View source for Philosophy:Skeptical movement

{{short description|Modern social movement based on the idea of scientific skepticism}}

The '''skeptical movement''' ([[Social:American and British English spelling differences#Miscellaneous spelling differences|British spelling]]: '''sceptical movement''') is a modern [[Social:Social movement|social movement]] based on the idea of '''scientific skepticism''' (also called '''rational skepticism'''). The movement has the goal of investigating claims made on [[Fringe science|fringe topics]] and determining whether they are supported by [[Empirical research|empirical research]] and are [[Reproducibility|reproducible]], as part of a methodological norm pursuing "the extension of certified knowledge".<ref>{{citation|last= Stemwedel|first= Janet D.|title= Basic concepts: the norms of science|date= 2008-01-29|url= http://scienceblogs.com/ethicsandscience/2008/01/29/basic-concepts-the-norms-of-sc|work= ScienceBlogs: Adventures in Ethics and Science|publisher= ScienceBlogs|format= blog|url-status= live|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130512231940/http://scienceblogs.com/ethicsandscience/2008/01/29/basic-concepts-the-norms-of-sc/|archive-date= 2013-05-12}}: quoting [[Biography:Robert K. Merton|Merton, R. K.]] (1942)</ref> The process followed is sometimes referred to as '''skeptical inquiry'''.<ref name="KendrickInquiry">{{cite web |last1=Frazier |first1=Kendrick |title=Why We Do This: Revisiting the Higher Values of Skeptical Inquiry |url=https://www.csicop.org/si/show/why_we_do_this_revisiting_the_higher_values_of_skeptical_inquiry |website=csicop.org |access-date=12 November 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170610192458/http://www.csicop.org/si/show/why_we_do_this_revisiting_the_higher_values_of_skeptical_inquiry |archive-date=10 June 2017 |date=1 November 2013}}</ref>

Roots of the movement date at least from the 19th century, when people started publicly raising questions regarding the unquestioned acceptance of claims about [[Unsolved:Spiritism|spiritism]], of various widely-held [[Unsolved:Superstition|superstition]]s, and of [[Unsolved:Pseudoscience|pseudoscience]].<ref>
Asbjørn Dyrendal: "Oh no it isn't!" Skeptics and the Rhetorical Use of Science in Religion. in Olav Hammer & James R. Lewis (red.) ''Handbook of'' ''Religion and the Authority of Science''. pp. 879–900. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers 2010, Dyrendal refers to spiritualists as early targets of skeptics based on Hammer 2007.
</ref><ref>
Loxton, 2013, pp. 10ff.
</ref>
Publications such as those of the Dutch Vereniging tegen de Kwakzalverij (1881) also targeted medical quackery.

Using as a template the Belgian organization founded in 1949, [[Organization:Comité Para|Comité Para]], Americans [[Biography:Paul Kurtz|Paul Kurtz]] and Marcello Truzzi founded the [[Organization:Committee for Skeptical Inquiry|Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP)]], in Amherst, New York, in 1976. Now known as the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI), this organization has inspired others to form similar groups worldwide.<ref name=Hammer/>

== Scientific skepticism ==
'''Scientific skepticism''' or '''rational skepticism''' (also spelled '''scepticism'''), sometimes referred to as '''skeptical inquiry''', is an [[Philosophy:Epistemology|epistemological]] position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking [[Empirical evidence|empirical evidence]]. In practice, the term most commonly references the examination of claims and theories that appear to be [[Unsolved:Pseudoscience|beyond mainstream science]], rather than the routine discussions and challenges among scientists. Scientific skepticism differs from [[Philosophy:Philosophical skepticism|philosophical skepticism]], which questions humans' ability to claim any knowledge about the nature of the world and how they perceive it, and the similar but distinct [[Philosophy:Cartesian doubt|methodological skepticism]], which is a systematic process of being skeptical about (or doubting) the truth of one's beliefs.<ref name = Merton/>

[[Biography:Paul Kurtz|Paul Kurtz]] described scientific skepticism in his 1992 book The ''New Skepticism'', calling it an essential part of scientific inquiry.<ref>{{cite book | last = Kurtz | first = Paul |  title = The New Skepticism: Inquiry and Reliable Knowledge | publisher = [[Philosophy:Prometheus Books|Prometheus]] | year = 1992 | page = [https://archive.org/details/newskepticisminq0000kurt/page/371 371] | url =https://archive.org/details/newskepticisminq0000kurt| url-access = registration | isbn = 978-0-87975-766-3 }}</ref> [[Organization:The Skeptics Society|The Skeptics Society]] describes it as "the application of reason to any and all ideas—no sacred cows allowed."<ref>{{cite web|title=About Us – A Brief Introduction|url=http://www.skeptic.com/about_us/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140601130116/http://www.skeptic.com/about_us/|archive-date=2014-06-01|publisher=The Skeptics Society}}</ref> [[Biography:Robert K. Merton|Robert K. Merton]] introduced [[Mertonian norms]], which assert that all ideas must be tested and are subject to rigorous, structured community scrutiny.<ref name = Merton>{{cite book|title= The Normative Structure of Science|last= Merton|first= R. K.|year= 1942}} in {{cite book|title= The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations|last= Merton|first= Robert King|author-link= Robert K. Merton|publisher= [[Organization:University of Chicago Press|University of Chicago Press]]|year= 1973|isbn= 978-0-226-52091-9|location= Chicago|url-access= registration|url= https://archive.org/details/sociologyofscien0000mert}}</ref> [[Biography:Kendrick Frazier|Kendrick Frazier]] said that scientific skeptics have a commitment to science, reason, evidence, and the quest for truth.''<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Frazier|first1=Kendrick|date=2019|title=You Can't fit What We Skeptics Do into a Neat Box|journal=[[Unsolved:Skeptical Inquirer|Skeptical Inquirer]]|volume=43|issue=2|pages=22-23|authorlink=Kendrick Frazier}}</ref>'' [[Biography:Carl Sagan|Carl Sagan]] emphasized the importance of being able to ask skeptical questions, recognizing fallacious or fraudulent arguments, and considering the validity of an argument rather than simply whether we like the conclusion.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Sagan|first1=Carl|author-link1=Carl Sagan|title=Carl Sagan > Quotes > Quotable Quote|url=https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/962093-science-is-more-than-a-body-of-knowledge-it-is|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170830161340/https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/962093-science-is-more-than-a-body-of-knowledge-it-is|archive-date=30 August 2017|access-date=30 August 2017|website=Goodreads.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Sagan|first=Carl|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/32855551|title=The demon-haunted world : science as a candle in the dark|date=1995|publisher=Random House|isbn=0-394-53512-X|edition=1st|location=New York|oclc=32855551}}</ref> Similarly, [[Biography:Steven Novella|Steven Novella]] described skepticism as selecting "beliefs and conclusions that are reliable and valid to ones that are comforting or convenient" and as the study of "pitfalls of human reason and the mechanisms of deception so as to avoid being deceived by others or themselves".<ref>{{cite web|title=Skepticblog|url=http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/11/17/skeptic-the-name-thing-again/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140425110706/http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/11/17/skeptic-the-name-thing-again/|archive-date=2014-04-25|work=skepticblog.org}}</ref> [[Biography:Brian Dunning (author)|Brian Dunning]] called skepticism "the process of finding a supported conclusion, not the justification of a preconceived conclusion.<nowiki>''</nowiki><ref>{{cite web|title=Skeptoid|url=https://skeptoid.com/skeptic.php|work=skeptoid.com}}</ref>

With regard to the skeptical social movement, [[Biography:Daniel Loxton|Daniel Loxton]] refers to other movements already promoting "humanism, atheism, rationalism, science education and even critical thinking" beforehand.<ref>
{{cite web
 |url= https://www.skeptic.com/downloads/Why-Is-There-a-Skeptical-Movement.pdf
 |title= Why Is There a Skeptical Movement?
 |last= Loxton
 |first= Daniel
 |year= 2013
 |page= 31
 |access-date= 18 August 2019
 |quote= If other movements already promoted humanism, atheism, rationalism, science education and even critical thinking, what possible need could there be for organizing an additional, new movement—a movement of people called 'skeptics'?
}}
</ref>
He saw the demand for the new movement—a movement of people called "skeptics" — as based on a lack of interest by the scientific community to address paranormal and fringe-science claims. In line with [[Biography:Kendrick Frazier|Kendrick Frazier]], he describes the movement as a surrogate in that area for institutional science.<ref>
{{cite web
 |url= https://www.skeptic.com/downloads/Why-Is-There-a-Skeptical-Movement.pdf
 |title= Why Is There a Skeptical Movement?
 |last= Loxton
 |first= Daniel
 |year= 2013
 |page= 32
 |access-date= 18 August 2019
 |quote= CSICOP—and with it the global network of likeminded organizations that CSICOP inspired, such as the JREF and the Skeptics Society—was created with the specific yet ambitious goal of filling a very large gap in scholarship. The skeptical movement sought to bring organized critical focus to the same ancient problem that isolated, outnumbered, independent voices had been struggling to address for centuries: a virtually endless number of unexamined, potentially harmful paranormal or pseudoscientific claims ignored or neglected by mainstream scientists and scholars. [...] '[...] We are in effect a surrogate in that area for institutional science.'
}}
</ref>
The movement set up a distinct field of study, and provided an organizational structure, while "the long-standing genre of individual skeptical writing" lacked such a community and background.<ref>
{{cite web
 |url= https://www.skeptic.com/downloads/Why-Is-There-a-Skeptical-Movement.pdf
 |title= Why Is There a Skeptical Movement?
 |last= Loxton
 |first= Daniel
 |year= 2013
 |page= 29
 |access-date= 18 August 2019
 |quote= The difference is between the long-standing genre of individual skeptical writing, and the recognition that this scholarship collectively comprised a distinct field of study.
}}
</ref>
Skeptical organizations typically tend to have science education and promotion among their goals.<ref>{{cite web|url= http://www.vof.se/about|title= About the Swedish Skeptics Association|website= Vetenskap och Folkbildning|access-date= 14 November 2017|url-status= live|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20161113025227/http://www.vof.se/about/|archive-date= 13 November 2016}}</ref><ref>
{{cite web
|url= http://nycskeptics.org/about|title= About NYC Skeptics|website= NYC Skeptics|access-date= 14 November 2017|url-status= live|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20171115143504/http://nycskeptics.org/about|archive-date= 15 November 2017
}}
</ref>

== Overview ==
Scientific skeptics maintain that empirical investigation of [[Philosophy:Reality|reality]] leads to the most reliable empirical [[Philosophy:Knowledge|knowledge]], and suggest that the [[Scientific method|scientific method]] is best suited to verifying results.<ref>{{cite web|last1= Novella|first1= Steven|title= Rethinking the Skeptical Movement|url= http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/rethinking-the-skeptical-movement/|website=Neurologica|access-date=8 August 2016 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160412180401/http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/rethinking-the-skeptical-movement/|archive-date=12 April 2016|date=10 August 2015 | quote = If somehow you thought you'd gained some kind of understanding about the natural world [...], how would you then be able to demonstrate to anyone else that the understanding was valid? Seems like you'd need something like the scientific method to do this, otherwise you're left with all such insights being equal, and no way to distinguish which are valid.}}</ref> Scientific skeptics attempt to evaluate [[Hypothesis|claims]] based on verifiability and [[Philosophy:Falsifiability|falsifiability]]; they discourage accepting claims which rely on [[Philosophy:Faith|faith]] or [[Anecdotal evidence|anecdotal evidence]]. 

Skeptics often focus their criticism on claims they consider implausible, dubious or clearly contradictory to generally-accepted science. Scientific skeptics do not assert that unusual claims should be automatically rejected out of hand on [[Philosophy:A priori and a posteriori|''a priori'']] grounds &ndash; rather they argue that one should critically examine claims of paranormal or anomalous phenomena and that extraordinary claims would require extraordinary evidence in their favor before they could be accepted as having validity.<ref name="NeurologicaNovella10Aug2015">{{cite web|last1=Novella|first1=Steven|title=Rethinking the Skeptical Movement|url=http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/rethinking-the-skeptical-movement/|website=Neurologica|access-date=8 August 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160412180401/http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/rethinking-the-skeptical-movement/|archive-date=12 April 2016|date=10 August 2015}}</ref> From a scientific point of view, skeptics judge ideas on many criteria, including falsifiability,<ref>{{cite web|last1= Novella|first1= Steven|title= Rethinking the Skeptical Movement |url= http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/rethinking-the-skeptical-movement/|website= Neurologica |access-date= 8 August 2016 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160412180401/http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/rethinking-the-skeptical-movement/|archive-date=12 April 2016|date=10 August 2015 | quote = It's a little nuanced, but ultimately it comes down to the idea that science can only really falsify a hypothesis. Tests are often constructed to prove the hypothesis false.}}</ref> Occam's Razor,<ref name="HowStuffWorksClark">{{cite web|last1= Clark|first1=Josh|title=How Occam's Razor Works |url= http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/scientific-experiments/occams-razor3.htm|website=How Stuff Works|access-date=8 August 2016|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160729093039/http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/scientific-experiments/occams-razor3.htm|archive-date=29 July 2016|date=2007-10-04}}</ref> [[Biology:Morgan's Canon|Morgan's Canon]]<ref name="Morgan">{{cite book|author= Morgan, C.L.|year=1903|title=An Introduction to Comparative Psychology|url= https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.174177|edition=2|publisher=W. Scott|location= London|page=[https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.174177/page/n70 59]}}</ref> and explanatory power, as well as the degree to which their [[Prediction|prediction]]s match [[Experiment|experiment]]al results.<ref name="NeurologicaNovella10Aug2015" />{{qn|date=June 2021}} 

Skepticism in general may be deemed part of the [[Scientific method|scientific method]]; for instance an experimental result is not regarded as established until it can be shown to be repeatable independently.<ref>{{cite web | last = Wudka | first = Jose | title = What is the scientific method? | year = 1998 | url = http://physics.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node6.html#SECTION02121000000000000000 | access-date = 2007-05-27 | url-status = dead | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070601225205/http://physics.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node6.html#SECTION02121000000000000000 | archive-date = 2007-06-01 | quote = A theory is accepted not based on the prestige or convincing powers of the proponent, but on the results obtained through observations and/or experiments which anyone can reproduce: the results obtained using the scientific method are repeatable.}}</ref>

The Sci.Skeptic FAQ characterizes the skeptic spectrum as divided into "wet" and "dry" sceptics,{{efn|Direct URL has been blacklisted as a source: faqs.org/faqs/skeptic-faq/}}<ref>
{{cite book| last1 = Hammer| first1 = Olav|  chapter = New Age religion and the sceptics | editor1-last = Kemp| editor1-first = Daren | editor2-last = Lewis| editor2-first = James R. | editor2-link = James R. Lewis (scholar) | title = Handbook of New Age | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=Bm-7DH2bZ8QC| series = Volume 1 of Brill Handbooks on Contemporary Religion | location = Leiden | publisher = Brill | publication-date = 2007| page = 389| isbn = 9789004153554| access-date = 20 June 2021 | quote = Within the discourse of anti-New Age, anti-paranormal, sceptical writers, there are personal differences. The most visible is that between the oddly-named 'dry' and 'wet' sceptics.}}</ref> primarily based on the level of engagement with those promoting claims that appear to be pseudoscience; the dry skeptics preferring to debunk and ridicule, in order to avoid giving attention and thus credence to the promoters, and the "wet" skeptics, preferring slower and more considered engagement, in order to avoid appearing sloppy and ill-considered and thus similar to the groups all skeptics opposed.<ref name=Hammer/>{{rp|389}}

[[Biography:Ronald A. Lindsay|Ron Lindsay]] has argued that while some non-scientific claims appear to be harmless or "soft targets", it is important to continue to address them and the underlying habits of thought that lead to them so that we do not "have a lot more people believing that 9/11 was an inside job, that climate change is a hoax, that our government is controlled by aliens, and so forth -- and those beliefs are far from harmless".<ref>{{cite journal |last1= Lindsay |first1=Ronald A. |title=Why Skepticism?: Sasquatch, Broken Windows, and Public Policy |journal= [[Unsolved:Skeptical Inquirer|Skeptical Inquirer]] |date=2017 |volume=41 |issue=2 |pages=46–50 |url=https://www.csicop.org/si/show/why_skepticism1 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20181104151605/https://www.csicop.org/si/show/why_skepticism1 |url-status=dead |archive-date= 2018-11-04 |access-date=4 November 2018}}</ref>

The skeptical movement has had issues with allegations of sexism. Mary Coulman identified a disparity between women and men in the movement in a 1985 skeptic newsletter.<ref name=Hess/>{{rp|112}} The skeptic movement has generally been made up of men; at a 1987 conference the members there discussed the fact that the attendees were predominantly older white men and a 1991 listing of 50 CSICOP fellows included four women.<ref name=Hess>{{Cite book|title= Science in the New Age: The Paranormal, Its Defenders and Debunkers, and American Culture|last=Hess|first=David J.|date=1993-01-01|publisher= Univ of Wisconsin Press|isbn=9780299138202|language=en}}</ref>{{rp|109}}  Following a 2011 conference, [[Biography:Rebecca Watson|Rebecca Watson]], a prominent skeptic,<ref name=Rinallo2013>{{Cite book|title=Consumption and Spirituality|last1= Rinallo|first1= Diego|last2= Scott|first2= Linda M.|last3=Maclaran|first3=Pauline|date=2013-01-01|publisher=Routledge|isbn=9780415889117|language=en}}</ref>{{rp|57}} raised issues of the way female skeptics are targeted with [[Cybercrime#Harassment|online harassment]] including threats of sexual violence by opponents of the movement, and also raised issues of sexism within the movement itself.  While she received some support in response to her discussion of sexism within the movement, she later became a target of virulent online harassment, even from fellow skeptics, after posting an online video that discussed her discomfort with being propositioned in a confined space. This became known as "Elevatorgate", based on Watson's discussion about being propositioned in a hotel elevator in the early morning after a skeptic event.<ref>{{cite news|last1= Watson|first1=Rebecca|title=It Stands to Reason, Skeptics Can Be Sexist Too|url= http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/10/sexism_in_the_skeptic_community_i_spoke_out_then_came_the_rape_threats.html|work=Slate|date=24 October 2012|url-status=live|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160424094011/http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/10/sexism_in_the_skeptic_community_i_spoke_out_then_came_the_rape_threats.html|archive-date=24 April 2016}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|title=Reading the Comments: Likers, Haters, and Manipulators at the Bottom of the Web|last=Reagle|first=Joseph M.|pages=114–17|date=2015-04-24|publisher=MIT Press|isbn=9780262028936|language=en}}</ref><ref>
De Waal, Mandy De (September 2, 2011) [http://mg.co.za/article/2011-09-02-dawkins-watson-and-the-elevator-ride/ "Dawkins, Watson and the elevator ride"] {{webarchive|url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110908060753/http://mg.co.za/article/2011-09-02-dawkins-watson-and-the-elevator-ride |date=September 8, 2011 }} ''Mail & Guardian''</ref>

== Debunking and rational inquiry ==

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 [[Philosophy:List of topics characterized as pseudoscience|list of topics characterized as pseudoscience]]) such as [[Unsolved:Unidentified flying object|U.F.O.s]], claimed [[Unsolved:Paranormal|paranormal]] phenomena, cryptids, conspiracy theories, [[Medicine:Alternative medicine|alternative medicine]], [[Religion:Religion|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 [[Medicine:Alternative medicine|alternative medicine]]s; the plausibility and existence of [[Philosophy:Supernatural|supernatural]] abilities (e.g. tarot reading) or entities (e.g. poltergeists, angels, [[Religion:Deity|gods]]—including [[Religion:Zeus|Zeus]]); the monsters of [[Biology:Cryptozoology|cryptozoology]] (e.g. the Loch Ness monster); as well as [[Philosophy:Creationism|creationism]]/[[Unsolved:Intelligent design|intelligent design]], [[Unsolved:Dowsing|dowsing]], [[Unsolved: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|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 [[Biography:James Randi|James Randi]] have become famous for [[Unsolved:Debunker|debunking]] claims related to some of these. Paranormal investigator [[Biography:Joe Nickell|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|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 [[Unsolved:Astrology|astrology]] and [[Unsolved:Homeopathy|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 |title=In Troubled Times, This Is What We Do |journal=[[Unsolved:Skeptical Inquirer|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.|date=2007-01-01|publisher=BRILL|isbn=978-9004153554|pages=382, 390, 395–96|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 ''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.|date=1993-01-01|publisher=Univ of Wisconsin Press|isbn=9780299138202|pages=63–64|language=en}}</ref> Hess states as well a strong tendency in [[Philosophy:Other|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/> [[Biography:Plato|Plato]] believed that to release others from ignorance despite their initial resistance is a great and noble thing.<ref>[[Philosophy:Allegory of the cave|Allegory of the cave]], Plato ''The Republic'', (New {{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} 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. [[Biography:Bertrand Russell|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|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>
[[Biography:James Randi|James Randi]] often wrote on the issue of [[Finance:Fraud|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 }}, {{wipe|Time (magazine)}}, 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|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> [[Biography:Richard Dawkins|Richard Dawkins]] points to religion as a source of violence (notably in ''[[Philosophy:The God Delusion|The God Delusion]]''), and considers [[Philosophy:Creationism|creationism]] a threat to biology.<ref>[[Biography:Richard Dawkins|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 [[Social: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.|date=June 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://www.webcitation.org/6Gt1sOBHo?url=http://www.bigsas.uni-bayreuth.de/en/members_of_BIGSAS/junior_fellows/igwe_leo/index.html|archive-date=2013-05-25}}</ref> and past Research Fellow of the [[Organization:James Randi Educational Foundation|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|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://www.webcitation.org/6Gt6gddQz?url=http://labs.sucuri.net/?cloudproxy|archive-date=2013-05-25}}</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 child witchcraft accusations. Igwe came into conflict with high-profile [[Social:Witchcraft|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 |title=Skepticism Reloaded |journal=[[Unsolved:Skeptical Inquirer|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 sceptic is, in reality, a disguised [[Philosophy:Dogma|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, [[Unsolved:Holocaust denial|Holocaust denial]] and [[Earth:Climate change denial|climate change denial]]) engage in pseudoskeptical behavior when they characterize themselves as "skeptics". This is despite their [[Cherry picking|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, [[Biography:Susan Blackmore|Susan Blackmore]], a parapsychologist who became more skeptical and eventually became a Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP) fellow in 1991, described what she termed the "worst kind of pseudoskepticism":

{{quote | 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 = 234–36 | 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, [[Biography: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">[[Biography:Robert Todd 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>

== History ==
[[File:Daniel Webster Hering.png|thumb|upright=0.4|Daniel Webster Hering author of ''Foibles and Fallacies of Science'']]
=== Historical roots ===
According to skeptic author [[Biography:Daniel Loxton|Daniel Loxton]], "skepticism is a story without a beginning or an end." His 2013 article in ''[[Religion:Skeptic (U.S. magazine)|Skeptic]]'' magazine "Why Is There a Skeptical Movement" claims a history of two millennia of paranormal skepticism.<ref name="Loxton2013">{{Cite web |url=http://www.skeptic.com/downloads/Why-Is-There-a-Skeptical-Movement.pdf |title=Why Is There a Skeptical Movement? |author=Daniel Loxton |publisher=[[Organization:The Skeptics Society|The Skeptics Society]] website |page=3 |date=2013 |access-date=24 May 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140807152309/http://www.skeptic.com/downloads/Why-Is-There-a-Skeptical-Movement.pdf |archive-date=7 August 2014 |author-link=Daniel Loxton }}</ref> He is of the opinion that the practice, problems, and central concepts extend all the way to antiquity and refers to a debunking tale as told [[Unsolved:Bel and the Dragon#Bel|in some versions of the Old Testament]], where the Prophet Daniel exposes a tale of a "living" statue as a scam.<ref>Daniel Loxton, Why Is There a Skeptical Movement? 2013 p. 24, reference 91</ref> According to Loxton, throughout history, there are further examples of individuals practicing critical inquiry and writing books or performing publicly against particular frauds and popular superstitions, including people like Lucian of Samosata (2nd century), [[Biography:Michel de Montaigne|Michel de Montaigne]] (16th century), Thomas Ady and Thomas Browne (17th century), [[Biography:Antoine Lavoisier|Antoine Lavoisier]] and [[Biography:Benjamin Franklin|Benjamin Franklin]] (18th century), many different philosophers, scientists and magicians throughout the 19th and early 20th century up until and after [[Biography:Harry Houdini|Harry Houdini]]. However, skeptics banding together in societies that research the paranormal and fringe science is a modern phenomenon.<ref name="Loxton2013"/>

Two early important works influential to the skeptical movement were [[Biography:Daniel Webster Hering|Daniel Webster Hering]]'s ''Foibles and Fallacies of Science'' (1924) and D. H. Rawcliffe's ''[[Unsolved:The Psychology of the Occult|The Psychology of the Occult]]''.<ref name="Loxton2013"/>

Loxton mentions the Belgian [[Organization:Comité Para|Comité Para]] (1949) as the oldest "broad mandate" skeptical organization.<ref name="Loxton2013" /> Although it was preceded by the Dutch Vereniging tegen de Kwakzalverij (VtdK) (1881), which is therefore considered the oldest skeptical organization by others,<ref name="Quackometer">{{Cite news |url=http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2009/08/dutch-sceptics-have-bogus-libel.html |title=Dutch Sceptics Have 'Bogus' Libel Decision Overturned On Human Rights Grounds |author=Andy Lewis |publisher=The Quackometer |date=3 August 2009 |access-date=24 May 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140213174338/http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2009/08/dutch-sceptics-have-bogus-libel.html |archive-date=13 February 2014 }}</ref><ref name="Standaard">{{cite news |url=http://www.standaard.be/cnt/ip1dpjjp |title=Masseuse met kapsones |newspaper=De Standaard |date=21 June 2007 |access-date=24 May 2014 |language=nl |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150114062240/http://www.standaard.be/cnt/ip1dpjjp |archive-date=14 January 2015 }}</ref> the VtdK only focuses on fighting quackery, and thus has a 'narrow mandate'. The Comité Para was partly formed as a response to a predatory industry of bogus psychics who were exploiting the grieving relatives of people who had gone missing during the [[Social:World War II|Second World War]].<ref name="Loxton2013" /> In contrast, [[Biography:Michael Shermer|Michael Shermer]] traces the origins of the modern scientific skeptical movement to [[Biography:Martin Gardner|Martin Gardner]]'s 1952 book ''Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science''.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.skeptic.com/about_us/manifesto/ |title=A Skeptical Manifesto |author=Michael Shermer |publisher=The Skeptics Society website |date=1997 |access-date=24 May 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140626213613/http://www.skeptic.com/about_us/manifesto/ |archive-date=26 June 2014 }}</ref>

In 1968, the French Association for Scientific Information (AFIS) was founded. AFIS strives to promote science against those who deny its cultural value, abuse it for criminal purposes or as a cover for [[Philosophy:Quackery|quackery]]. According to AFIS, science itself cannot solve humanity's problems, nor can one solve them without using the [[Scientific method|scientific method]]. It maintains that people should be informed about scientific and technical advancements and the problems it helps to solve. Its magazine, ''Science et pseudo-sciences'', attempts to distribute scientific information in a language that everyone can understand.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article23 |title=Notre histoire |author=Jean-Pierre Thomas |work=Website AFIS |publisher=AFIS |access-date=3 April 2015 |language=fr |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140706105911/http://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article23 |archive-date=6 July 2014 }}</ref>

=== CSICOP and contemporary skepticism ===
{{main|Organization:Committee for Skeptical Inquiry}}
[[File:Ken-RayPaulRandiKen photo at TAM8.jpg|thumb|Influential North American skeptics: [[Biography:Ray Hyman|Ray Hyman]], Paul Kurtz, James Randi and Kendrick Frazier]]
In 1976, the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), known as the [[Organization:Committee for Skeptical Inquiry|Committee for Skeptical Inquiry]] (CSI) since November 2006, was founded in the {{wipe|United States}}. Some see this as the "birth of modern skepticism",<ref>Loxton (2013), p. 29.</ref> however, founder [[Biography:Paul Kurtz|Paul Kurtz]] actually modeled it after the Comité Para, including its name.<ref name="Loxton2013"/> Kurtz' motive was being "dismayed ... by the rising tide of belief in the paranormal and the lack of adequate scientific examinations of these claims."<ref>Loxton (2013), p. 32.</ref>

Kurtz was an atheist and had also founded the [[Philosophy:Committee for the Scientific Examination of Religion|Committee for the Scientific Examination of Religion]]. While he saw both aspects as being covered in the skeptical movement, he had recommended CSICOP to focus on paranormal and pseudoscientific claims and to leave religious aspects to others.<ref name="NisbetKurtsStrategicError">{{cite web |last1=Nisbet |first1=Matthew |title=Paul Kurtz on the "Strategic Blunder" of the New Atheists |url=https://bigthink.com/age-of-engagement/paul-kurtz-on-the-strategic-blunder-of-the-new-atheists |website=www.bigthink.com |access-date=12 November 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180319051059/http://bigthink.com/age-of-engagement/paul-kurtz-on-the-strategic-blunder-of-the-new-atheists |archive-date=2018-03-19 |date=16 August 2010 |url-status=live }}</ref> Despite not being the oldest, CSICOP was "the first successful, broad-mandate North American skeptical organization of the contemporary period",<ref>Loxton (2013), p. 2.</ref> popularized the usage of the terms "skeptic", "skeptical" and "skepticism" by its magazine, ''[[Unsolved:Skeptical Inquirer|Skeptical Inquirer]]'',<ref name="Wonder">{{cite journal |last=Boel |first=Herman |date=2003 |title=Wat is het verschil tussen Skepticisme en Scepticisme? |url=http://nederlands.skepdic.com/skepticus.htm |journal=Wonder en is gheen Wonder<!--Citation bot --> |publisher=SKEPP |volume=3 |issue=1 |access-date=24 May 2014 |language=nl |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517153013/http://nederlands.skepdic.com/skepticus.htm |archive-date=17 May 2014 }}</ref> and directly inspired the foundation of many other skeptical organizations throughout the world, especially in Europe.<ref>{{cite book |last=Frazier |first=Kendrick |date=1996 |title=The Encyclopedia of the Paranormal |url=http://www.csicop.org/about/csicop/ |location=Amherst, New York |pages=168–80 |access-date=24 May 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140615171346/http://www.csicop.org/about/csicop/ |archive-date=15 June 2014 }}</ref>

These included [[Organization:Australian Skeptics|Australian Skeptics]] (1980), Vetenskap och Folkbildning (Sweden, 1982), New Zealand Skeptics (1986), GWUP (Austria, Germany and Switzerland, 1987), Skepsis r.y. (Finland, 1987), [[Organization:Stichting Skepsis|Stichting Skepsis]] (Netherlands, 1987), CICAP (Italy, 1989) and SKEPP (Dutch-speaking Belgium, 1990).

Besides scientists such as astronomers, stage magicians like [[Biography:James Randi|James Randi]] were important in investigating charlatans and exposing their trickery. In 1996 Randi formed the [[Organization:James Randi Educational Foundation|James Randi Educational Foundation]] (JREF) and created the [[Unsolved:One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge|One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge]], where anyone who could demonstrate paranormal abilities, under mutually agreed-upon controlled circumstances, could claim the prize. After Randi's retirement in 2015, the Paranormal Challenge was officially terminated by the JREF with the prize unclaimed:{{Quote|text=Effective 9/1/2015 the JREF has made major changes including converting to a grant making foundation and no longer accepting applications for the Million Dollar Prize from the general public.<ref>{{cite web|title=JREF Status, 9-1-2015|url=http://web.randi.org/home/jref-status|website=Web.randi.org|publisher=JREF|access-date=30 August 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170830152145/http://web.randi.org/home/jref-status|archive-date = 30 August 2017 |url-status = live}}</ref>}}

Other influential second-generation American organizations were [[Organization:The Skeptics Society|The Skeptics Society]] (founded in 1992 by [[Biography:Michael Shermer|Michael Shermer]]), the [[Organization:New England Skeptical Society|New England Skeptical Society]] (originating in 1996) and the Independent Investigations Group (formed in 2000 by James Underdown).

=== After 1989 ===
After the Revolutions of 1989, Eastern Europe saw a surge in quackery and paranormal beliefs that were no longer restrained by the generally secular Communist regimes or the Iron curtain and its information barriers. The foundation of many new skeptical organizations was as well intending to protect consumers.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Mahner |first=Martin |date=January–February 2002 |title=10th European Skeptics Congress: Rise and Development of Paranormal Beliefs in Eastern Europe |url=http://www.csicop.org/si/show/10th_european_skeptics_congress_rise_and_development_of_paranormal_beliefs_ |journal=[[Unsolved:Skeptical Inquirer|Skeptical Inquirer]] |publisher=[[Organization:Committee for Skeptical Inquiry|CSICOP]] |volume=26 |issue=1 |access-date=23 May 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140528010034/http://www.csicop.org/si/show/10th_european_skeptics_congress_rise_and_development_of_paranormal_beliefs_ |archive-date=28 May 2014 }}</ref> These included the Czech Skeptics' Club Sisyfos (1995),<ref name="Sisyfos">{{Cite web |url=http://www.sysifos.cz/index.php?id=vypis&sec=1148731628&lang=en |title=Czech Skeptical Club SISYFOS |publisher=Sisyfos website |date=27 May 2006 |access-date=24 May 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140625110707/http://sysifos.cz/index.php?id=vypis&sec=1148731628&lang=en |archive-date=25 June 2014 }}</ref> the Hungarian Skeptic Society (2006), the Polish Sceptics Club (2010)<ref name="autogenerated1">{{Cite web |url=http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/the_inception_of_the_polish_sceptics_club |title=The Inception of the Polish Sceptics Club |author=Tomasz Witkowski & Maciej Zatonski |publisher=CSI website |date=18 November 2011 |access-date=24 May 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140528010248/http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/the_inception_of_the_polish_sceptics_club |archive-date=28 May 2014 }}</ref> and the Russian-speaking Skeptic Society (2013).<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://skepticzone.libsyn.com/the-skeptic-zone-333-8mar2015 |title=Episode 338 |author=Richard Saunders |work=The Skeptic Zone |publisher=Skepticzone.tv |access-date=1 July 2015 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151004174846/http://skepticzone.libsyn.com/the-skeptic-zone-333-8mar2015 |archive-date=4 October 2015 }}</ref> The Austrian Skeptical Society in Vienna (founded in 2002) deals with issues such as Johann Grander's "vitalized water" and the use of [[Unsolved:Dowsing|dowsing]] at the Austrian Parliament''.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.zeit.de/2012/19/A-Skeptiker|title=Skeptikerbewegung: Die Apokalypse in den Köpfen|last=Müller|first=Stefan|date=2012-05-03|newspaper=Die Zeit|issn=0044-2070|access-date=2016-09-16|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161107173701/http://www.zeit.de/2012/19/A-Skeptiker|archive-date=2016-11-07}}</ref>

The European Skeptics Congress (ESC) has been held throughout Europe since 1989, from 1994 onwards co-ordinated by the European Council of Skeptical Organizations.<ref name="EarlierEvents">{{Cite web |url=http://szkeptikustarsasag.hu/14th-european-skeptic-congress/earlier-european-events |title=Earlier European skeptic events |publisher=HSS website |access-date=24 May 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140527214128/http://szkeptikustarsasag.hu/14th-european-skeptic-congress/earlier-european-events |archive-date=27 May 2014 }}</ref> In the United States, The Amaz!ng Meeting (TAM) hosted by the JREF in Las Vegas had been the most important skeptical conference since 2003, with two spin-off conferences in [[Place:London|London]], {{wipe|United Kingdom}} (2009 and 2010) and one in [[Place:Sydney|Sydney]], Australia (2010). Since 2010, the Merseyside Skeptics Society and Greater Manchester Skeptics jointly organized Question, Explore, Discover (QED) in Manchester, UK. World Skeptics Congresses have been held so far, namely in Buffalo, New York (1996), Heidelberg, Germany (1998), Sydney, Australia (2000), Burbank, California (2002), Abano Terme, Italy (2004) and Berlin, Germany (2012).<ref name="EarlierEvents" /><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0osZXewi340 |title=World Skeptics Congress 2012: A Brief History of the Skeptical Movement |author=James Alcock |publisher=YouTube |date=25 May 2012 |access-date=3 June 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150718174851/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0osZXewi340 |archive-date=18 July 2015 }}</ref>

In 1991, the [[Organization:Center for Inquiry|Center for Inquiry]], a US think-tank, brought the CSICOP<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.csicop.org|title=CSI|last=Smith|first=Cameron M.|publisher=Csicop.org|access-date=2014-03-01|url-status=live|archive-url=http://archive.wikiwix.com/cache/20110223190213/http://www.csicop.org/|archive-date=2011-02-23}}</ref> and the Council for Secular Humanism<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.secularhumanism.org|title=Council for Secular Humanism|publisher=Secularhumanism.org|access-date=2014-03-01|url-status=live|archive-url=http://archive.wikiwix.com/cache/20110224080731/http://www.secularhumanism.org|archive-date=2011-02-24}}</ref> (CSH) under one umbrella. In January 2016, the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science announced its merger with the Center for Inquiry.<ref name="Merger">{{cite web|url=http://news.wbfo.org/post/merger-creates-largest-atheist-organization#stream/0|title=Merger creates largest atheist organization|publisher=WBFO|access-date=2016-01-24|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160124024027/http://news.wbfo.org/post/merger-creates-largest-atheist-organization#stream/0|archive-date=2016-01-24}}</ref>

== Notable skeptical projects ==
===Guerrilla Skepticism on Wikipedia===
[[File:Five Fellows CSI 2018.jpg|right|thumb|Susan Gerbic of GSoW and four other CSI fellows in 2018: (left to right: Kendrick Frazier, Ben Radford, Mark Boslough, and Dave Thomas)]]
In 2010, as a form of skeptical outreach to the general population, [[Biography:Susan Gerbic|Susan Gerbic]] launched the [[Biography:Susan Gerbic#GSoW|Guerrilla Skepticism on Wikipedia]] (GSoW) project to improve skeptical content on Wikipedia.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Gerbic|first1=Susan| title=Wikapediatrician Susan Gerbic discusses her Guerrilla Skepticism on Wikipedia project|url=http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/wikapediatrician_susan_gerbic_discusses_her_guerrilla_skepticism_on_wikiped|work=[[Unsolved:Skeptical Inquirer|Skeptical Inquirer]]|publisher=[[Organization:Committee for Skeptical Inquiry|Committee for Skeptical Inquiry]]|date=March 8, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150830023844/http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/wikapediatrician_susan_gerbic_discusses_her_guerrilla_skepticism_on_wikiped|archive-date=August 30, 2015 |url-status=live|access-date=January 13, 2015}}</ref> In 2017, Gerbic (who was made a [[Social:Fellow|fellow]] of the [[Organization:Committee for Skeptical Inquiry|Committee for Skeptical Inquiry]] in 2018)<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.centerforinquiry.net/news/cause_effect_99/|title=Center for Inquiry News: Cause & Effect: The CFI Newsletter - No. 99|website=www.centerforinquiry.net|language=en|access-date=2018-02-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180208134003/http://www.centerforinquiry.net/news/cause_effect_99/|archive-date=8 February 2018|url-status=live}}</ref> and her GSoW team received an award from the [[Organization:James Randi Educational Foundation|James Randi Educational Foundation]] which "is given to the person or organization that best represents the spirit of the foundation by encouraging critical questions and seeking unbiased, fact-based answers. We are pleased to recognize Susan's efforts to enlist and train a team of editors who continually improve Wikipedia as a public resource for rationality and scientific thought."<ref>{{cite web|title=2017 JREF Award|url=https://web.randi.org/home/2017-jref-award|website=James Randi Educational Foundation|access-date=27 March 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180328102358/https://web.randi.org/home/2017-jref-award|archive-date=March 28, 2018|df=mdy-all}}</ref>

In July 2018, ''Wired'' reported that the GSoW team had grown to more than 120 volunteer editors from around the world, and they were collectively responsible for creating or improving some of Wikipedia's most heavily trafficked articles on skeptical topics. As of July 2018, GSoW had created or completely rewritten more than 630 Wikipedia articles in many languages, which together have accumulated over 28 million page visits.<ref>{{cite magazine|url=https://www.wired.com/story/guerrilla-wikipedia-editors-who-combat-conspiracy-theories/|title=The 'Guerrilla' Wikipedia Editors Who Combat Conspiracy Theories|last=Matsakis|first=Louise|date=July 25, 2018|journal=Wired|access-date=July 25, 2018 }}</ref>

== Notable skeptical media ==

'''Books'''
{{main|Philosophy:List of books about skepticism}}
* ''The Demon-Haunted World''
* ''[[Unsolved:Why People Believe Weird Things|Why People Believe Weird Things]]''
* ''Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science''
*''The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe''

'''Magazines'''
{{main|Unsolved:List of skeptical magazines}}
* ''[[Religion:Skeptic (U.S. magazine)|Skeptic]]'' (US)
* ''[[Unsolved:Skeptical Inquirer|Skeptical Inquirer]]''
* ''[[Unsolved:The Skeptic (UK magazine)|The Skeptic]]'' (UK)

'''Television programs'''
* ''Penn & Teller: Bullshit!''
* ''MythBusters''

'''Podcasts'''
* ''The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe''
* ''Skepticality''
* ''[[Organization:Australian Skeptics#The Skeptic Zone|The Skeptic Zone]]''
* ''Skeptoid''
* ''Point of Inquiry''
* ''For Good Reason''

== See also ==
{{columns-list|colwidth=20em|
* [[Philosophy:Academic skepticism|Academic skepticism]]
* [[Organization:Brights movement|Brights movement]]
* [[Philosophy:Criticism of science|Criticism of science]]
* [[Social:Denialism|Denialism]]
* [[Philosophy:Empiricism|Empiricism]]
* [[Philosophy:Freethought|Freethought]]
* [[Philosophy:Inductivism|Inductivism]]
* [[Philosophy:Lists about skepticism|Lists about skepticism]]
* [[Philosophy:Logical positivism|Logical positivism]]
* [[Philosophy:Naturalism|Naturalism]]
* Philosophic burden of proof
* [[Philosophy:Positivism|Positivism]]
* [[Philosophy:Religious skepticism|Religious skepticism]]
* [[Reproducibility]]
* [[Philosophy:Reductionism#In science|Scientific reductionism]]
* [[Scientism]]
* [[Philosophy:Secular humanism|Secular humanism]]
* [[Social:Secular movement|Secular movement]]
* SkeptiCamp
* [[Skepticism]]
* ''[[Philosophy:The Skeptic's Dictionary|The Skeptic's Dictionary]]''
* [[Philosophy:Snopes.com|Snopes.com]]
* [[Theory of justification]]
* Superstitions
* Superstitions in Muslim societies
}}

== References ==
'''Notes'''
{{notelist}}
{{Reflist}}

'''Further reading'''
* {{cite book
| last = Carroll
| first = Robert Todd
| title = The Skeptic's Dictionary: A Collection of Strange Beliefs, Amusing Deceptions, and Dangerous Delusions
| publisher = John Wiley & Sons
| year = 2003
| isbn = 978-0-471-27242-7 | title-link = Skeptic's Dictionary
}}
* {{cite book
| last = Gardner
| first = Martin
| title = Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science
| publisher = Dover Publications
| year = 1957
| page = [https://archive.org/details/fadsfallaciesint00gard/page/n384 373]
| url = https://archive.org/details/fadsfallaciesint00gard
| isbn = 978-0-486-20394-2
| url-access = registration
}}
* {{cite book
| last = Randi
| first = James
| title = Flim-Flam! Psychics, ESP, Unicorns, and Other Delusions
| publisher = Prometheus Books
| date = June 1982
| page = 342
| isbn = 978-0-345-40946-1 }}
* {{cite book
| last = Randi
| first = James
|author2=Arthur C. Clarke
 | title = An Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, and Hoaxes of the Occult and Supernatural
| publisher = St. Martin's Griffin
| year = 1997
| page = 336
| isbn = 978-0-312-15119-5 }}
* {{cite book
| last = Sagan
| first = Carl
|author2=Ann Druyan
 | title = The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark
| publisher = Ballantine Books
| year = 1997
| page = 349
}}
* {{cite book
| last = Shermer
| first = Michael
| title = Why People Believe Weird Things
| publisher = St Martins Griffin and Company
| year = 1997
| page = 349
| isbn = 978-0-8050-7089-7 }}

== External links ==
* [http://skepdic.com The Skeptic's Dictionary] –  Robert Todd Carroll, contains many articles on science, alternative medicine, pseudoscience, etc.
* [http://www.skeptic.com/about_us/manifesto.html A skeptical manifesto] – Michael Shermer, a philosophical analysis of scientific skepticism
* [https://skepticalinquirer.org/2001/07/proper-criticism/ Proper Criticism] – Ray Hyman, suggestions to upgrade the quality of scientific skepticism
* [[Biography:Carl Sagan|Carl Sagan]]'s [http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html Baloney Detection Kit]. Operation Clambake. 1998. Based on the book "''The Demon Haunted World: Science as a candle in the dark''". ({{ISBN|0-345-40946-9}})
* [http://www.theness.com/articles.asp New England Skeptical Society Newsletter Articles] – includes articles on such topics as Homeopathy, Intelligent Design, and other pseudoscientific topics{{dead link|date=April 2016}}
* [http://www.faqs.org/faqs/skeptic-faq sci.skeptic FAQ]
* [http://www.skeptic.com/downloads/Why-Is-There-a-Skeptical-Movement.pdf Why Is There A Skeptical Movement?] –  Daniel Loxton, contains an overview of the history (and pre-history) of the skeptical movement as well as the principles underlying scientific skepticism.


{{Philosophy of science}}
{{Skepticism}}
{{Science and technology studies}}


{{DEFAULTSORT:Scientific Skepticism}}
[[Category:Scientific skepticism| ]]
[[Category:Social movements]]

{{Sourceattribution|Skeptical movement|1}}