This section encourages readers to engage in critical thinking and adopt proactive consumer habits. Recognizing one’s own biases or ideological leanings is crucial not only in science but also as consumers when evaluating opinions on exploratory research. Opinion pieces may offer comfort and validate pre-existing beliefs, but this does not make their assertions true or informative.
In the controversial field of parapsychology, substantial statistical meta-analyses support the existence of psi phenomena. According to the Parapsychological Association, the field has progressed toward process-oriented and qualitative research to better understand the nature of these phenomena. However, the field’s infancy and its historical context leave it vulnerable to sociopolitical attacks, often motivated by personal ideologies and flawed assumptions about how psi works. Thus, it is essential to discern whether you are engaging in an intellectually honest conversation with a true skeptic.
Genuine skeptics maintain an open mind, using critical thinking to evaluate available evidence. In contrast, pseudo-skeptics present themselves as skeptics but are, in fact, dogmatic and authoritarian in their philosophical stances. The following academic article demonstrates the need for psychologists to be vigilant against biases when evaluating parapsychology research in the peer-review process: Bias in the Evaluation of Psychology Studies: A Comparison of Parapsychology Versus Neuroscience.
Below is a list of organizations and individuals that have demonstrated unreasonable biases and distorted perceptions of the parapsychology field. These links direct you to Skeptical about Skeptics, an organization dedicated to calling out pseudo-skeptics. While it’s important to acknowledge the influence of pseudo-skeptics in the media, it’s even more crucial to focus on creative exploration. Organizations that profit from dehumanizing psi experiencers, mocking cultural practices, or clinging to rigid scientific views are likely to be forgotten.
The Good Thinking Society
The Good Thinking Society | Skeptical About Skeptics
The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry
The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry | Skeptical About Skeptics
James Randi Educational Foundation
James Randi Educational Foundation | Skeptical About Skeptics
The Skeptic Society
The Skeptic Society | Skeptical About Skeptics
The British Skeptic magazine
The British Skeptic magazine | Skeptical About Skeptics
Guerilla Skepticism
Susan Gerbic | Skeptical About Skeptics
Wikipedia Harassment
Rampant Harassment on Wikipedia | Skeptical About Skeptics
SBM- Skeptics Steven Novella
Modern Skepticism: Western Civilization’s Scientific Wahhabism | Skeptical About Skeptics
Stephen Barrett
Stephen Barrett: Wikipedia’s Agent Provocateur Against Natural Medicine | Skeptical About Skeptics
Simon Singh
Simon Singh | Skeptical About Skeptics
Michael Shermer
Michael Shermer | Skeptical About Skeptics
Susan Blackmoore
Susan Blackmore | Skeptical About Skeptics
Richard Dawkins
Richard Dawkins | Skeptical About Skeptics
Ray Hyman
Ray Hyman | Skeptical About Skeptics
James E. Alcock
James E Alcock | Skeptical About Skeptics
Richard Wiseman
Richard Wiseman | Skeptical About Skeptics
Sean Carrol
Sean M Carroll | Skeptical About Skeptics
David Deutsch
David Deutsch | Skeptical About Skeptics
Edzard Ernst
Edzard Ernst | Skeptical About Skeptics
Chris French
Chris French | Skeptical About Skeptics
Martin Gardner
Martin Gardner | Skeptical About Skeptics
Nicholas Humphrey
Nicholas Humphrey | Skeptical About Skeptics
Bruce Hood
Bruce Hood | Skeptical About Skeptics
Mike Hutchinson
Mike Hutchinson | Skeptical About Skeptics
Paul Kurtz
Paul Kurtz | Skeptical About Skeptics
David Marks
David Marks | Skeptical About Skeptics
Pz Myers
PZ Myers | Skeptical About Skeptics
James Randi
James Randi | Skeptical About Skeptics
Lewis Wolpert
Lewis Wolpert | Skeptical About Skeptics
Tony Youens
Tony Youens | Skeptical About Skeptics