What I meant is just because bad person A has opinion X, it does not invalidate opinion X. So just because Sexist A is skeptic it does not follow that every skeptic is sexist.
As I said in another comment: if he can not even avoid basic logical fallacies, he probably never was a very good skeptic to begin with.
"What I meant is just because bad person A has opinion X, it does not invalidate opinion X. So just because Sexist A is skeptic it does not follow that every skeptic is sexist."
Of course not.
But as he, I also noticed a lot of them being sexist.
At some point you have to stop the "just because X is A and B, doesn't mean that every A is B", and make an empirical observation based on the statistical information you have available.
Else you fall into the "no true scotchman" fallacy.
So you claim that there are so many sexist skeptics that it is a given that all skeptics are sexist?
And which skeptics community are you referring to? Climate skeptics? Sexism skeptics? Religion skeptics? I am not even sure what skeptics communities there are, and certainly they don't all agree with each other. I am sure there are climate change skeptic skeptics for example.
>So you claim that there are so many sexist skeptics that it is a given that all skeptics are sexist?
No, but I do claim that the "all" quantifier is useless in human affairs. Why even try to rephrase my statement with "all"? To make it more like a strawman?
What I claim is: "there are many sexist skeptics, period". I don't care if not "all" of them are. I know that I met a large percentage that were, and that it is enough for me to not like those kind of communities.
Plus, it's not that I just dislike their sexism, I dislike their general attitude, which the original article describes quite accurately. That is, they made "thinking independently" into a religious-like dogma.
>I am not even sure what skeptics communities there are, and certainly they don't all agree with each other.
I mean the general "Carl Sagan, Dawkins, James Randi, etc are gods among men, let's hang around internet forums and sites and debunk junk science, lament for the lack of scientific knowledge, waste time arguing with conspiracy theorists, religious nuts, et al" kind of sceptic communities. Maybe with some Ayn Rand thrown in for good measure.
As I said in another comment: if he can not even avoid basic logical fallacies, he probably never was a very good skeptic to begin with.