Years’n’years ago somebody asked me if contrarianism were just another word for skepticism. My answer was No—but I couldn’t explain why at the time and said I would think about it. I did the promised thinking, though I don’t think I’ve ever explored the issue at length here on Contra or anywhere else. Well, it’s time.
My first insight on the question was that contrarianism is broad, whereas skepticism is narrow. Fleshed out a little, that insight became this: Skepticism is targeted; we’re skeptical about something, not simply skeptical, period. I’ve since refined that insight to its current form:
Contrarianism is a mindset; skepticism is its mechanism.
Contrarianism welcomes (and sometimes celebrates) doubts. Skepticism examines those doubts to determine if they have any value. I explored the notion of contrarianism here on Contra in my entry of January 1, 2009. I didn’t get into skepticism in that piece since people so easily confuse the two.
The scientific method is essentially systematic and disciplined skepticism. The example I often cite is that of the supposed Law of Parity. Some physicists had doubts about the Law of Conservation of Parity as observed in nuclear physics. They did some new experiments in the 1950s, and demonstrated that parity was not always conserved.
I take a little heat from some people over my skepticism of dark matter. We don’t know what true dark matter is made of, but I’m pretty sure it’s not subatomic particles as we understand them. For once, the Grok AI answered my question “What is dark matter made of?” by admitting that we don’t know: “Dark matter’s composition remains unknown.” I have a (personal) hypothesis, since we only know dark matter by the shape of space, and the shape of space is affected by gravity: Dark matter is gravitational distortion of space caused by mass existing in a higher dimension. I don’t claim it’s true, but until more and better research answers the question, that hypothesis remains my best guess. (And I’ll bet there’s a story or three in it!)
Skepticism operates in many other realms than that of science. My skepticism is most active when I confront conventional wisdom, those often bogus things that “everybody knows.” Back in 1970 or so, “everybody” knew that we were about to enter a new ice age. A few years later, when winters didn’t get any worse, the coin flipped and then it was global warming. This sounded fishy to me, and my skepticism kicked into high gear. There are loads of lists online of apocalyptic scare stories about climate that never came even close to being true. I continue to research climate, but as climate research has now become utterly political, I won’t discuss it further here.
Skepticism goads the skeptic into learning new (and often useful) things. I heard the tired old saw, “Fat makes you fat” a great deal in my early life. I went largely low-carb in 1997 by not drinking sugar-sweetened iced tea because I threw a kidney stone. I lost 5 or 6 pounds in a few months. This startled the hell out of me. Over the next several years I researched diet, and when I happened on Gary Taubes’ book Good Calories, Bad Calories, I began to understand. I am now 20 pounds lighter than I was in 1997 because I only rarely have carb dishes like pasta or rice, I rarely drink sodas, and mostly adhere to our diet of meat, fish, eggs, dairy, and salad. Skepticism of conventional wisdom (“Fat makes you fat”) drove me to do that research, and I’ve learned a lot in the process.
It’s important to remember that good skepticism is to some extent skeptical of itself. I overrode my skepticism of the government’s declarations on COVID, and got the Pfizer vacc and its booster. Mercifully, I stopped there, but I remained skeptical enough to get a supply of HCQ and Zinc Sulfate via a telemed MD just in case. When we finally caught COVID in ‘23, the HCQ/Zinc protocol knocked the damned thing out in 5 days. Well, the Powers finally admitted that the Pfizer vacc won’t keep you from getting it or spreading it. It is thus not a vaccine at all, but a form of pre-treatment that carries side effects we’re only now pinning down. Like climate, the side effects issue has become completely political, and I won’t discuss it further here. The lesson is just this: Keep your skepticism on a short leash, and pay attention to its sidebands; i.e., issues to either side of the core object of your skepticism.
Skepticism has other benefits. Skepticism fosters an open mind. Skeptics are scammed a lot less often. Skeptics don’t get swept up into fads and tribal tarpits as easily. Skeptics readily admit when they’re wrong about something, largely because skepticism causes them to be wrong less often.
In short, skepticism has made my life better and taught me a great deal. More than that, in conjunction with my contrarianism, it’s kept me a free man. And that’s why I am a skeptic now and always will be.
” Well, the Powers finally admitted that the Pfizer vacc won’t keep you from getting it or spreading it”.
Jeff, can you share a link to that info? I tried a quick google before sending this question but all I could find was that it was effective (not 100% of course). Not doubting you at all, just keen on contrary but also reputable information. Thanks
Well, almost none of the sites I scanned through just now say you can still get it or spread it after vaccination. Almost. The World Health Organization (WHO) says this:
“It is still possible to get COVID-19 and spread it to others after being vaccinated, so continue to do everything you can to keep yourself and others healthy. Wash your hands regularly and cover coughs and sneezes and follow the advice of your health authorities.”
Link: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/covid-19-vaccines/advice
Virtually all the sites I visited said that the vaccine makes you less likely to become seriously ill or die if you contract COVID. That may be true, but immunity is a key part of anything I’m willing to consider a vaccine.
Thanks for the link and reply Jeff.
“Immunity is a key part ‘to’ consider a vaccine”. I wish it were so simple. The reason there is no vaccine immunity for the flu is that it mutates too quickly. Same for the common cold, and Covid. The measles, small pox, etc. viruses, are preventable by vaccines because they don’t mutate very fast, or mutate to non virulent forms.
We all have to make choices about our health. Are knee replacements good or bad? Is the shingles vaccine worth while when it is not a complete preventitive? (only 91% efficacy). Do our heath choices about communicative diseases affect others? I wish things were simple, but they aren’t.
You have good timing with current news with this and your last post. The intersection of AI and health just came out as the MAHA report. The citations show made up references and researchers listed state they never wrote what was quoted. These are the same issues you pointed out before with Grok. I just fear that bad data may make for bad policies.
An awful lot of influential people are in denial about AI hallucinations and something called “model collapse.” The Register has an article about it that’s worth reading:
https://www.theregister.com/2025/05/27/opinion_column_ai_model_collapse/
I have yet to get 100% true answers to questions posed to any AI. (I’ve tested two or three, most recently Grok on X.) I will continue to test them, and report here from time to time.
Heck, AI is already more truthful than most advertisers… and politicians. 😉
Contrarianism is a mindset which can be profoundly credulous.
Many years ago, David Brin wrote an essay titled “The Dogma of Otherness”. He was prompted by encounters with people (often at SF cons) who championed concepts – even absurd ones – that had been declared false by “established science”. These people were attracted to such propositions.
This mindset goes back over 100 years. In 1905, there was a report that biologist Jacques Loeb had created life artificially. This was rejected by “a consensus of opinion among biologists”. Mark Twain published a comment asserting at great length that Loeb was probably right because “the consensus” was always wrong.
Today there are lots of people who believe “They” are lying. “Believe nothing until it has been officially denied.”