3 ms·
Any time I hear a very socially useful truth proposed, I get very wary. History is littered with ideas that were proclaimed to be true mostly only because it w
by otakucode 9y ago
Any time I hear a very socially useful truth proposed, I get very wary. History is littered with ideas that were proclaimed to be true mostly only because it would be very useful if it were true. It's certainly no guarantee of illegitimacy, but if an idea comes along that basically says "hey, you know how your society likes to do X? Turns out that's the best!" I immediately enter high-skepticism mode. Everything from leaded gasoline to eugenics to the Industrial Revolutions views on the dangers of masturbation can be laid at the feet of people who so desperately wanted something to be true that they skimped on rigor and ended up leaving unimaginable suffering in their wake. When the doctor (I can never recall his name!) suggested other doctors wash their hands between performing autopsies and delivering babies, he was insulted and rejected, as the idea that doctors who wanted desperately to help their patients were responsible for the astronomically high rate of death of both mothers and infants was offensive. This is the opposite side of that coin.
- dredmorbius 9y agoThat's effectively Appeal to Consequences fallacy, though in both its usual (false rejection of an inconvenient truth) and inverse (false support of an appealing falsehood) forms. That's a useful counter-bias to have, though not an infallible one.
- yesenadam 9y agoIgnaz Semmelweis