How To Be A Skeptical Empiricist In One Easy Lesson

I consider myself to be a skeptical empiricist, a philosophical position that’s often misunderstood.  Common labels for skeptical empiricists for those not in the know are pessimist, doubter, denier,  and even know-it-all (this last one tends to be true).  In simplified terms, a skeptic is merely someone whose default position in any debate is “prove it.”  Meanwhile, an empiricist is someone more interested in the practical results of an action rather than its philosophical underpinnings.  That is, empiricists value results over theory.  These definitions, of course, don’t exactly match the technical definitions found in the encyclopedia (the topic is much too complex for a mere dictionary) but I think they provide a good working definition for today’s philosopher-on-the-go.  Something you can actually use in your day-to-day life.

Neither skepticism nor empiricism have ever been dominant paradigms in the western world (despite science’s claims), but they have been gathering steam of late, mostly thanks to the writings of pop-philosophers like Nassim Taleb (of Fooled By Randomness and The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable fame).  I mean no disrespect to these thinkers by labeling them pop-philosophers.  To the contrary, it is high praise of their ability to avoid the temptation to philosophize about how many angels could fit on the head of a pin.

How To Convince Anybody Of Anything

It’s simple to convince much anybody of pretty much anything.  You simply need a hypothesis and a logical-sounding narrative to back it up.  It helps if you start with the desired conclusion and work your way backwards towards your initial premise.  No worries if the premise is shaky, however, since if you’ve spun the narrative correctly your victim won’t think to question it.  The problem is the tendency of the human mind to assume that if an argument seems logical and plausible, it must be true.  How often have you heard somebody make a detailed, logical argument only to have their opponent say “well that makes sense to me,” and that be the end of it?  It very well may make sense.  And it may even be probable.  But just because it makes sense doesn’t necessarily mean it must be true.

The Confirmation Bias

The real problem is that people use shortcuts to make decisions.  In the case above, the logical argument was used as a shortcut to avoid actually having to conduct an empirical experiment.  Most times, there’s no need to guess about whether a hypothesis is true or not:  it is easily testable!  A well-sounding theory is useless if it doesn’t work in the real world and is no substitute for actual experimentation.  The debater has already made up their mind what to believe.  The logical argument merely serves to solidify the correctness of their pre-conceived notion in their mind.  It makes sense, so it must be true.  Hence, the search for other plausible explanations ceases abruptly.  This is a manifestation of the confirmation bias, whereby people reinforce their existing attitudes by selectively collecting new supporting evidence while ignoring contradictory evidence.

Inoculation Against Foolishness

Since you can form a reasonable argument for pretty much anything and then turn around and make an equally-reasonable argument for the exact opposite, it’s obvious that relying on logic and reason alone dooms you to failure.  A skeptical empiricist relies only on empirical data, not logic.  Logic is all well in good, but in the premise is either incorrect or too simplified, it can lead you far off course.

Here’s how to be a skeptical empiricist in one easy lesson:  demand empirical evidence for everything.  A skeptical empiricist cannot be persuaded by logical arguments, only by empirical data.  By definition, if a person can be convinced by argument alone they are not what I call a skeptical empiricist.  People love stories.  They love thought experiments.  They love to think they are creative, intelligent, and free-thinking.  Don’t fall for it.  Data doesn’t lie, people do.

For a primer on influencing people, I highly recommend buying Robert Cialdini’s aptly-named book Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion because he clearly illustrates the various so-called “automatic triggers” which compel people to take action without thinking critically about it (Hint Hint, Salesmen).