Adapted from some material on the World Wide Web.
| True Skeptics / Open-Minded Skeptics | Pseudo-skeptics / Closed-Minded Skeptics |
| Questions everything and takes nothing on faith, even from cherished established institutions. | Does not question anything from established non-religious institutions, but takes whatever they say on faith and demands that others do the same. |
| Asks questions to try to understand new things and are open to learning about them. | Does not ask questions to try to understand new things, but judges them by whether they fit into orthodoxy. |
| Applies critical examination and inquiry to all sides, including their own. | Applies “critical thinking” only to that which opposes orthodoxy or materialism, but never to the status quo itself. |
| Withholds judgment and does not jump to rash conclusions. | Immediately judges as false and debunks anything that contradicts their paradigm. |
| Seeks the truth and considers it the highest aim. | Are not interested in truth, evidence or facts, only in defending their views. |
| Thinks in terms of possibilities rather than in preserving fixed views. | Cannot think in terms of possibilities, but sees their paradigms as fixed and constant. |
| Fairly and objectively weighs evidence on all sides. | Deceive themselves by failing to consider all available evidence. |
| Acknowledges valid convincing evidence rather than ignoring or denying it. | Automatically dismisses and denies all data that contradicts materialism and orthodoxy. |
| Are non-judgmental and slow to draw conclusions about things they know little or nothing about. | Are judgmental and quick to draw conclusions about things they know little or nothing about. |
| Uses objective analysis and examination of things they initially oppose rather than scoffing and ridiculing. | Scoffs and ridicules what they oppose instead of using objective analysis and examination. |
| When faced with evidence or facts they find conflicts with their current understanding, they seek to understand the issue. | When faced with evidence or facts they can’t refute, uses semantics, word games and denial to try to obfuscate the issue. |
| Are able to adapt their paradigms to new evidence and update their hypothesis to fit the data. | Unable to adapt their paradigms to new evidence, and denies data which doesn’t fit into them. |
| When all conventional explanations for a phenomenon are ruled out, are able to accept non-conventional ones. | When all conventional explanations for an unexplainable phenomenon are ruled out, are still not able to accept non-conventional ones. |
| Accepts that there are mysteries and revels in trying to understand them. Can tolerate ambiguity. | Dislikes mystery and uncertainty, and insist that all unknown phenomena must have a mundane explanation. Cannot tolerate very much ambiguity. |
| Views science as a tool and methodology, not as a religion or authority to be obeyed. Understands the difference between the scientific process and the scientific establishment. | Views the scientific establishment as a religion and authority to be taken on faith and never questioned or challenged. Does not understand the difference between the scientific process/methodology and the scientific establishment institution. |
| Acknowledges that the scientific establishment is subject to politics, corruption, control, censorship and suppression, as all human based institutions are – and therefore must be critically examined and scrutinized, rather than taken on faith, especially in the light of contrary evidence to their claims. | Assumes that the scientific establishment is objective and unbiased, and free of politics, corruption, control, censorship and suppression for no other reason than blind faith in authority |
| Will admit they are wrong when the evidence calls for it. | Will never admit that they are wrong no matter what, regardless of evidence. |