CAT ARTICLE DOSE – 3

Calling someone a "skeptic" can be a term of praise or condemnation.

Too often, it expresses approval when the target of skepticism is a claim we reject, and disapproval when the
target is a claim we hold dear. I might praise skepticism towards homeopathic medicine, but disdain skepticism
towards human evolution. Someone with a very different set of beliefs might praise skepticism regarding the
moon landing, but disdain skepticism regarding the existence of God.

Sometimes, though, skepticism is taken to be a healthy attitude towards belief — a characteristic that we might
praise regardless of its target. Skepticism is supposed to reflect a willingness to question and doubt — a key
characteristic of scientific thinking. Skepticism encourages us to look at the evidence critically; it allows for the
possibility that we are wrong. It seems like a win, then, to learn that courses in skepticism can decrease belief in
the paranormal or — as reported in an article forthcoming in Science & Education — that teaching students to
think critically about history can decrease belief in pseudoscience and other unwarranted claims.

But taken too far, skepticism misses its mark. It's important to avoid the error of believing something we ought
not to believe, but it's also important to avoid the error of failing to believe that which we should. If the aim is to
detect signal — and not merely to reject noise — then an educational win would require greater differentiation
between warranted and unwarranted claims, not merely rejection of the unwarranted. This point is sometimes
lost in praising skepticism and skeptical thinking, with its emphasis on what we reject rather than what we
uphold.

It's important to say that this isn't intended as a criticism of the skeptical movement or of skeptical philosophy,
both of which endorse more nuanced versions of what skepticism entails. It is, however, a criticism of the way
skepticism (as used in casual conversation) is sometimes held up as a virtue in itself. The virtues we should really
be upholding — and for which skepticism is only an oblique guide — are what I'll call truth-tracking and humility.

Truth-tracking is about getting things right: identifying the signal amidst the noise. We don't want to be fooled by
noise (about a link between vaccines and autism, for example), but we also don't want to miss out on signal
(about the real benefits of vaccination). Truth-tracking isn't (only) about rejecting noise, but about differentiating
signal from noise.

Humility is about recognizing the possibility for error, and therefore holding beliefs tentatively (or "defeasibly").
But recognizing uncertainty doesn't mean that all bets are off. Some bets are still much better than other bets.
You don't know who will win the next horserace, for example, but that doesn't mean that you'd assign equal
probabilities to all contenders. Similarly, we can quantify uncertainty by assigning degrees of belief to different
propositions. I might think that life on other planets is unlikely, and that ESP is unlikely, yet assign a much higher
probability to the former than to the latter. Similarly, I might think that rain tomorrow and human evolution are
highly likely, but assign a much higher probability to the latter than to the former. Quantifying uncertainty allows
us to hold even strong beliefs with a modicum of doubt, while simultaneously recognizing that they're far more
likely than the alternatives we defeasibly reject.

Skepticism is a poor proxy for truth-tracking and humility. It gets us half of truth-tracking (rejecting noise), and it
gets us some of humility (questioning and doubt). What it doesn't get us is signal with degrees of belief or —
more ambitiously — truth in an uncertain world. That seems like a more praiseworthy aim to me.

[Analysis and details of the above passage can be found on the next page]
ARTICLE INFORMATION
• Source: NPR, Skepticism About Skepticism
• Link to the Original Article: https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2017/04/03/522426299/skepticism-about-
skepticism
• Length of the Extract: 615 words
• Flesch Kincaid Grade Level: 12.3
• Genre: Philosophy, Humanities

ARTICLE ANALYSIS
Theme: The theme of this article revolves around the concept and usage of skepticism in various contexts. It
critically analyzes skepticism as a tool for truth-tracking and humility, questioning its efficacy and promoting a
more nuanced approach to belief and uncertainty.

Tone: Analytical and Informative. The author encourages critical thinking about the advantages and limitations of
skepticism, approaching the topic with a logical and reasoned perspective.

Key Ideas:

• Paragraph One: The author introduces the concept of skepticism, noting how it's often praised or
disdained based on the subject matter it's applied to.
• Paragraph Two: The author praises skepticism as a characteristic of scientific thinking that encourages
critical evaluation of evidence and allows room for doubt.
• Paragraph Three: The author acknowledges the drawbacks of extreme skepticism, emphasizing the need
to differentiate between warranted and unwarranted claims.
• Paragraph Four: The author criticizes the superficial portrayal of skepticism in casual conversations,
asserting that truth-tracking and humility are virtues more deserving of recognition.
• Paragraph Five: The author defines truth-tracking as the ability to distinguish signal from noise, or truth
from untruth.
• Paragraph Six: The author defines humility as recognizing the possibility of error while still making
judgments about relative probabilities.
• Paragraph Seven: The author concludes by reiterating the limitations of skepticism as a tool for truth-
tracking and humility, promoting a more nuanced approach to the pursuit of truth in an uncertain world

Structure:
The article follows a clear structure, beginning by establishing a context for skepticism and its conventional
usage in various situations. It then moves on to praise the attributes of skepticism, particularly in scientific
thinking, before transitioning to an examination of its limitations. The article subsequently proposes alternative
virtues—truth-tracking and humility—as more beneficial frameworks for dealing with belief and uncertainty. In the
final part, the author presents a more in-depth exploration of these concepts, underlining their superiority over
skepticism.