Facts are nice, but fact-checking is not always relevant or helpful, especially when it misses the point of whatever statements are being corrected.
Viewing entries tagged
Basic Principles and Useful Heuristics
“False consciousness [is] the notion that people are so misled about reality that they act against their own interests. What was once the preserve of Marxists, flummoxed that workers refused to lose their capitalist chains, is now the fall-back position for the modern [left], which worries that voters cannot accurately comprehend the world in which they live.” - Are voters as clueless as Labour’s intelligentsia thinks? The Economist, November 30, 2024.
These survey results reveal broad support for a get-tough approach to crime before 2000. Then, as the crime rate dropped, American attitudes softened - until crime rates rose again, a trend the following chart documents…
Around this time, journalists, social scientists, and even philosophers provided helpful lists of expressions associated with gaslighting to help individuals and groups recognize when they’ve been victims. For example….
So it doesn’t surprise me that political groups can agree on the same moral basics but still doubt each other’s moral commitments. This doubt may not reflect a misunderstanding or lack of trust but real disagreement on how foundational values and principles should be applied in real life.
Power makes it easier to get what you want. Power gets you even more of what you want. Power gets you things you didn’t know you wanted. Power opens up a world of expanding possibility.
Nibbling at the edge of a mystery, trying to reach the core of some truth. I can taste what seems like progress but can’t see the fruit, so have no idea how much longer it will take.
My distinction between insider and outsider perspectives comes from 20th century anthropology, which used the terms emic and etic to make the same distinction…What I’ve learned from reading about patriotism in America is that emic and etic descriptions tend to be worlds apart.
Surveys often ask about people’s beliefs. But what are the respondents giving them - factual or symbolic beliefs?
This series of posts will focus on what patriotism means to people who consider themselves patriotic. For example, what beliefs, perceptions, principles, values, ideals, actions and emotions come to mind when they feel the swell of patriotism or explain why they consider themselves patriotic. I will not be defining patriotism, but will approach this project in the spirit of a descriptive dictionary, which…
So how does this all connect with the psychology of social justice? Mainly to show that there is no "natural" response to status differences and inequality. Whether we respond with resentment, depression, fear, stress, envy, anger, indignation, admiration, aesthetic pleasure, or even happiness at another's good fortune...all depends.
There actually have been people and movements that were more broadly antiscience than today’s this-or-that skeptics: what we used to call “new age” types, e.g., members of religious cults and believers in the occult. In his oft-cited 1993 book Science and Anti-Science, Gerald Holton mentions “interest in astrology” as indicative of antiscience beliefs, as least as “conventionally” understood (his word).
Our brains run simulations, the better to survive and reproduce. Simulations don't have to be rational; they just need to be possible. Or possibly possible…Beliefs aren't either/or propositions; they are points along a continuum of felt credibility.
The inspiration for this post came from reading a bunch of articles on how to combat “antiscience”. Each one cautioned against trying to reason or debate scientific issues with people who hold antiscience views. Rather, one should try to relate to their emotions and social needs, e.g., be warm, tell stories, find common ground, establish a connection. Above all, don’t acknowledge their ideas have any merit.
And I thought: don’t any of these authors know about the “persuasive backfire effect”? Here’s a brief review…
“Antiscience is a set of attitudes that involve a rejection of science and the scientific method. People holding antiscientific views do not accept science as an objective method that can generate universal knowledge...Lack of trust in science has been linked to the promotion of political extremism and distrust in medical treatments…for some, rejecting scientific consensus or public health guidance serves as an expression of political allegiance or skepticism towards perceived authority figures.” Wikipedia
Hmm…
“Science is broadly understood as collecting, analyzing, publishing, reanalyzing, critiquing, and reusing data.” Wikipedia,
In other words, science is a process. More specifically, science is a self-correcting process for deepening our understanding of the world. It is a process that comes with safeguards to minimize error. Data is the direct outcome of that process.
What would you consider the “science” in these scenarios? What science would you trust? What leads you to trust one science claim and not another? If the credibility of the source, how do you determine the credibility of a source? …
Mastery is that feeling of riding the wave, of knowing what adjustments to make as it tries to throw you off. You may still lose your balance. The wave may win. But you're not overwhelmed; you’re focused and you keep trying.
Of course, causes rarely work like that in the real world, which is why scientists speak such in such convoluted terms. To say “x partly accounts for a portion of y given certain assumptions and conditions and only at high levels of x” lacks the emotional bunch of “x causes y” but that’s often how the world works.
So when people say x is the cause, or the ultimate cause, or the root cause, of some phenomenon: doubt and try to disconfirm the proposition - with a Wason test.
What would Make Redlining a Root Cause of the Black-White Homeownership Gap (If It is One), Part III
The gap in Black-white homeownership rates recently reached 30.1% in the U,S. Per Jung Hyun Choi of The Urban Institute, three factors explain around 80% of this gap: difference in Black-white income (31%), marital status (27%), and credit scores (22%).