My family and I live in Texas and I’ve been following the antics of Donny McLeroy and the Texas State Board of Education for a little while now. Basically, some on the board believe that the world was created 10,000 years ago and they wish to convey this idea to our school children through public education. Sara and I do plan to put our son Alex into public schools if for no other reason than to sharpen his wits against the crazy he’ll be exposed to. Sara and I had an excellent experience in our school district as kids even though we were at opposite ends of the academic spectrum. School isn’t always about grades.
My approach is to teach Alex to think critically for himself and not automatically believe people who liken themselves authorities on any subject. Just because scientists say things like evolution and global climate change are true doesn’t mean you should believe it right away. Instead, look at the predictions made by both of these theories. Did they come true? Do they present a cogent and consistent view of the domain they claim to describe? (The answer is yes on both counts, but don't take my word for it!)
The scientific method is not the ultra clean process presented in schools. It is utterly messy and oftentimes cruel. However, it does work. Take for example multiple Nobel Prize winning chemist Linus Pauling who made significant contributions many disciplines including quantum chemistry. Later in his life, he began to study the effects mega doses of vitamin C has on preventing and curing the common cold and cancer. He successfully argued his case in the public arena (on preventing colds at least, which it does not) though other scientists and doctors were skeptical. Many clinics attempted to repeat Pauling’s results with little success. Even though no one could verify his claims, Pauling held to them tightly. His pet theory had been decimated and he was quickly moved into the realm of quackery.
The ideas of repeatability and prediction are key to the understanding the scientific process. Pauling's results could not be predicted or repeated, thus they lost traction. Global climate change, however, makes very specific predictions how human carbon production affects the acidification of the ocean, the mass of the ice shelves in the Arctic, and levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. Over the span of the last thirty years, many of these predictions have come true. Does this mean the model of global climate change is absolutely correct? No, of course not, but it does lend credibility to the idea that something is going on and humans are to blame.
A level head and a good understanding of how to think critically is all it takes to tease the truth out of any situation. Be wary of the person with an idea to sell. (Kinoki foot pads anyone?) Actual science doesn’t start with an outcome and work back like Pauling did with his belief that vitamin C cures all ills. If a scientist’s idea is crushed by an observation, the scientific community moves on and expects that scientist to move on with it. Unfortunately, some like Pauling, do not.
So here’s a wee little guide on how to think critically:
1) Be wary of the person who has an idea to sell and damn the facts. (This is so important, it’s worth repeating.)
2) Be wary of the person who can’t back up their ideas with facts and data but resorts to the “this is so obvious, only a moron couldn’t see it” defense. (Rush Limbaugh is famous for this. That doesn’t mean he’s wrong, only that he is a poor arbiter of a cogent worldview.)
3) Not all ideas are made equal. The silly notion of showing all sides of an argument leads folks in the press to present crack pot theorists on the same level as real scientists.
4) Just because you don’t like an idea, doesn’t have any bearing on whether it’s true or false. We are all human, prone to human mistakes in judgment.
5) Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Why do the UFO and ghost folks hang on every tiny shred of evidence that their particular worldview is correct? Why do they push the notion that “they are out there” and “you can speak to your dead relatives through me”? Do they have solid evidence or blurry pictures and crazy stories? Is the scientific establishment “hiding” these things or did the (great many) experiments on paranormal activity all return negative?
6) Be aware of the false dichotomy. My favorite example is the Creation vs. Darwin argument. Darwin was a scientist who proposed a theory that makes very specific predictions and has been tested to the Nth degree over the past 150 years. His theory also lead to the genetic understanding of all life on Earth! Creation purports and idea which has no observable data (it’s a nice story) associated with it and makes no predictions that have come true. Setting these ideas against each other is like comparing apples to buildings, it is nonsensical and silly.
7) Last one, I swear. Be aware of the straw man. The alternative medicine people (foot pads! raw and organic foods! acupuncture!) do this all the time. They tell you that western medicine has it all wrong and Big Pharma is out to do you an injustice. This is a straw man, easy to build up and easy to knock down. No evidence, no facts, and no data generally follow their arguments.
Why is all of this important? Let me tell you a simple anecdote. I fell for the lure of alternative medicine myself a few of years ago before I honed my BS detector. I have MS and the drug I was taking is not tested for use with MS, relied on the authority of a single scientist who was fighting "Big Pharma", and claimed extraordinary results without any actual testing or data. Needless to say once my thinking became more systematic and less "woo"ifed, I dropped that drug like a bad habit and got on one that's proven.
These tools have served me very well over that past couple of years and I hope to impart them on my son. Living in this world is a whole heck of lot easier when I can keep the patrons of bullshit from invading my space.
No comments:
Post a Comment