The article aims at answering two questions: 1) Is skepticism still a problem worth the attention of philosophers? 2) Is skeptical attitude true? It also sheds light on current local discussion of skepticism and offers some critical commentaries on it. Ad 1): The difference between skepticism and skeptic argument is underlined as well as the necessity to focus on explicitly articulated skeptic arguments. Ad 2): There are several skepticisms that are to be differentiated if we want to judge their truth values. In general, the interesting forms of skepticism are not true (this judgment depends on conceiving interesting skeptical arguments as paradoxes). Finally, some of the shortcomings of otherwise valuable writings on skeptical arguments in current discussion are indicated, due to which the solutions they offer cannot be satisfactory.