on ignoring science & philosophy

[sophiaserpentia]

So I've seen headlines recently on "the science of ignoring science," but really, this is a very simple question. For anything that does not affect day to day life it is easy to repeat whatever you want to yourself. Getting food in your stomach before sundown or passing on your genes does not depend on whether the earth is flat or round or whether the earth is four billion years old or six thousand years old.

Comments

[azaz-al.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure what you're saying here.

[azaz-al.livejournal.com]

Maybe because I haven't been reading the articles you are reading.

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

Gaah, I can't find the articles now. So the question is, how is it possible to ignore the brilliant, well-tested outcomes and mountains of evidence offered by Science!, but the reason is not very complex, really. There is no cost to one's day to day survival from having a false belief, nor is there any benefit to one's day to day survival from having a true belief. So there is no tangible incentive that can force someone to revisit their worldview.

[azaz-al.livejournal.com]

I would argue that it does - it isn't immediately or glaringly noticeable to these people, or they are deliberately blinding themselves to the results of their actions, but it is having real results that are affecting people in tangible, sometimes deadly, ways.

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

Yes, it does, in the long run. But even that "long run" is abstract enough that it can be talked over inside the space of someone's mind.

[akaiyume.livejournal.com]

how is it possible to ignore the brilliant, well-tested outcomes and mountains of evidence offered by Science

I haven't read the articles you are talking about, but I wonder if part of the problem could be that a lot of people don't seem to really grasp the difference between theoretical science and applied science/technology. I mean the latest and greatest cure/gadget/method of doing something seems to change almost everyday; the laws of thermodynamics, not so much. But if someone doesn't really grok that distinction then all the "scientists say" stuff we are bombarded with can make science seem really fickle. So they may get no sense of stability and comfort from scientific knowledge, because they don't understand how well tested and enduring the non-applied, non-marketed stuff is.

[legolastn.livejournal.com]

Well, yes, to the extent believing many scientific facts is irrelevant or at least not directly relevant to most people's day to day survival.

But then the question remains, why are some people committed to believing the earth is flat (or at least espousing that view) and other people committed to believing the earth is round, even though it has no direct bearing on either of their day to day lives in terms of their survival? I think the answer to this question is that it turns out these beliefs do have a relationship with everyday life indirectly related to survival in the sense that they are related to things like likelihood of support, opportunity, and advancement. For example:
* Who you consider to be your in-group(s) and/or reference group(s) (and/or who considers you to be part of their in-group and/or reference group)
* What beliefs demonstrate you have cultural capital in the social circles you travel
* What beliefs, when expressed, result in material and non-material rewards or penalties

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

If anything, group membership and self-identity with a group provide a tangible enough benefit to create positive resistance against bringing someone to the point of questioning the beliefs they profess.

[legolastn.livejournal.com]

Yes, exactly. It can even be strong enough to cause someone to at least profess a particular belief even if they previously "believed in science" or otherwise intellectually find the scientific evidence compelling.

[lassiter.livejournal.com]

Not believing in natural selection/evolution, or at least not accepting that humans are essentially primates, could put someone at a distinct competitive disadvantage compared to people who do understand that. Granted, they may not realize they're at a disadvantage.

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

If that's true, their descendants will have a slight survival advantage that will eventually reflect in human evolution. Assuming the eschaton isn't imminentized.

[lassiter.livejournal.com]

Next Tuesday, after lunch.

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

According to those predictions we saw all over the place at Mardi Gras, it's May 12th. Great - I won't have to take my digital electronics final!

[azaz-al.livejournal.com]

May 21st actually - http://www.ebiblefellowship.com/may21/

[lassiter.livejournal.com]

My prediction is that the end will be so sudden, so traumatic, that as a reflex action akin to grabbing a banister when falling downstairs, we will all spontaneously recreate the universe anew, and reincarnate into it exactly the way we were before. Or perhaps not exactly.

[azaz-al.livejournal.com]

Ah my bad, first we get tormented by locust creatures for 5 months, and THEN the world ends when Jesus comes back, or something. haha

[lassiter.livejournal.com]

Locust creatures? Ha! I work for the Texas Legislature!

[azaz-al.livejournal.com]

bwah ha ha

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

Darn it!

[azaz-al.livejournal.com]

Hey it gives you nine more days YOU FILTHY SINNER

[lassiter.livejournal.com]

"Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?" - Romans 6:1

"Hell, yeah!" Punter 23:5

[sarahmichigan.livejournal.com]

There's a scene in one of the Sherlock Holmes books (I'm thinking of it on film, but I'm fairly certain the scene was in one of the stories as well), where Watson is shocked that HOlmes doesn't know that the earth goes around the sun.

Holmes tells him that information of that sort, that doesn't impact his day-to-day life or his investigations, is useless to him, so as soon as he learns it, he forgets it, to make room for more pragmatic information, like bus schedules and ethnobotany...