5 ms·

> It’s good to have an open mind. Is it? That's the very basis for error that begat this article. In fact, Turing's and Kahneman's minds were too open. They

> It’s good to have an open mind. Is it? That's the very basis for error that begat this article. In fact, Turing's and Kahneman's minds were too open. They didn't express sufficient reservation by demanding more rigorous tests of those claims. Perhaps a better maxim would be, "It's good to have a mind that's open just enough to entertain the impossible."

clint 4y ago
Its funny, I considered Turing's state of mind to be not open enough to the possibility that he might be wrong.
- n4r9 4y ago
  My thoughts exactly. "This claim is true and you mustn't disagree" is quite closed-minded.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
arto 4y ago
"By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out." -- Richard Dawkins
- eyelidlessness 4y ago
  An appropriately simplistic quote from someone who habitually and sometimes famously demonstrates being stubbornly narrow minded. But then, how else would he not know that brains don’t fall out of—nor are placed in—minds.
- bloak 4y ago
  That saying, or ones like it, are also attributed to Carl Sagan, G. K. Chesterton, James Oberg, Arthur Hays Sulzberger, Virginia Gildersleeve, Bertrand Russell, Max Radin, ... This article mentions Walter M. Kotschnig as the author of the earliest known instance of the saying, but notes that even Kotschnig seemed to be quoting something that was already known at the time: https://www.skeptic.com/insight/open-mind-brains-fall-out-maxim-adage-aphorism/ https://www.skeptic.com/insight/open-mind-brains-fall-out-ma...
- tpoacher 4y ago
  I prefer Terry Pratchett's quote: "The problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it."
mr_toad 4y ago
In addition to statistical evidence people should really examine the plausibility of the mechanism in question. Most accounts of ESP have no description of how it might actually work. The theories are typically dualistic, vitalistic and even plain magical.
- xyzzyz 4y ago
  What kind of “mechanism of action” you are looking for? I mean, physicists provide no “mechanism of action” for the forces they stipulate to exist. There is no “mechanism of action” for electromagnetism, it just does what it does. Similarly, ESP force might not have “mechanism of action”, it just could do what it does. What you are doing here is that you are betraying two huge hidden assumptions that you implicitly make. First is that you are most likely expecting to obtain “mechanism action” in some kind of mathematical terms, which implicitly assumes ability to use mathematics to explain the observed universe. Second is that you are looking for “mechanism of action” for ESP in terms of known physical forces and theories. Here, you implicitly assume that known physics is all there is. Now, I do not believe in ESP either, my point is only that you are demanding rigor from ESP you don’t from electromagnetism.
  - josephcsible 4y ago
    I think it's the combination of "ESP has no mechanism of action in terms of known science, and so would require new fundamental physics to be possible" and "ESP has never been successfully tested, and not for lack of trying" together that's a really hard pill to swallow.
  - wnkrshm 4y ago
    Physics can replicate electromagnetic effects with an extremely high degree of precision, it's almost trivial to replicate said effects. Physics has formulated models of how electromagnetism works and from that model, predicted other effects that could be replicated in experiments as well. That's what a 'mechanism of action' means here. The predictive power of a model, by whatever means it's formulated makes it useful. There are infinitely many ways to model electromagnetism but only a few of them are useful because they allow to make theoretical predictions that then also match reality.
sebastialonso 4y ago
imo having an open mind means rather exclusively to allow the possibility to be moved by scientific evidence. Not just believe for the sake of it or because of some kind of bias If we don't keep an open mind, in this sense, we'd still believe the Sun rotates around the Earth.

clint 4y ago

Its funny, I considered Turing's state of mind to be not open enough to the possibility that he might be wrong.

n4r9 4y ago
My thoughts exactly. "This claim is true and you mustn't disagree" is quite closed-minded.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

arto 4y ago

"By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out." -- Richard Dawkins

eyelidlessness 4y ago
An appropriately simplistic quote from someone who habitually and sometimes famously demonstrates being stubbornly narrow minded. But then, how else would he not know that brains don’t fall out of—nor are placed in—minds.
bloak 4y ago
That saying, or ones like it, are also attributed to Carl Sagan, G. K. Chesterton, James Oberg, Arthur Hays Sulzberger, Virginia Gildersleeve, Bertrand Russell, Max Radin, ... This article mentions Walter M. Kotschnig as the author of the earliest known instance of the saying, but notes that even Kotschnig seemed to be quoting something that was already known at the time: https://www.skeptic.com/insight/open-mind-brains-fall-out-maxim-adage-aphorism/ https://www.skeptic.com/insight/open-mind-brains-fall-out-ma...
tpoacher 4y ago
I prefer Terry Pratchett's quote: "The problem with having an open mind is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it."

mr_toad 4y ago

In addition to statistical evidence people should really examine the plausibility of the mechanism in question. Most accounts of ESP have no description of how it might actually work. The theories are typically dualistic, vitalistic and even plain magical.

xyzzyz 4y ago
What kind of “mechanism of action” you are looking for? I mean, physicists provide no “mechanism of action” for the forces they stipulate to exist. There is no “mechanism of action” for electromagnetism, it just does what it does. Similarly, ESP force might not have “mechanism of action”, it just could do what it does. What you are doing here is that you are betraying two huge hidden assumptions that you implicitly make. First is that you are most likely expecting to obtain “mechanism action” in some kind of mathematical terms, which implicitly assumes ability to use mathematics to explain the observed universe. Second is that you are looking for “mechanism of action” for ESP in terms of known physical forces and theories. Here, you implicitly assume that known physics is all there is. Now, I do not believe in ESP either, my point is only that you are demanding rigor from ESP you don’t from electromagnetism.
- josephcsible 4y ago
  I think it's the combination of "ESP has no mechanism of action in terms of known science, and so would require new fundamental physics to be possible" and "ESP has never been successfully tested, and not for lack of trying" together that's a really hard pill to swallow.
- wnkrshm 4y ago
  Physics can replicate electromagnetic effects with an extremely high degree of precision, it's almost trivial to replicate said effects. Physics has formulated models of how electromagnetism works and from that model, predicted other effects that could be replicated in experiments as well. That's what a 'mechanism of action' means here. The predictive power of a model, by whatever means it's formulated makes it useful. There are infinitely many ways to model electromagnetism but only a few of them are useful because they allow to make theoretical predictions that then also match reality.

sebastialonso 4y ago

imo having an open mind means rather exclusively to allow the possibility to be moved by scientific evidence. Not just believe for the sake of it or because of some kind of bias If we don't keep an open mind, in this sense, we'd still believe the Sun rotates around the Earth.