Certainly it was not as a "sceptic" that you could define him, whatever his definition might be.
And in suggesting this, they have all the advantages that every sceptic has when he supports a negation.
He is a sceptic, and dare hardly give credit to his senses, which he hath often arraigned of false intelligence.
But the sceptic is himself debarred from producing these grounds.
Of course to the sceptic this criterion may appear unsatisfactory, since it depends, not on direct knowledge, but on inference.
And never did a Christian's adoration So praise him as this sceptic's blasphemy.
"Let's hope he's blown himself up and made an end of all that nonsense," said the sceptic of the party.
This begets a very natural question; What is meant by a sceptic?
Only the purest principle, or spirit, is impregnable against the attacks of the sceptic.
He was a sceptic about everything, even about his own position.
also sceptic, 1580s, "member of an ancient Greek school that doubted the possibility of real knowledge," from Middle French sceptique and directly from Latin scepticus "the sect of the Skeptics," from Greek skeptikos (plural Skeptikoi "the Skeptics, followers of Pyrrho"), noun use of adjective meaning "inquiring, reflective" (the name taken by the disciples of the Greek philosopher Pyrrho, who lived c.360-c.270 B.C.E.), related to skeptesthai "to reflect, look, view" (see scope (n.1)).
Skeptic does not mean him who doubts, but him who investigates or researches as opposed to him who asserts and thinks that he has found. [Miguel de Unamuno, "Essays and Soliloquies," 1924]The extended sense of "one with a doubting attitude" first recorded 1610s. The sk- spelling is an early 17c. Greek revival and is preferred in U.S. As a verb, scepticize (1690s) failed to catch on.