To be skeptical 99% of the time, or to be open minded 99% of the time. Which based on circumstances is more probable that the skeptical or open minded will turn out to be true? For example, many people say they believed they were abducted by aliens, naturally, one person will be skeptical, and another person would be open to believing...Considering all the facts that is presented day by day, what are the chances that being skeptical or opened mind would turn out to be true, or a correct decision?
2007-02-01 15:16:02 · 13 answers · asked by Source 4 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Both and neither.
2007-02-08 13:25:20 · answer #1 · answered by OldGringo 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The human condition is to be skeptical 99% of the time. This is due to several factors.
One: Humans hurt other humans. Whether intentional or not we have all been hurt be someone else who we have trusted.
Two: We don't know what we don't know. This is the original interpretation of arogance being ignorant of your own ignorance and it is quite true we never know that we don't know something untill we know it, then we can look back and say I didn't know that.
Three: Not smart enough. We as humans are not intellegent enough to be able to decern wether someone else is lieing or telling the truth. We may get feelings but we can never be sure.
Since humans are like all other animals drawn to pleasure and away from pain (pain of embarasment, emotional pain, physical pain, pains caused by fear) we tend to be skeptical of all new thing that cross our path as new things can potenially cause us pain. This applies to all people, even thoes who may be 'open minded' because even these people will be skeptical of new things to come along more often than not.
We must however never fall into the trap of thinking that because someone have a willingness to accept things from a curtain subject without question like U.F.O.'s and little green men that they are any more open minded than we are. They may not be open minded about other thing that they do not believe in.
Hopr this helps
2007-02-01 15:43:13 · answer #2 · answered by Arthur N 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The skeptic thinks it's probably not true, but it could be true. The open-minded person is only reserving judgment, considering that something could be true and is listening to the evidence. So the open-minded person would be right more often because they can never really be wrong.
2007-02-01 15:35:23 · answer #3 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
A rational person will not deviate from the original conclusion. Unless circumstances due to overtime has modified the intrinsic to another, giving it a better edge or rationale in comparison to the original. In this case, we only change the “right” of the past with a “better” solution in the replacement of the existence.
“Abduction by alien” is out of place to logic. Skeptical now and later, there is nothing to deduce which is out of contention to a dispute in validity.
2007-02-01 17:59:49 · answer #4 · answered by cheng 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
One persons truth is anothers lie. There is no such thing as a lie, though there is a commonly accepted definition of one. I don't believe really anybody here answered your question truly.
To be skeptical is more probable for most people.
2007-02-01 16:30:59 · answer #5 · answered by Darian T 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that neither is probable for a person of average or above average intelligence. I fit into the category of people who believe pretty much anything could be possible, because without openness to possibility, how much room is there for exploration and discovery?
2007-02-09 14:22:16 · answer #6 · answered by Croa 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that's what i'm hoping for. Signed: Uncle Wayne (age sixty 8) *** Scientfically: The Universe is 13.7 Billion years previous The Earth is 4.5 Billion years previous this ability that if a planet formed 13 Billion years in the past, it would or ought to be a minimum of 8 billion years greater technologically stepped forward than we are. That leaves room for a scientist from that planet to fill the footwear of God as our writer via seeding Planet Earth. assorted new scientists, who dabble in that variety of element, think of that the Earth develop into seeded via comets or asteroids from exterior our photograph voltaic equipment. ought to God the scientist from Planet Heaven have directed those comets and asteroids? And, if so, then why, different than to offer us an afterlife?
2016-11-02 02:41:27 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
For me, it depends on the day. A skeptic one day and an optimist on another. Maybe it depends on which side of the bed I get out of.
2007-02-07 00:58:16 · answer #8 · answered by lisateric 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In my view, it will continue to be the same for years. It has been this way since the beginning, and it will be the same till the end of times.
With science improvementes it should have been solved by now, and it hasn't. Maybe it is much better for human beings not to be able to distinguish the truth.
2007-02-01 15:30:06 · answer #9 · answered by Tune 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nowadays open minded can lead you straight to trouble. You just got to sort out fact from fiction.
2007-02-01 15:22:57 · answer #10 · answered by Da Mick 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Is the glass half empty or half full????????????
The truth is what you choose to see.
Each person's truth is individual and unique.
The outcome will follow the truth.............
It's manifesting your destiny!!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-02-01 15:30:29 · answer #11 · answered by Susan C 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋