Better a Skeptic than Two Geese

Mark Honeychurch - 26 May 2025

A couple of weeks ago I started seeing posts about how Google’s AI was bending over backwards attempting to explain idioms that didn’t exist. I didn’t think much of it until a few days ago, when I was searching for advice on a level in the game “Consider It” on the Switch. The level in question involved a couple walking down the pavement together towards some dog poop, and I couldn’t work out how to avoid stepping in it - so I searched for “consider it poop level”. Google’s AI then tried to explain the phrase I had searched for as if it was a well-known saying.

It was interesting to see the phenomenon I’d read about the week before, and I figured it might be fun to try and test it to see if I could get silly explanations for some made-up skeptical phrases. I started off with something inspired by the classic 1980s movie Gremlins.

When I put the phrase below in my Google search, sure enough Google’s AI treated it like a real phrase and attempted to explain it to me.

You can’t trust a skeptic past midnight

The statement “you can’t trust a skeptic past midnight” is a humorous or metaphorical way of saying that a person’s level of skepticism or doubt might become exaggerated or unreasonable, especially when tired or influenced by late-night circumstances. It suggests that when a skeptic is in a state of reduced mental capacity or judgment, their natural tendency towards doubt and questioning might be amplified, leading to irrational or exaggerated distrust.

Here’s a breakdown of why this statement might be used:

Skepticism’s Double-Edged Sword:

While healthy skepticism is valuable in promoting critical thinking and evidence-based decision-making, excessive skepticism can lead to mistrust and a closed-mindedness.

Tiredness and Poor Judgment:

When people are tired, their cognitive abilities, including judgment and reasoning, can be impaired. This can lead to amplified doubts and a less rational approach to situations.

The Power of Circumstances:

Late-night settings, whether due to stress, sleep deprivation, or other factors, can influence how individuals interpret events and react to information.

Figurative Language:

The phrase “past midnight” is a common way of describing late-night hours or circumstances that might lead to impulsive or exaggerated reactions.

In essence, the statement highlights a potential for skepticism to become a negative trait under certain conditions, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a balanced perspective even when facing doubts or uncertainties.

What appears to be happening here is that the AI, having been trained to be as helpful as possible and give plausible answers to questions from users, is generating what looks like a sensible response to my search, blissfully unaware that the phrase I’ve typed in doesn’t make any sense and isn’t a common saying. The decision to train the AI to be helpful and try to generate an answer where possible seems to be at the expense of discerning whether the question is nonsensical.

Following this success, I tried some more made-up phrases, and it was interesting to see that in some cases at least, the AI did warn me that although my made-up proverbs looked plausible, they weren’t something that appears to be in common use.

Better a skeptic than two geese

The saying “Better a skeptic than two geese” doesn’t appear to be a well-known proverb or idiom. It’s possible it’s a phrase someone created or modified, or perhaps it’s a misunderstanding of a related saying.

However, the phrase “better a skeptic than two geese” seems to imply that being skeptical or doubtful is preferable to having two geese. This could be interpreted in a few ways:

Skepticism is a valuable trait:

Skeptics are often described as questioning assumptions and seeking evidence before accepting claims. This can be seen as a positive trait in a world where misinformation and false information are prevalent.

Geese may be perceived as having negative qualities:

Geese can be noisy, territorial, and prone to aggression, especially when protecting their young. They also have a reputation for being messy. Perhaps the phrase is meant to highlight the annoyance or inconvenience of having geese around.

A single skeptic is better than multiple geese:

The phrase could be a play on the idea that having one person with a skeptical mindset is preferable to having a large number of geese. This could be seen as a comparison between a single, intelligent person and a group of animals.

Ultimately, the meaning of “better a skeptic than two geese” is open to interpretation, but it seems to suggest that skepticism is a valuable trait and that having two geese might be undesirable for some reason.

Once a skeptic, always a day less

The phrase “once a skeptic, always a day less” is a play on words, not a common saying or a well-known philosophical concept. It suggests that someone who is skeptical, meaning they question or doubt something, will always have a shorter “day,” or perhaps a more limited or less positive experience, because of their questioning nature.

Here’s a breakdown of the potential meaning:

“Once a skeptic”:

This refers to someone who has a skeptical mindset, questioning claims, evidence, or authority.

“Always a day less”:

This is a metaphorical way of saying that being skeptical might mean missing out on a “day” or opportunity. It could imply that skepticism can lead to less certainty, less joy in accepting things at face value, or even less trust in others.

It’s a somewhat pessimistic view of skepticism, suggesting that it can be a barrier to experiencing life fully or accepting things as they are.

Ever the skeptic, twice on a monday

The phrase “ever the skeptic, twice on a monday” is not a known saying or idiom. However, it can be interpreted to mean that a person is always skeptical (doubting or questioning) and that this skepticism is particularly strong or noticeable on Mondays, perhaps because of the start of the workweek or the potential for things to go wrong.

Here’s a breakdown of the meaning:

Skeptic:

A person who doubts or questions something, often without readily accepting claims or beliefs.

Twice on a monday:

This suggests that the skepticism is not just present but intensified or happens with more frequency on Mondays. It could be because Mondays are often associated with the start of a workweek, which might bring about more situations that could be viewed with doubt or skepticism.

Without further context, it’s difficult to say precisely what this phrase might mean. However, it paints a picture of a person who is habitually questioning and who has a particularly pronounced skeptical outlook, especially on Mondays.

After this bit of fun I tried a pair of contradictory made up idioms, to see how well it managed to conjure up “rational” explanations for two opposite ideas.

Skeptic for wealth, believer for health

The statement “skeptic for wealth, believer for health” suggests a cautious, critical approach to financial matters while embracing a more trusting attitude towards personal well-being. It highlights a distinction between carefully evaluating investment opportunities and trusting in the effectiveness of healthy habits and treatments. This approach balances financial prudence with a positive outlook on health.

Here’s a more detailed breakdown:

Skeptic for Wealth:

This implies a tendency to question claims about wealth generation, especially those promising quick or easy riches. It suggests a focus on solid, verifiable information, avoiding potentially risky ventures based on hype or unproven methods. A financial skeptic might be more cautious in investing, preferring long-term, well-researched strategies over speculative ones.

Believer for Health:

This suggests a more trusting attitude towards established healthcare practices and a willingness to adopt healthy habits. It might involve believing in the effectiveness of things like a balanced diet, exercise, and mental health practices. This belief can be a strong motivator for making positive changes in one’s lifestyle.

In essence, this approach combines a critical mindset towards financial matters with a more optimistic and trusting view of personal health and well-being.

Skeptic for health, believer for wealth

The statement “skeptic for health, believer for wealth” highlights a dichotomy in how people might approach health and wealth. It suggests a cautious, critical stance towards health information, while embracing a more positive and optimistic outlook regarding the pursuit of wealth.

Here’s a breakdown of the concepts:

Skeptic for health:

This implies a questioning attitude towards medical advice, treatments, and information. It can involve skepticism about the effectiveness of certain drugs, the safety of vaccines, or the accuracy of health claims, according to the Wellcome Collection and BYU. A healthy skepticism can be a way to promote agency and control over one’s health, says the Wellcome Collection.

Believer for wealth:

This suggests a strong belief in the possibility of achieving financial success, coupled with a positive mindset about investments, business ventures, and other wealth-generating opportunities. It may also involve a belief in the idea that hard work and determination can lead to prosperity.

Dichotomy:

The statement suggests a contrast between a careful approach to health and a more optimistic, sometimes even unquestioning, approach to wealth. This can be seen in the way people might question medical advice but readily believe promises of financial gain.

Following on from these examples, I wondered how it would cope with a pair of sensible questions that asked for opposite advice. Obviously these days Google, OpenAI and other companies investing in AI products have been adding common-sense filters and guard rails to ensure their products don’t give dangerous or misleading answers (although it seems that Elon Musk’s Grok AI is currently being trained to do the opposite of this by offering misinformation). So, would Google’s AI attempt to answer a question that was positive about Skepticism, but refuse to answer one that tried to portray skepticism in a negative light? Would there be an obvious bias towards evidence-based thinking, and away from pseudoscience and credulousness?

Why you should be a skeptic

An AI Overview is not available for this search

My first question was “why you should be a skeptic”, and the AI decided it was unable or unwilling to answer this question, simply telling me “An AI Overview is not available for this search”. However, when I asked the inverse question, “why you shouldn’t be a skeptic”, Google’s AI wasn’t quite so tight-lipped, giving me a long list of reasons why I should not be overly skeptical, and should instead “learn to trust”, and “embrace uncertainty”.

Why you shouldn’t be a skeptic

While a certain level of skepticism can be healthy, being overly skeptical can lead to problems. Excessive doubt can prevent you from accepting new information or forming meaningful relationships, and it can also make it difficult to make decisions. Additionally, skepticism can sometimes devolve into cynicism, where people assume the worst about everything and everyone.

Here’s a more detailed look at why it might be detrimental to be overly skeptical:

1. It can hinder learning and growth:

Inability to embrace new ideas:

If you’re constantly questioning everything, you might be hesitant to learn new things or consider different perspectives.

Missed opportunities:

Excessive doubt can prevent you from taking risks and trying new things that could lead to personal or professional growth.

2. It can damage relationships:

Difficulty trusting others:

Being skeptical of others can make it hard to build strong, trusting relationships.

Judgmental attitudes:

A skeptical outlook might lead to a tendency to judge others’ motivations or beliefs, which can create distance and conflict.

3. It can lead to cynicism and pessimism:

Negative outlook:

Constant questioning and doubting can create a generally negative and pessimistic view of the world.

Difficulty finding happiness:

A cynical mindset can make it hard to find joy and satisfaction in life’s experiences.

4. It can make it difficult to make decisions:

Overthinking:

Being overly skeptical can lead to overthinking and analysis paralysis, making it challenging to make decisions, even simple ones.

Fear of making mistakes:

The fear of being wrong can hold you back from taking action and making choices.

5. It can be exhausting:

Mental strain:

Constantly questioning and doubting everything can be mentally draining and lead to burnout.

Loss of joy in life:

A skeptical outlook can make it difficult to appreciate the simple things in life.

Instead of being overly skeptical, try to:

Find a balance: A healthy level of skepticism is useful for critical thinking, but it’s important to also be open to new ideas and trust others.

Focus on the positive: Cultivate a more optimistic and hopeful outlook on life.

Learn to trust: Develop a greater ability to trust your intuition, your own judgment, and the judgment of others.

Embrace uncertainty: Accept that you don’t need to know everything to make good decisions.

By finding a balance between healthy skepticism and trust, you can navigate life with greater ease and find more joy and fulfillment.

At Friday evening’s New Zealand wide Skeptics in Cyberspace meeting I let people know of the disappointing responses I’d received, and Al Blenney suggested I could ask a similar question about religion as a way to find out whether the AI has other similar biases. Sure enough, when I plugged in Al’s two opposite questions, I only received an answer to the less skeptical, more credulous of the two questions.

Why should one be religious

There are several reasons why someone might choose to be religious, including finding meaning and purpose in life, experiencing a sense of community, and feeling a connection to something larger than themselves. Religiosity can also have positive impacts on mental and physical health, offering support during difficult times and promoting prosocial behaviors.

Here’s a more detailed look at the potential benefits:

Meaning and Purpose:

Religion can provide a framework for understanding the world and one’s place in it, offering answers to fundamental questions about life, death, and the universe.

Sense of Community:

Religious communities can offer a strong sense of belonging and social support, providing a network of friends and confidants who share similar beliefs.

Mental and Physical Health:

Research suggests that religious involvement can be linked to improved mental health outcomes, such as reduced rates of depression, anxiety, and substance abuse. It may also be associated with physical health benefits like lower blood pressure and a reduced risk of heart disease.

Stress Reduction and Coping:

Religion can provide mechanisms for coping with stress and difficult life events, offering a sense of hope and guidance through challenging times.

Prosocial Behaviors:

Religious teachings often emphasize the importance of compassion, helping others, and contributing to society, which can encourage prosocial behaviors and a sense of social responsibility.

Moral Guidance:

Many religions offer moral frameworks that can provide guidance on how to live a meaningful and ethical life.

Hope and Optimism:

Belief in a higher power or a spiritual afterlife can instill hope and optimism, particularly during difficult times.

Sense of Connection:

Religion can provide a sense of connection to something larger than oneself, offering a sense of purpose and meaning that extends beyond individual experiences.

Why should one not be religious

An AI Overview is not available for this search

Following on from this, I tried one last question, thinking of something that could have real-world implications. What would Google’s AI do when asked for advice about alternative medicine from two different perspectives? I started with the non-skeptical question, by now figuring that this one was likely to provide me with an answer.

What reasons are there why I should trust alternative medicine

There’s no universal reason to trust alternative medicine; it’s a spectrum of practices, some with evidence-based benefits and others lacking scientific support. Some people find alternative therapies helpful for managing symptoms, increasing overall well-being, and feeling more in control of their health. However, it’s crucial to approach alternative medicine with caution, considering potential risks and interactions with conventional treatments.

Here’s a more detailed look:

Reasons to consider alternative medicine:

Complementary benefits:

Some alternative therapies, like meditation, yoga, and acupuncture, have shown promise in reducing symptoms, improving quality of life, and supporting well-being for conditions like cancer and chronic pain.

Focus on holistic approach:

Alternative practices often focus on the interconnectedness of the body, mind, and spirit, which some individuals find appealing.

Natural and gentler approach:

Some people prefer alternative medicine because it often uses natural substances and techniques, which they perceive as safer or less invasive than conventional treatments.

Empowerment and control:

Alternative therapies can empower individuals to take a more active role in their health journey and feel more in control of their healing process.

Addressing specific concerns:

Some people may seek alternative therapies due to concerns about side effects of conventional medications or a desire to avoid pharmaceuticals.

Personal preferences and beliefs:

Individuals may choose alternative therapies based on their personal beliefs, values, and experiences.

The AI did go on to give a few reasons why I should be wary of some alternative medicines, but by this point I think the damage has already been done. As with the previous two examples, the counter-question resulted in Google’s AI clamming up and refusing to answer.

What reasons are there why I shouldn’t trust alternative medicine

An AI Overview is not available for this search

What started off as a fun way to trick Google’s AI search bot into tying itself in knots, attempting to please me by making up plausible explanations for made-up idioms, ended on a much more serious note. The AI is happy to answer when prompted for alternative, non evidence-based approaches and viewpoints, but something in its training, when given a question that prompts for an answer that goes against these alternative viewpoints, causes it to refuse to answer.

I suspect that this issue is likely caused by one of the upper layers of AI training, where human feedback is given to ensure the AI is polite, kind and friendly, and doesn’t upset people with answers they don’t want to hear. Sadly, if this is the case, this training is having an unintended consequence of causing the AI to favour nonsense over evidence, at least in response to certain types of questions. Of course, I could be wrong here, and I’d be keen to hear from anyone who has some insight into what may be causing this bias. But, please, don’t just get an AI to answer this for you and send me its response - that’s going to be a waste of both my time and yours!

Disclaimer: There were some variations of these pairs of questions that I asked where the AI refused to answer either of them, which required me to slightly reword the question, but I never encountered a question pair where it answered both. Below are screenshots of some of the first questions I asked, to give you an idea of what the responses look like.