Now, to Thom’s question. I feel that being a skeptic is about looking at things unfiltered- without bias, agenda, or stigmas. It is also learning to recognize what needs a skeptical eye and what doesn’t. In my life, I’ve spent a good deal of time applying my skeptical toolkit to religion. This is because by the very nature of faith, it is outside of rational and logical processes (I’m also fascinated by the entire concept of religion, but that’s a little unrelated). While on the other hand, I would postulate there’s no reason to be skeptical of the blueness of the sky. Ok, it’s not a great example, but it’s late and that’s all I’ve got.

The scientific method doesn’t have a Western bias or agenda, despite what you may believe. I personally do not think we’re “the only fish swimming in the pond” as you put it, but I still know that homeopathy is bullshit. It has been proven that homeopathy has about the same effect at the Placebo effect (if you’re unfamiliar with that: http://skepdic.com/placebo.html). So before you start criticizing our skeptical paradigm, perhaps you should take a closer look at your own.

Just because something doesn’t follow our logical, Western, scientific methods of thought doesn’t mean it can’t work. We’re not the only fish swimming in the pond, you know; just because we think we’re the best and smartest fish doesn’t mean we actually ARE the best and smartest fish.

By all means: be skeptical and ask questions. But understand also that your paradigm shapes your perspective.