3 ms·

It's really interesting to me how so many people, including in these comments, instantly decided that the vaccine was untrustworthy based on politics, and just.

It's really interesting to me how so many people, including in these comments, instantly decided that the vaccine was untrustworthy based on politics, and just... left it at that. Even though their own lives were on the line in many cases. Why would you let blind trust or distrust in some political talking heads determine whether you, yourself, live or die? ... Why not check out the evidence for yourself, or talk to your doctor? Even after watching people die terrible deaths regretting their choice not to get the vaccine, they're still rationalizing this choice based on politics. I guess if the Red Tribe says something is bad, one must believe it as a matter of identity in the Red Tribe? Even at the cost of one's own life? Maybe the trust in the tribe's information sources is so absolute that it would never occur to a member to seek out potentially contrary sources? This is definitely not just a Red Tribe problem, but it's one of the most tragic and pathetic manifestations I've ever seen. For more information on this phenomenon, I highly recommend this introduction to "coalitional instincts" https://www.edge.org/response-detail/27168 https://www.edge.org/response-detail/27168

ZeroGravitas 5y ago
There was a recent story that detailed red areas needing to provide places where people could be vaccinated in private so other people couldn't see them 'breaking' the tribes rules. Similar to that joke about taking two Baptists fishing, because if you only take one, they'll drink all your beer. There was also the weird finding that the better educated a Republican was about climate change, the more their opinion diverged from the science. The conclusion was that just as a nerdy religious person might know all the obscure rules better than an average person, scientifically literate Republicans could list all the correct talking points better because they understood them more.
- civilized 5y ago
  It all makes me wonder, what is to be done? Is there any way to cut through this instinct to believe tribal bullshit? Are there examples of people doing it successfully in the past? What was their playbook? Can the same tricks work in today's information environment?
  - ZeroGravitas 5y ago
    Gay marraige is often touted as a success in this regard. Lots of conservatives said they were against it, because lots of conservatives said they were against it. When it became clear that even most conservatives didn't care, the whole thing collapsed and it was one of the fastest changes in reported opinion on record. https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/carrie-wofford/2014/03/26/how-did-public-opinion-on-gay-marriage-shift-so-quickly?context=amp https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/carrie-wofford/2014/03/... So just convincing conservatives that other conservatives have the same sinking feeling of "are we the baddies?" might be worth looking into.
    - civilized 5y ago
      I had the impression that a lot of change came with the 2015 SCOTUS ruling. Which is a little unsettling - a lot of change only comes if one side imposes their will by law. I could be wrong though. I haven't looked closely at the timing.
      - ZeroGravitas 5y ago
        Coincidentally, I just added a link to a story from 2014 that was already celebrating the shift in attitudes.
        civilized 5y ago
        Haha, thank goodness for that. To your earlier point, "here are some card-carrying members of your tribe with a different opinion" definitely seems like a useful approach. If you can find those people, and they can maintain their card-carrying status after coming out of the closet with their contrarian opinion.
        abenga 5y ago
        Trump is far more than a card carrying member of the tribe, yet was booed when he suggested taking the vaccine.
edmcnulty101 5y ago
> Why would you let blind trust or distrust in some political talking heads determine whether you, yourself, live or die? Very good point. I think that's also part of peoples argument against vaccines.
- civilized 5y ago
  Except the most important evidence by far wasn't from talking heads. Moderna and Pfizer both produced clinical trials that showed high effectiveness. To discredit that evidence, you have to believe that both of these companies were willing to completely throw away their reputations with the public and regulators just to make a few bucks on some snake oil vaccines. Or you have to believe that these companies trusted there would be no need to protect their reputations, because there would be a massive conspiracy to fudge the numbers and make the vaccines look effective. Either of these beliefs is QAnon-tier conspiracism.
  - convolvatron 5y ago
    to be fair, these studies aren't the whole truth. they show an effect, but don't eliminate the possibility of unconsidered long-term consequences. but we do make those kinds of 'close enough' tradeoffs in medicine all the time and it seems to work out pretty well.
    - garciasn 5y ago
      This is a disingenuous statement. It ignores the fact that there have been and are likely to be more long term issues from the virus too.
      - civilized 5y ago
        You're right about what it ignores but I don't think GP was being disingenuous.
        garciasn 5y ago

ZeroGravitas 5y ago

There was a recent story that detailed red areas needing to provide places where people could be vaccinated in private so other people couldn't see them 'breaking' the tribes rules. Similar to that joke about taking two Baptists fishing, because if you only take one, they'll drink all your beer. There was also the weird finding that the better educated a Republican was about climate change, the more their opinion diverged from the science. The conclusion was that just as a nerdy religious person might know all the obscure rules better than an average person, scientifically literate Republicans could list all the correct talking points better because they understood them more.

civilized 5y ago
It all makes me wonder, what is to be done? Is there any way to cut through this instinct to believe tribal bullshit? Are there examples of people doing it successfully in the past? What was their playbook? Can the same tricks work in today's information environment?
- ZeroGravitas 5y ago
  Gay marraige is often touted as a success in this regard. Lots of conservatives said they were against it, because lots of conservatives said they were against it. When it became clear that even most conservatives didn't care, the whole thing collapsed and it was one of the fastest changes in reported opinion on record. https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/carrie-wofford/2014/03/26/how-did-public-opinion-on-gay-marriage-shift-so-quickly?context=amp https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/carrie-wofford/2014/03/... So just convincing conservatives that other conservatives have the same sinking feeling of "are we the baddies?" might be worth looking into.
  - civilized 5y ago
    I had the impression that a lot of change came with the 2015 SCOTUS ruling. Which is a little unsettling - a lot of change only comes if one side imposes their will by law. I could be wrong though. I haven't looked closely at the timing.
    - ZeroGravitas 5y ago
      Coincidentally, I just added a link to a story from 2014 that was already celebrating the shift in attitudes.
      - civilized 5y ago
        Haha, thank goodness for that. To your earlier point, "here are some card-carrying members of your tribe with a different opinion" definitely seems like a useful approach. If you can find those people, and they can maintain their card-carrying status after coming out of the closet with their contrarian opinion.
        abenga 5y ago
        Trump is far more than a card carrying member of the tribe, yet was booed when he suggested taking the vaccine.

edmcnulty101 5y ago

> Why would you let blind trust or distrust in some political talking heads determine whether you, yourself, live or die? Very good point. I think that's also part of peoples argument against vaccines.

civilized 5y ago
Except the most important evidence by far wasn't from talking heads. Moderna and Pfizer both produced clinical trials that showed high effectiveness. To discredit that evidence, you have to believe that both of these companies were willing to completely throw away their reputations with the public and regulators just to make a few bucks on some snake oil vaccines. Or you have to believe that these companies trusted there would be no need to protect their reputations, because there would be a massive conspiracy to fudge the numbers and make the vaccines look effective. Either of these beliefs is QAnon-tier conspiracism.
- convolvatron 5y ago
  to be fair, these studies aren't the whole truth. they show an effect, but don't eliminate the possibility of unconsidered long-term consequences. but we do make those kinds of 'close enough' tradeoffs in medicine all the time and it seems to work out pretty well.
  - garciasn 5y ago
    This is a disingenuous statement. It ignores the fact that there have been and are likely to be more long term issues from the virus too.
    - civilized 5y ago
      You're right about what it ignores but I don't think GP was being disingenuous.
      - garciasn 5y ago