Skip to main content

Think Critically!

It is easy to get frustrated, and never more so when witnessing the absolute gullibility of humanity. We all know, of course, about the strange beliefs that some people hold, that aliens abduct and probe humans, that aliens built the pyramids, that planes disappear in the Bermuda Triangle and that Bigfoot is walking around somewhere in the undiscovered wilds. We may shake our heads at the fact that some people swallow an endless number of conspiracy theories, seeing the hidden hand of the Freemasons, the Illuminati, the Jews, or some other secretive power behind the workings of the world. We rightly mock and ridicule anyone who seriously believes that FEMA is setting up detention camps, just waiting for a crisis to allow them to impose a fascistic "New World Order" on the United States, or that the Sandy Hook school shooting was a false flag operation. These are easy targets, however, and only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to wrong and foolish things that we believe.

The plain fact is that we all believe something that is ridiculous or just wrong. We simply don't realize that this belief is mistaken, in many cases. It seems obvious, but if we thought that something we believed was demonstrably untrue, really thought it, we would stop believing that. But we can cling to our beliefs with remarkable tenacity, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that we are wrong. Take climate change for example. Those who dogmatically reject that our climate is warming and that this is caused by humans burning fossil fuels will deny or rationalize away any evidence that their beliefs are wrong. This denial of reality isn't nearly as harmless as, say, the belief that Elvis lives; it has real consequences on our policies and thus on the world in which we live, delaying necessary action to mitigate and reverse the damage we are doing. 

When it comes to evidence, we are quick to apply critical scrutiny to new information that contradicts our beliefs and just as quick to accept new information that confirms what we already believe. Our confirmation bias defends and protects our most deeply-held beliefs from the scrutiny that they deserve, whether they have a basis in reality or not. This is not a criticism of specific ideologies, though some systems of belief may certainly be said to have a greater basis in reality than others, but an observation made by many others well before me. It is a warning to us to be careful, a reminder that we are pre-disposed to this behavior. We owe it to ourselves to try to re-examine our beliefs in light of new evidence, to be open to changing our beliefs if it seems warranted. I believe that we would be a healthier society, a healthier world, if more of us could transcend the closed-mindedness that seems to be our natural disposition as a species, and a move towards that ideal begins with each of us.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Today I Am Ashamed of My Alma Mater

Over a week ago, my alma mater, Clarion University of Pennsylvania, released what it touted as a "bold" and "ambitious" workforce plan for the next several years. The backlash was both strong and immediate, forcing the University Administration, currently headed by President Karen Whitney, to release a " Frequently Asked Questions " for its plan. The outrage on social media, as well as a MoveOn.org petition with several thousand signatures, doubtless have already channeled the displeasure of the community, alumni, and students with the plan. The University is accepting public feedback, but this seems to be only a political window-dressing for a plan that Whitney herself was  quoted  as saying "...is 95-98% a done deal." For over a week I debated over what form a blog on the topic would take, and while I realize that what I have to say here is little different from what I and others have already stated elsewhere, I feel the need to address thi...

How I Left Creationism

There is a discussion going on right now in the science community about whether or not we should debate creationists: it is a debate within a debate, if you will. There are good arguments on both sides, but I have to think that we should debate creationists, and we should do it as often as we can stand it. Why do I think this? Last week, I saw that Michael Shermer posted a link to a story of a woman who argued this very point. As a former creationist, it was going to debates between Shermer and Kent Hovind that began to convince her of the legitimacy of evolution and of science. I too was once a creationist. Without ever having read anything about it, without it ever having been mentioned in class (I never heard a word about evolution in high school), I was ready to pounce at the merest mention of the topic as false and godless, two of the favorite creationist talking-points. I look back at this self in amazement, at how ignorant and proud of that ignorance I was, how I failed to ...

The Hovinds...Still Poking at Straw Men

Kent Hovind, the false "Dr. Dino", and his ilk are at it again. In a new article on his website, Hovind (or whoever authored the piece, perhaps his son) claims that while creationists have no problems using miracles to explain events (a habit that perpetually makes them unfit to do real science), evolutionists criticize them for it, even though, in Hovind's mind, they rely on miracles just as much to explain their "religion" of descent through natural selection. This is, at its core, demonstrably nonsense. He claims that a "miracle" is needed to make stars and planets form out of gas, a supposed violation of Boyle's Law because there was no "outside force" acting on the gas and dust. How about gravity, Dr. Dino? That would certainly explain it, no miracles needed here. This attack is a non-sequitur. The objection has everything to do with astronomy and cosmology and nothing to do with evolution, which is the development of new species o...