Re: virus: Faith, Logic and Purpose

Paul Prestopnik (
Mon, 24 Nov 1997 14:25:35 -0500

> > >Does that make skeptisim a religion for some? Wade?
> >
> > You know, skeptics hear that sort of retort constantly. No, of course
> > is not.
> Really? Consider that "religious" is not an insult coming from my lips,
> only from yours. Are you sure that you understand the question?
> -Prof. Tim

Before this goes any further someone should explicitly state their
definition of a religion.

This is from Microsoft Bookshelf:

re·lig·ion (rī-līj¹en) noun
Abbr. rel., relig.
1. a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded
as creator and governor of the universe. b. A personal or institutionalized
system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a
spiritual leader.
4. A cause, a principle, or an activity pursued with zeal or conscientious

In my opinion Skepticism would certainly not apply as a religion under the
first definition, or the third (unless you really stretch what is meant by
spiritual leader, and even then I can't see it fitting). The second
doesn't fit, and that leaves the fourth. The fourth definition could
certainly apply to at least some skeptics. I think that a modification of
definition three that simply leaves out the requirement that there is a
basis on the teachings of a spiritual leader, would be come closest to
fitting skepticism