Logic with False Premises and Cherry Picking
This is so WIN. I ♥ this discussion.
Eugenie Scott, in an interview with Liza Gross, talks about cherry picking data by anti-science folks and using logic with a false premise (anomalies). She also discusses how there are dichotomies setup (false ones) that make it difficult to reach the people that might not be anti-science.
Regarding anti-vaxxers, Scott had this to say To understand this phenomenon you really have to dig deeper into what is motivating people. First of all, I’d like to distinguish between the people who lead these movements versus the people who follow them. They’re not the ones generating the vaccine anomaly, so to speak, but they’ve read this literature and they’re parroting what they’ve heard. And your heart goes out to them. They’re concerned about their children. They don’t want their kids to get sick. But as many admit, they don’t fully understand the science. And your decisions are obviously going to be influenced by your emotions. We’re human beings, not automatons. But you need to temper them with good information, empirical information, dare I say scientific information, in order to make the best decisions.
Since people liked it, I’m adding this quote from my profile page:
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”
Isaac Asimov, column in Newsweek (21 January 1980)
#Anti_anti_intellectualism
Big h/t to Liza Gross
#ScienceEveryday when it isn’t #ScienceSunday
Originally shared by Liza Gross
How to deal with science denialists? Talk to America’s No. 1 science defender: cc ScienceSunday
