International Graduate School of African Studies<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.bigsas.uni-bayreuth.de/en/members_of_BIGSAS/junior_fellows/igwe_leo/index.html|title=Igwe, Leo – Junior Fellow|work=Bayreuth International Graduate School of African Studies|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140904152800/http://www.bigsas.uni-bayreuth.de/en/members_of_BIGSAS/junior_fellows/igwe_leo/index.html|archive-date=2014-09-04}}</ref> and past Research Fellow of the [[James Randi Educational Foundation]] (JREF),<ref name="hill-20122">{{cite web|url=http://doubtfulnews.com/2012/10/leo-igwe-partners-with-jref-to-respond-to-witchcraft-problem-in-africa/|title=Leo Igwe partners with JREF to respond to witchcraft problem in Africa|author-link=Sharon A. Hill|website=Doubtful News|last1=Hill|first1=Sharon A.|access-date=2013-02-17|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130315170947/http://doubtfulnews.com/2012/10/leo-igwe-partners-with-jref-to-respond-to-witchcraft-problem-in-africa/|archive-date=2013-03-15}}</ref><ref name="jref-20122">{{Cite web|url=http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/jref-news/1896-jref-staff.html|title=Leo Igwe Appointed as New JREF Research Fellow|work=James Randi Educational Foundation|access-date=2013-02-16}}</ref> wrote ''A Manifesto for a Skeptical Africa'',<ref name="manifesto2">{{Cite web|url=http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/component/content/article/37-static/1891-leo-igwe.html|title=A Manifesto for a Skeptical Africa|last=Igwe|first=Leo|author-link=Leo Igwe|work=James Randi Educational Foundation|access-date=2013-02-17|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130526084523/http://labs.sucuri.net/?cloudproxy|archive-date=2013-05-26}}</ref> which received endorsements from multiple public activists in Africa, as well as skeptical endorsers around the world.<ref name="manifesto2" /> He is a Nigerian human rights advocate and campaigner against the impacts of [[Witch Children in Africa|child witchcraft]] accusations. Igwe came into conflict with high-profile [[witchcraft]] believers, leading to attacks on himself and his family.<ref name="de-waal-2012">{{Cite web|url=http://mg.co.za/article/2012-04-10-suffer-the-little-children/|title=Suffer the little children|last=De Waal|first=Mandy|date=April 10, 2012|work=Mail & Guardian|access-date=2013-02-14|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120614213053/http://mg.co.za/article/2012-04-10-suffer-the-little-children|archive-date=June 14, 2012}}</ref><ref name="robbins-2011a">{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/aug/08/nigeria-witch-children-polio|title=Face to faith: Christian and Islamist extremists in Nigeria are exporting dangerous ideas|last=Robbins|first=Martin|date=August 7, 2009|work=The Guardian|issn=0261-3077|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130907022318/http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/aug/08/nigeria-witch-children-polio|archive-date=September 7, 2013}}</ref>

In 2018, [[Amardeo Sarma]] provided some perspective on the state of the skeptical movement by addressing "the essence of contemporary skepticism and [highlighting] the vital nonpartisan and science-based role of skeptics in preventing deception and harm." He emphasized the dangers of pseudoscience as a reason for prioritizing skeptical work.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sarma |first1=Amardeo |author-link1=Amardeo Sarma |title=Skepticism Reloaded |journal=[[Skeptical Inquirer]] |date=2018 |orig-year=Originally published online 6 March 2018|volume=42 |issue=4 |pages=40–43 |url=https://www.ecso.org/skepticism-reloaded/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180704163424/https://www.ecso.org/skepticism-reloaded/ |url-status=dead |archive-date=2018-07-04 |access-date=4 July 2018}}</ref>

=== Pseudoskepticism ===
{{main|Pseudoskepticism}}
Richard Cameron Wilson, in an article in ''[[New Statesman]]'', wrote that "the bogus skeptic is, in reality, a disguised [[dogma]]tist, made all the more dangerous for his success in appropriating the mantle of the unbiased and open-minded inquirer". Some advocates of discredited intellectual positions (such as [[AIDS denial]], [[Holocaust denial]] and [[climate change denial]]) engage in pseudoskeptical behavior when they characterize themselves as "skeptics". This is despite their [[cherry picking]] of evidence that conforms to a pre-existing belief.<ref name="Wilson_NS">{{citation|last=Wilson|first=Richard|title=Against the Evidence|date=2008-09-18|url=http://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2008/09/evidence-sceptic-hiv-bogus|magazine=[[New Statesman]]|publisher=Progressive Media International|issn=1364-7431|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141016192228/http://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2008/09/evidence-sceptic-hiv-bogus|archive-date=2014-10-16}}</ref> According to Wilson, who highlights the phenomenon in his 2008 book ''Don't Get Fooled Again'', the characteristic feature of false skepticism is that it "centres not on an impartial search for the truth, but on the defence of a preconceived ideological position".<ref name="Wilson_fooled">{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ARNNLgAACAAJ|title=Don't get fooled again: the sceptic's guide to life|last=Wilson|first=Richard C.|publisher=Icon|year=2008|isbn=978-1-84831-014-8}}</ref>

Scientific skepticism is itself sometimes criticized on this ground. The term ''pseudoskepticism'' has found occasional use in controversial fields where opposition from scientific skeptics is strong. For example, in 1994, [[Susan Blackmore]], a parapsychologist who became more skeptical and eventually became a [[CSICOP|Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal]] (CSICOP) fellow in 1991, described what she termed the "worst kind of pseudoskepticism":

{{blockquote | There are some members of the skeptics' groups who clearly believe they know the right answer prior to inquiry. They appear not to be interested in weighing alternatives, investigating strange claims, or trying out psychic experiences or altered states for themselves (heaven forbid!), but only in promoting their own particular belief structure and cohesion&nbsp;...<ref>{{cite journal | first = J. E. | last = Kennedy | title = The capricious, actively evasive, unsustainable nature of psi: A summary and hypotheses | journal = The Journal of Parapsychology | volume = 67 | pages = 53–74 | year = 2003}} See Note 1 p. 64 quoting {{cite book | last = Blackmore | first = S. J. | year = 1994 | chapter = Women skeptics | editor1-first = L. | editor1-last = Coly | editor2-first = R. | editor2-last = White | title = Women and Parapsychology | pages = 234–236 | location =  New York | publisher = Parapsychology Foundation}}</ref>}}

Commenting on the labels "dogmatic" and "pathological" that the "Association for Skeptical Investigation"<ref name="SI">{{cite web|url=http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/New/index.html|title=Skeptical Investigations|website=Association for Skeptical Investigation|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130412230002/http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/homepage.html|archive-date=April 12, 2013|access-date=July 6, 2013}}</ref> puts on critics of paranormal investigations, [[Robert Todd Carroll|Bob Carroll]] of the ''[[Skeptic's Dictionary]]''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://skepdic.com/refuge/sheldrake.html|title=Internet Bunk|work=skepdic.com|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100726083705/http://www.skepdic.com/refuge/sheldrake.html|archive-date=2010-07-26}}</ref> argues that that association "is a group of pseudo-skeptical paranormal investigators and supporters who do not appreciate criticism of paranormal studies by truly genuine skeptics and critical thinkers. The only skepticism this group promotes is skepticism of critics and [their] criticisms of paranormal studies."<ref name="carroll">[[Robert Todd Carroll]] "[http://skepdic.com/refuge/sheldrake.html Internet Bunk: Skeptical Investigations] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100726083705/http://www.skepdic.com/refuge/sheldrake.html |date=2010-07-26 }}." ''[[Skeptic's Dictionary]]''</ref>