3 ms·
Whether it is reasonable to believe something does not depend on whether it is true (because you can't know that), but on whether it is the currently best-known
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 10y ago
Whether it is reasonable to believe something does not depend on whether it is true (because you can't know that), but on whether it is the currently best-known explanation of the available evidence.
Quacks aren't stupid because what they believe isn't true, but because they believe it without sufficient evidence, or, often enough, despite evidence to the contrary.
- Noseshine 10y agoI don't understand your reply - could you please tell me what connection there is with what I wrote? Seems like random rambling to me.
- kybernetikos 10y agoI presume the argument was that a doctor who is misinformed about the latest studies in wrong is an entirely different way to a quack (e.g. a vaccine denier) who may be 'not even wrong'.
- Noseshine 10y agoYou presume too much and don't understand the story. Maybe you grow into it some day, some things cannot be taught. Not to mention that your reply is the pinnacle of hypocrisy and stupidity. "Even when I'm wrong I'm better wrong than you!" How incredibly stupid.