First a little chat about oversensitivity.
It's estimated that perhaps 1 in 4 four people is oversensitive. Meaning they overreact with excessive emotion toward mistakenly perceived hurts, such as a harsh tone, or a conversational throw away line . Oversensitives dwelll and grieve over these "hurts" way too long.perhaps, months or years. The oversensitives' main emotions at this juncture are fear and anger which are simply too easily reached by slings and arrows from outside.Too thin skinned, they are. This is often the case in artisitic creative personalities. They over analyze, partly because they dream, and think, and plan, far too much. Instead of doing things.
Personality is built into, and emanates from our physical bodies. Like say, food allergies. Artistic people then, have this biochemical bias toward near permanent fear (anxiety) or shall we say, a hair trigger, fear reponse?
Now, Skeptics Ardent .
It is possible, with this inherited physical biochemical bias, like a food allergy, to have a hair trigger fear reponse, when confronted, by a new situation. When something new, is required to be learned. Not all rise to the challenge. Some, with this predetermined physical bias, have an understandable fear response, and to protect their oversensitive self, they come up with an instant Rejectiou Strategy rather than learn to live with the fear and confusion associated with a surprising new revelation. It is a reflexive thought habit ingrained from babyhood. Most other people learn that the abruptness of new knowledge wears off with time. But not with the oversensitive. The hurt can go much deeper and last for a long long time. The babyhood strategy that worked so well continues into adulthood where it can become a social problem
A social problem because the frightened, oversenstive skeptic, often resorts to verbally violent attacks on other people denoucing them with hysterical abuse and childishly cynical, irrelevant playground accusations, in a dispute over, say, the paranormal. Entire TV shows are made by groups of skeptics, forever trying to prove there are no mysteries.Frightening mysteries to skeptics. Fascinating mysteries to everyone else.
Deception is a major player in the skeptic defending his sensitive inner self. It is OK to lie to yourself when a baby, and lie to others because it works, as in babyhood the only important issue is self protection. It is such a wonderful habit. So rewarding. So simple. Just deny. Lie to oneself, and it often works on others too ! What a discovery !
Problem with this early successful lying habit is that it preserves babyhood in a growing person, by the refusal to take onboard, challenging ideas. The very thing that stimulates growth, in most others.
Japanese art of BONSAI is growing a tree seedling in a half orange and repeatedly cutting the roots. The tree can only produce a miniature copy of it's true self. Born-again-skeptics, Ardent Atheists, Religious Zealots all practice the same technique on their own brains, by restricting their growth inputs using a few slogans to avoid thinking ,often unwittingly shrinking their minds to a pitiful miniature of its true potential.. Self protective aggression exceeds their curiosity - this is the Skeptic Art of Continuous Self –Miniaturisation.
Examples of the Skeptic practising the Noble art of Continuous Self Miniaturisation.
(a) Religious fundamentalists eschewing all thought and just repeating endlessly a few mindless slogans.
(b) When everything the skeptic can't live with, is denounced as
pure chance, coincidence, anecdotes are not evidence, there is no scientific study,
(c) demanding primary sources as an abusive put down, when Google is on their own desktop,
(d) insisting that everyone in the experiment is an idiot, implying that the skeptic is far smarter,
actually a scientist, from watching so many forensic police dramas, on TV. And legal shows.
And believing nobody else watches TV.
(e) never, even once, factoring in the possibility, that the skeptic himself could have a below average IQ.
f) Quoting their patron saint Carl Sagan "Extraodinary claims require exrtraordinary evidence" WRONG.
Standard rules of evidence apply.
Demanding additional unavailable evidence is an unscientific retreat from an uncomfortable new reality.
The babyhood game. Even played by eminent scientists, today, defending orthodoxy.
Solution for skeptics Green panel !