On Thu, 22 July 1999, "Lee Daniel Crocker" wrote:
> The idea that one should never believe anything is just as dogmatic
> and far less useful than the expedient, practical method of believing
> what is likely to be true until shown otherwise.
So your saying that it is dogmatic to remain undogmatic? :-) Very funny.
> I freely admit,
> for example, that I believe all psychics are frauds Is this because
> I have spent a lot of time examining various claims, or because I
> blindly follow James Randi or because I want to be part of the "in"
> crowd of skeptics? No; I simply think it is the most likely case
> given what I know, and until I see more evidence it is quite rational
> and practical to live with that belief.
What may be practical for you is not necessarily for someone else. If I understand you correctly, you are saying it is more practical for you to remain stringently dogmatic on certain issues unless someone can convince you otherwise? I find this all quite revealing.
P.S. I think you should write an essay titled 'On the Practical Uses of Dogmatism'. I for one would be very interested in reading it, and I'm sure it will become a fascinating topic of debate on this list.