← Back to catalogue
Research draft

skepticism

vr.tr.skepticism · XCT.QLT

Let an agent explain skepticism in its philosophical and scientific senses, distinguish evidence-based skepticism from denialism and pseudoskepticism with attribution, describe skeptical traditions and organisations, and present contested applications neutrally.

Thing Registry Cross-cutting context

Research draft, second pass

A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.

written by Claude from model knowledge without web access - no source was read, every claim is a lead to verify

Researched by: Claude

Purpose and description

Let an agent explain skepticism in its philosophical and scientific senses, distinguish evidence-based skepticism from denialism and pseudoskepticism with attribution, describe skeptical traditions and organisations, and present contested applications neutrally.

An attitude of doubt or suspended judgement toward claims until adequate evidence is provided, ranging from philosophical skepticism about the possibility of knowledge to scientific skepticism that evaluates claims by evidence and method; the term is also applied, by observers, to doubt directed at scientific or public health consensus, such as vaccine hesitancy or denial of established findings, which scientists and scholars distinguish from evidence-based skepticism, and this entry presents these distinctions with attribution.

What it is for: Doubt pending evidence.

It can be explain philosophical and scientific skepticism; distinguish from denialism with attribution; describe traditions and organisations; present contested applications neutrally.

Distinguishing features

Evidence-based doubt

Suspended judgement

Method-oriented

Contested applications

What it looks like

Not physical; an epistemic attitude.

How it is recognised

Doubt until evidence

Philosophical or scientific

Cynicism assumes bad motives; denialism rejects evidence

Related models

is a kind of - category

tendency

is related to - beliefs skeptics examine

superstition

is related to - a practice examined by skeptics

astrology

is related to - logical evaluation of claims

contradictory

In practice

Families and kinds

ancient and modern philosophical skepticism

scientific skepticism

religious skepticism

skeptical organisations and movements

contested uses such as science denial labelled as skepticism

Standards and regulation

Scientific method and evidence standards

Public health communication guidance

No regulation of the attitude

Failure modes and hazards

Conflating skepticism with denialism

Partisan framing of public health debates

False balance on settled science

Also called

pseudoskepticismCOVID-19 vaccine misinformation and hesitancydistrust of centralized financeanti-mask movementviral denialismBiblical teaching on skepticismmoral skepticismphilosophical skepticismeuroscepticismreligious skepticismvaccine hesitancySemmelweis reflexepistemology (in a broad sense of rejection)neo-Pyrrhonismeuroscepticism in Franceeuroscepticism in the Czech Republiceuroscepticism in IrelandEurorealismeuroscepticism in the United Kingdomeuroscepticism in Polandhard Euroscepticismparental vaccine hesitancyCOVID-19 vaccine hesitancyVaccine hesitancy in the worldGreat Awakening RallyCEASE therapy

Where this came from

wikidata · CC0 1.0

Source repository Registry entry point

Drafted structure

Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 4 bundles · 8 layers · 8 findings · 16 questions.

Understand What skepticism is.

Philosophy.

Philosophy

Philosophical skepticism.

Philosophy

Philosophy.

  1. What are the main forms of philosophical skepticism, from Pyrrhonism to modern epistemology, with positions attributed? provenance
  2. Which entry fits a specific philosopher? action

Scientific

Scientific skepticism.

Scientific

Scientific.

  1. What is scientific skepticism, and how do skeptical organisations evaluate claims? provenance
  2. Which entry fits a specific organisation? action
Distinguish Skepticism versus denial.

Attribution.

Denialism

Denialism and pseudoskepticism.

Denialism

Denialism.

  1. How do scientists and scholars distinguish evidence-based skepticism from denialism and pseudoskepticism, and what criteria do they use? provenance
  2. Is the presentation neutral while accurately reporting scientific consensus? boundary

Health

Public health contexts.

Health

Health.

  1. How do health bodies and researchers describe vaccine hesitancy and related movements, and what do they recommend for communication? provenance
  2. Is the user asking for personal medical advice, which needs a clinician? boundary
Practice Practising skepticism.

Practice.

Evaluate

Evaluating claims.

Evaluate

Evaluation.

  1. How can a claim be evaluated skeptically using evidence, source quality and logical analysis? action
  2. Which entry fits critical thinking? action

Religion

Religious skepticism.

Religion

Religion.

  1. How is skepticism treated within and toward religious traditions, with positions attributed? provenance
  2. Is the presentation respectful? boundary
Learn History and teaching.

Education.

History

History of skepticism.

History

History.

  1. How did skeptical traditions develop from antiquity to modern skeptical movements? provenance
  2. Which references are standard? provenance

Teach

Teaching.

Teach

Teaching.

  1. How can skepticism and critical thinking be taught? action
  2. Which misconceptions arise? provenance

What the second pass must settle

  • Should scientific skepticism be a separate entry?
  • How should philosophical sources be linked?
  • How should misinformation research be linked?
Draft as JSON