4 ms·
"Ahh" , the scientist laments, "if only they had sufficient data they would make the right choice." This is just smart people being dumb because they're scienc
by bruce511 4y ago
"Ahh" , the scientist laments, "if only they had sufficient data they would make the right choice."
This is just smart people being dumb because they're science smart, but people dumb.
Firstly, you cannot reason someone out of a position they have not been reasoned into.
Secondly, people believe what they believe because it suits them to believe it. "I don't care about the science of vaccines, I am scared of injecting something into my body."
Thirdly, follow the money. Smoking might be bad for you, but making cigarettes is big business. With big social change comes big shifts in money. Thus coal ignores climate change, because to do otherwise is suicide.
Fourthly there's a trust problem. If you know your leader lies, or acts in bad faith, then by extension they all do [1]. If all leaders lie or act in bad faith then I no longer trust any leader. I assume you are telling me something to help you, not help me.
Ultimately the problem is not one of data (give the people data, and the tools (science) to interpret that data) but rather the implications of change, The abandonment of existing social circle, The financial loss, The improvement of others at my expense.
Science can't solve these issues, because they aren't science issues.
[1] if I assume the opposite, that only my leader lies, then clearly following him is stupid, and I am not stupid, qed.
- phdelightful 4y ago> you cannot reason someone out of a position they have not been reasoned into Yes you can, that’s one of the best things about reason. I see this phrase pop up from time to time and I guess it’s just too cute to die
- jhbadger 4y agoExactly. If that were the case, it would be impossible for people raised to be religious as children to become atheists as adults when they've realized that the evidence for their religion doesn't hold up, but this is very common.
- heresie-dabord 4y agoI understand the expression to be shorthand for the principle that a person will defend a comfortable bunker position stubbornly and with main force. Changing the person's thinking will require significant energy and may exhaust your resources. Your adversary may die in that bunker. But there's an entire economic system that got your opponent to enter the position and believe in it.
- yunwal 4y agoI think there is a data problem as well. There's the issue that you can find a scientific study making the case for whatever view you hold if it's sufficiently marketable to do one. Because hundreds of studies got done about masks, at least 1 or 2 will have returned an unclear result, and you can bet those 1 or 2 studies will be promoted by biased politicians, public health officials, etc. Here's 150 studies that conclude masks don't work/are harmful to certain populations https://centerforneurologyandspine.com/do-masks-work-see-the-review-of-over-150-studies-below/ https://centerforneurologyandspine.com/do-masks-work-see-the... Here's 49 that say masks do work https://kfor.com/news/health/coronavirus/do-face-masks-work-here-are-49-scientific-studies-that-explain-why-they-do/ https://kfor.com/news/health/coronavirus/do-face-masks-work-... I haven't looked through every single one but there are plenty of reputable research institutions in both articles. Even if the general consensus among the scientific community is pro-mask, people are going to take away whatever they want because there are no clear answers anymore.