At what point does healthy skepticism become cynicism?
It is important to employ a healthy degree of skpeticism when dealing with the paranormal. However, at what point do you think that healthy skepticism goes too far and becomes cynicism? Are there any tell-tale signs that we should all be looking for?
Elsewhere we have been discussing skepticism / cynicism - but here it would be useful to explore the point at which a helpful system becomes unhelpful.
As an example I have a very old book which describes an incident at a Royal Society lecture circa 1900s. It concerns a lecture being given by some psychical researcher (I forget who it was). During the lecture, a scientists in the audience got up and shouted that the suggestions of the lecturer were ridiculous and that "nothing, no one, and no evidence could ever convince him that the paranormal was real". To me this view is cynicism and is actually unscientific and illogical. To claim no evidence would ever convince you is a truly closed-minded approach. This for me is what most people confuse as skepticism - but it is not skepticism in the true sense of the word.