In politics, and life, we encounter many alien ideas. An alien idea is something we can't imagine ourselves ever believing. When we come across such ideas, we ask ourselves: "Do they really believe that?". Examples of alien ideas, for me, are:
- "Kings are ordained to rule by God"
- "Transwomen are women"
- "God made the world in seven days"
- "Islamic martyrs who die in Jihad will be rewarded with 72 virgins in heaven"
- "The moon is made of cheese"
- "Every nation is a race of people (such as: Jews, Germans, English)"
I've been familiar with some of these ideas forever; in that I heard them early in life and can't remember when I first encountered it. Other alien ideas I only encountered recently. Because alien ideas can seem so strange to us, we sometimes think those who believe the idea are 'insane', or even so driven by politics, or religion, that they're 'brain-washed'.
This is a very bad way for a skeptic to understand belief. Belief is better understood as ideas we act upon, as if true, without even thinking. Skeptics and scientists claim to hold scientific evidence above all other evidence, but not all do. They claim to base their beliefs on evidence, but many don't.
It's never worth asking oneself the question "Do they really believe that?" because many people who claim to believe something don't! They just act as if they do. For example, skeptics, who claim to believe in man-made climate change generally, 99% of the time, have no evidence for their belief. They essentially believe it because powerful political bodies say it.
The only way one can debunk or counter such ideas is with evidence. When they really are skeptics they'll follow the evidence, and one has a rational debate. When they're not skeptics, no amount of evidence can persuade them to go against their politics, religion, common sense, or whatever. So always argue from evidence. You may assume your standards are universal but they won't be; in that there are no universal standards anymore. Not even in science and academia. Post-modernism continues to erode standards; even long after it's dead as a practical belief system. An example of the death of universal ideas, in science, is the claim the greenhouse gas effect is settled science. People who say this don't, generally, even know, nor seem to care what settled science means. Settled science is just the scientific method, plus ideas related to it such as Occam's razor (as explaied by Einstein): Everything should be kept as simple as possible, but no simpler.". But beware: even the scientific method is now, disputed. For example we're told peer review is part of the method; but it isn't. OK, arguably settled science also includes accepted laws and theories of science too; certainly the laws; not so much the theories. We behave as if the theories of science are real things. AKA true. We know the laws are.
If not, Q: Do they really believe that?, then what?, Maybe, Q: Why do they believe that? No, don't bother. You can't mind-read another person; that only misleads you to projection; which really is a categorical error for a skeptic. Better to ask yourself, Q: What is the best evidence?
