I think this only furthers the author's point about skepticism-as-an-identity. When you apply the term "real skeptic," you necessarily invoke some form dogma ab

I think this only furthers the author's point about skepticism-as-an-identity. When you apply the term "real skeptic," you necessarily invoke some form dogma about what skepticism is. This can be avoided by not treating skepticism as an identity, but rather a name for a collection of tools. Like the OC said, it's being skeptical about things rather than being a skeptic.