Intellectualism Vs Skepticism

Can a person be skeptical about everything, or are there limits? Is it possible to doubt everything, or almost everything? Are there beliefs you possess that cannot be challenged or shown to be false? How might the skeptic respond to your claim that such a belief cannot be doubted? Identify one such specific belief and present your response to the skeptic.

Skeptic people distrust and question all accepted judgments. If your journey is toward touching reality, then skepticism is a constructive intellectual quality. This trait is a part of almost everyone’s personality but with different levels. Questioning the opinions is not detrimental, rather, by undertaking this interrogation process you get to know the levels of intellectualism. In
For example, if I ask you to make a cup of tea, you will ask ‘why’? I will reply as I said so, but you will insist as ‘but why’? To doubt everything may be viewed as a personality disorder or may enlarge paranoia in the personality.

I have a strong personal belief that there is a reason behind every occurrence and nothing is incidental in this world. I believe, until you are not capable of defending and justifying your belief, it’s of no use to hold it. People, who tend to be skeptic about or almost everything, wonder and interrogate simply EVERYTHING. They narrate that they find questions in every given fact as well. People with such extreme reaction may challenge my belief, but I have number of facts, figures and arguments to prove my firm belief accurate.

A skeptic mind will refer my belief as a phenomenon of ‘coincidence’. He will argue that opinions are shared only for man-made reasons. For example, if my car is broken down at a deserted place with no inhabitants around, as per my conviction, I will think that there is a reason behind it. A skeptic on the other hand will insist it as a law of nature or a bad luck, but not a
Without teaching different aspects of life, one cannot think rationally. This problem may be resolved if both school of thought are presented with fair evidences. Religion will be meaningless if evolution is restricted as well. Restriction on teaching creationism in science class does not mean it cannot be taught in the World Religions Class. It is a good way to demonstrate kids what exactly the science should be. For example, as a supporter of creationist I would present evidences against macroevolution, and religion itself has many facts that are proved scientifically in today’s world. The Darwin’s evolution theory on the other hand is disproved by the advent of modern scientific evidences. One of the major facts is that the body parts of a living being are not evolved progressively. Cells are complex and intricate as researched by Michael Behe. They are composite in chemical functions. This indicates that cells are not step by step evolved. Evidence against evolution theory presented today is the inadequacy of fossil records form in a transitional way. Besides, evolutionary process comprises much impossibility. For example, just have a look at yourself, how perfectly you are created and how complex the functions of cells are. We cannot disregard creationism with a perception that there is an involvement of Super power. Even the fast track technology and scientific enhancement are failed to produce a