This is nothing new, it's a defect of humanity that has existed forever. It's also a problem that has been solved through the scientific method and peer review.

This is nothing new, it's a defect of humanity that has existed forever. It's also a problem that has been solved through the scientific method and peer review. It goes against our nature, so it's a skill that needs to be learned and practiced. This means that the average person isn't going to have those skills, and even people with those skills aren't all going to be experts. What is new is that the internet is leading every random idiot to believe that they're an expert on everything. So finding a link to a "study" with a title that sounds like it supports your point (without even reading it, and definitely without critically evaluating it) is seen as doing research. > all I'm trying to say is that I have decided not to think in the way you just did e.g. "where's that study which supports what I already believe?". It doesn't seem like a good tactic anymore You might be victim to what I described above. Finding a study that already supports what you believe was never a "good tactic". In fact, calling it a tactic makes it seem as if it's an adversarial thing where there's a winner and a loser. It's not. Facts and truths aren't partisan (ignoring them is)