THE DECONSTRUCTION OF SKEPTICISM
The skeptics evolved an arsenal of arguments
that subvert virtually all the statements that philosophers and scientists
would ever wish to make about anything. the original
motive for this thinking was to fight dogmatism. These arguments are called the
"modes" or "tropes". The four-volume chronicle of ancient
skepticism by Sextus Empiricus
(1562) is almost entirely devoted to these arguments. To many it is an
encyclopedia of negation. The skeptics use the tropes to provide only enough
subversion to establish a suspension of judgment, not to affirm or deny
anything outright. Philosophically the skeptics wanted truth (certainty) and
shunned belief (Certitude). However, since truth is believed and what is
believed is thought to be true, the skeptic is bound to dreaded indecision.
Pure, methodological skepticism is empty.
The pathological skeptic admits that anything learned in the process is up to
the opponent resulting from the skeptic's mastery.
There are categories of skepticism which can
be distinguished according to motive:
If our purpose is to build something, it is
"constructive" skeptical methodology; and, it is useful in focusing
attention to aspects of weakness in an ideological structure. For this reason,
we should all be skeptical of our beliefs, if we are properly trained. This is
called "methodological skepticism".
If our purpose is to gut something for the
purpose of rebuilding on a more substantial foundation, it's
purpose is "deconstructive". This methodology (deconstruction) takes
logic down to the bare roots of an ideological structure to test it's very foundation. The origins revealed by this method
are sometimes irreducible, but revealed just the same. One must be careful not
to uncover a certainty and turn it into a dogmatism.
If our purpose is to gut something with no
objective in reconstruction, it is "destructive" skeptical
methodology. This is the focus of the smug skeptic who imagines him/herself as
launching against the very basis of civilization, relishing the writhing pained
souls strewn behind, who are left with nothing but the smoldering remains of a
shattered faith. Any belief can best be held with understanding, and with the
knowledge that it works as a creative foundation for continued inquiry.
Beliefs that have complete lack of independent
support are called "faith". Faith provides knowledge of those
presently unknowable areas of our cognizance that exist due to the nature of
one's intelligence and humanity. The destructive skeptic revels in its ruin;
and, in the final analysis, finds him/herself lost and
adrift with no faith left.
The point is that the value of faith is
mortally necessary to people. Once realized, the attacker of such is also open
to skeptical criticism, and counter-attack. Promoting attacks without
considering alternate beliefs is philosophical malpractice. This is the
activity of the destructive skeptic.
I would be the first to say that the
skeptical view of the Bible, though mostly shallow, is an excellent adjunct for
the study of the scriptures. But, why do so many skeptics concentrate on the
Bible? "Love your neighbor", for instance. Where did that come from?
The destructive skeptic recites "I am NOT my brothers
keeper" everyday in the mirror till they reach personal despair. I wonder
if the attitude of the destructive skeptic would lighten if they recognized the
damage that they were doing to this bit of civilized morality. Certainly there
are babies in the bath water that should not be thrown out.
In essence, deconstructing skepticism is
dishing out a little of itself, to itself, by itself.
Alden Bacuzmo
Realistic Idealism The alternative: fallible, philosophy based on
evidence.