From the NYTimes. The central point:
Humans, he argues, are hard-wired to reject scientific conclusions that run counter to their instinctive belief that someone or something is out to get them.
From the NYTimes. The central point:
Humans, he argues, are hard-wired to reject scientific conclusions that run counter to their instinctive belief that someone or something is out to get them.
This doesn’t seem to really be about science per se. It seems to be more that people reject claims regardless of their truth when the claims are associated with hostile tribes.
Comment
Which means it is about human biases affecting rationality. On topic totally.
Comment
Sure. Completely on topic. I upvoted it. I’m not sure why it has been downvoted.
It is almost a truism in business process re-engineering that you should always make people feel comfortable, whatever they do in the current process and explain to them the value that they will be adding in the new setup/process. If people feel insecure, it is very difficult to get their cooperation and your project will tend to fail, badly.
And if you reject science, you conclude that scientists are out to get you. The boot fits; upvoted.