Abstract. We investigate the task of skeptically reasoning in extensionbased, nonmonotonic logics by concentrating on general argumentation theories. The restricted applicability of Dung’s notion of skeptical provability in his well-known argumentation framework is illustrated, and a new approach based on the notion of a claim associated with each argument is proposed. We provide a formal definition of a skeptical proof in our framework. As a concrete formalism, default logic in case of normal default theories is embedded in the general framework. We prove a formal correspondence between the two notions of skeptical provability, which enables us to adopt the general concept of a skeptical proof into default logic.