SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the I-don't-want-knowledge-I-want-certainty dept.
Jeremy P. Shapiro, a professor of psychology at Case Western Reserve University, has an article on The Conversation about one of the main cognitive errors at the root of science denial: dichotomous thinking, where entire spectra of possibilities are turned into dichotomies, and the division is usually highly skewed. Either something is perfect or it is a complete failure, either we have perfect knowledge of something or we know nothing.
Currently, there are three important issues on which there is scientific consensus but controversy among laypeople: climate change, biological evolution and childhood vaccination. On all three issues, prominent members of the Trump administration, including the president, have lined up against the conclusions of research.
This widespread rejection of scientific findings presents a perplexing puzzle to those of us who value an evidence-based approach to knowledge and policy.
Yet many science deniers do cite empirical evidence. The problem is that they do so in invalid, misleading ways. Psychological research illuminates these ways.
[...] In my view, science deniers misapply the concept of “proof.”
Proof exists in mathematics and logic but not in science. Research builds knowledge in progressive increments. As empirical evidence accumulates, there are more and more accurate approximations of ultimate truth but no final end point to the process. Deniers exploit the distinction between proof and compelling evidence by categorizing empirically well-supported ideas as “unproven.” Such statements are technically correct but extremely misleading, because there are no proven ideas in science, and evidence-based ideas are the best guides for action we have.
I have observed deniers use a three-step strategy to mislead the scientifically unsophisticated. First, they cite areas of uncertainty or controversy, no matter how minor, within the body of research that invalidates their desired course of action. Second, they categorize the overall scientific status of that body of research as uncertain and controversial. Finally, deniers advocate proceeding as if the research did not exist.
Dr. David "Orac" Gorski has further commentary on the article. Basically, science denialism works by exploiting the very human need for absolute certainty, which science can never truly provide.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday November 14 2019, @02:26PM (4 children)
Mensa IQ tests have very few dimensions as compared to real life.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Thursday November 14 2019, @03:13PM (3 children)
Hey! I'll have you know my ability to rapidly test rearrangements of letters against a substantive, if incomplete, vocabulary is a crucial life skill that is definitely causal with life success and not an correlation with an unrelated shared root cause!
(Score: 3, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Thursday November 14 2019, @03:33PM (2 children)
There are some very real negative correlations between high scores on Mensa-like tests and what would typically be called "real-life success."
Company I worked for did a 2 day offsite psych profile evaluation prior to promoting anyone into management. Like 50 other management hopefuls, I figured: what the hell let 'em pay for it and see what comes out. I came, I saw, I performed above average (for existing management personnel within the company, who - themselves - performed well above general population average) in all areas, and also turned in a score on their logical analysis test consistent with my GRE, highest they had ever seen.
How many of those 50 other management candidates were promoted before me? The world will never know, I left the company a year later - but at least 15 of the other hopefuls were tapped and promoted with 30% raises during that year. Rather than stick around a company run by a dumb frat boy [businessinsider.com] I took a position with a smaller company, 20% salary bump and relocation to somewhere I'd rather live.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Thursday November 14 2019, @04:02PM (1 child)
Anecdotes aside, I'm not a fan of how we use IQ, but the research finding that it has correlation with success in health and career is substantive enough that you cannot really say the opposite like that.
The problem I have with the subjective interpretation of that (i.e. that it's causal and being "smarter" in terms of working memory and visio-spatial skills) is entirely with the number of further assumptions that are made and immediately taken for granted by the mighty buzzard types, especially in light of contradictory evidence and non-confirmatory findings.
(Score: 3, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Thursday November 14 2019, @04:55PM
I guess it can be a question of: what level of "success" do you aspire to? IQ at 2SD+ above the mean, correlates with "success" above average - matches with my limited ability to directly observe the world (few thousand examples, probably less than 0.1% sample size for US residents.) If you're looking to break into the 1% club, not so much IQ based anymore - no matter how high.
I was just musing about working memory and recall speed this morning - recall speed is at least roughly related to "skill" or at least proficiency/fluency. My recall speed for some things is insanely fast, others well below average, and any attempt to test and quantify this is going to be fraught with Heizenberg-like uncertainty.
Like Socrates, Coach Butterworth is hard to refute: https://encuruj.com/tag/bad-news-bears/ [encuruj.com]
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end