The difference between a sceptic and a non-sceptic

[SteveII]

Rob, when you say sceptic are you defining that to be a person who embraces philosophical scepticism? In some sentences it sounds that way but overall you seem to be defining a sceptic as someone more sceptical then perhaps an average person.

[FatAndFaithless]

Yeah, I was actually wondering along the same lines as Steve. There's a distinction to made between the idea of being skeptical towards something (like my Americanized spelling of 'skeptical') and calling someone a skeptic.

[robvalue]

It's not about being more sceptical, it's about being consistent in the application of scepticism as much as possible, to claims of similar kinds. Trying to address personal biases. Being thorough and not making special exceptions. Caring about having beliefs that are supported by evidence.

It's an ideal, of course. Someone can try to work towards it, or not. "A sceptic" is declaring that this is their goal. How successful they are will remain to be seen; but it represents their attitude. People who scoff at it clearly don't value such goals.

This is my understanding, and my attempts to explain it. I'm not claiming to be an authority on it. I'm noting the differences I have seen between the people who support the idea and those that belittle it.

If other people have different understandings, then feel free to share!