Editing Skepticism (section)

== Types ==
Various types of skepticism have been discussed in the academic literature. Skepticism is usually restricted to knowledge claims on one particular subject, which is why its different forms can be distinguished based on the subject.{{r|Greco2009|Popkin|Blackburn2008}} For example, [[Religious skepticism|religious skeptics]] distrust [[religious doctrines]] and [[Moral skepticism|moral skeptics]] raise doubts about accepting various moral requirements and customs. Skepticism can also be applied to knowledge in general. However, this attitude is usually only found in some forms of philosophical skepticism.{{r|Greco2009|Popkin}} A closely related classification distinguishes based on the [[Sources of knowledge|source of knowledge]], such as skepticism about [[perception]], [[memory]], or [[intuition]].<ref name="Cohen1996">{{cite book |last1=Cohen |first1=Stewart |editor1-last=Craig |editor1-first=Edward |title=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |date=1996 |publisher=Routledge |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/BEAREO |chapter=}}</ref> A further distinction is based on the degree of the skeptical attitude. The strongest forms assert that there is no knowledge at all or that knowledge is impossible. Weaker forms merely state that one can never be absolutely certain.<ref name="Greco2009"/>

Some theorists distinguish between a good or healthy form of moderate skepticism in contrast to a bad or unhealthy form of radical skepticism. On this view, the "good" skeptic is a critically minded person who seeks strong evidence before accepting a position. The "bad" skeptic, on the other hand, wants to "suspend judgment indefinitely... even in the face of demonstrable truth".{{r|Raynaud1981|MeinerSkeptizismus}} Another categorization focuses on the motivation for the skeptical attitude. Some skeptics have [[ideological]] motives: they want to replace inferior beliefs with better ones. Others have a more practical outlook in that they see problematic beliefs as the cause of harmful customs they wish to stop. Some skeptics have very particular goals in mind, such as bringing down a certain institution associated with the spread of claims they reject.{{r|Greco2009|Popkin}}

[[Philosophical skepticism]] is a prominent form of skepticism and can be contrasted with non-philosophical or ordinary skepticism. Ordinary skepticism involves a doubting attitude toward knowledge claims that are rejected by many.<ref name="Comesaña2001"/> Almost everyone shows some form of ordinary skepticism, for example, by doubting the knowledge claims made by [[flat earthers]] or [[astrologer]]s.{{r|Greco2009|Popkin}} Philosophical skepticism, on the other hand, is a much more radical and rare position. It includes the rejection of knowledge claims that seem certain from the perspective of [[common sense]]. Some forms of it even deny that one knows that "I have two hands" or that "the sun will come out tomorrow".<ref name="Comesaña2001"/><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Olsson |first1=Erik J. |title=Not Giving the Skeptic a Hearing: 'Pragmatism and Radical Doubt' |journal=Philosophy and Phenomenological Research |date=2005 |volume=70 |issue=1 |pages=98–126 |doi=10.1111/j.1933-1592.2005.tb00507.x |jstor=40040781 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/40040781|url-access=subscription |issn=0031-8205}}</ref> It is taken seriously in philosophy nonetheless because it has proven very hard to conclusively refute philosophical skepticism.{{r|Greco2009|Comesaña2001}}