In today’s world there are always people trying to come up with a new way to explain something. There will always be people trying to pedal a new product or story about an innovative new way to look at things. Some of these ideas will really be ground-breaking, but many of these will be false ideas. Many of them will just be honest mistakes, but just as many will be ideas from people trying to trick other people. Carl Sagan recognizes this and writes about it in his article The Fine Art of Baloney Detection. Within it he describes how he has been vulnerable himself wanting to believe things that people have told him that didn’t seem true, but was what he wanted to hear. He then goes on to talk about how people need to be skeptical about what they are told/read. He has developed a system using the scientific which he calls “Tools for Skeptical Thinking.” These are things that people can do when evaluating a situation or idea to check for “baloney.” I have picked six of these tools to explain in further detail. The first tool that I think is important …show more content…
It is that simpler explanations are more likely the better choice than complicated drawn out explanations. The simpler something is the easier it is follow and there is less room for mistakes. Complicated explanations are more likely to make errors in them. This of course is when both theories explain the data or situation equally well. For example if you walk into the kitchen and the cat food has been knocked over and split all over the floor you would have to evaluate the different explanations. If your in-between two explanations that are the cat jumped on the counter and knocked it over or the dog unlocked its kennel pushed a chair over to the counter and then jumped on the counter, this tool says to go with the first option. Both explanations are reasonable and would explain what happened but the first less
Many of us hold onto our beliefs or myths even when we are presented with evidence proving our beliefs to be false. In the article, “When ears don’t hear, truth is futile” by Leonard Pitts Jr. he states, “When people are determined to believe a lie, there is nothing more futile than the truth.” (para. 16) Why is that? As human beings sometimes it is easier to hold onto our fabricated worldviews, this allows us to stay and rest in our comfortable bubbles. If we were to appropriately assess truthful information presented to us, we might experience cognitive turmoil, our biased truths becomes lies, and ultimately we now have information that would either force a lifestyle change or we “bury our head in the sand” so to speak. In the article Leonard
1. Video “Here Be Dragons” by Brian Dunning (4/15/14) is a fresh and critical overlook on the huge variety of so called “dragons” which exist in abundance even in our civilized society. This video promotes critical thinking and demonstrates the “red flags” that one has to look out for in order to detect pseudosciences. A pseudoscience is an idea that claims to be real but is not backed by any real science or evidence. For instance, hair analysis, feng shui, psychokinesis, homeopathy, numerology, aura analysis, the list could go on forever. The warning signs for such “sciences” are - appeal to authority, ancient wisdom, confirmation bias, confuse correlation with causation, red herring, proof by verbosity, mystical energy, suppression by authority, all natural and ideological support. The one “red flag” I have always been skeptical about and this video confirmed it for me is “appeal to authority”. It is hard for me to understand how people actually trust advertisements that are simply screaming “we are specialists, look at our white lab coats and and all the certificates and the celebrities that support our product”. It is simply pathetic. As Brian says - “Good science presents good data, it does not aim to impress”. However, the one “red flag” that I have to be careful about myself is confusing correlation with causation. It is the natural human tendency to assume that, if two events or phenomena consistently occur at about the same time, then one is the cause of the other. Our weakness for this tactic is often exploited by scammers and bogus scientists when they want to persuade us that a relationship exists between two variables without providing supporting evidence. In order to secure ourselves from falling for all the nonsense...
Carl Sagan’ speech “The Fine Art of Baloney Detection” bears a strong resemblance to Anne Causey’s “Is Hunting Ethical?” Both authors chose to invoke their audience’s emotional strings by first relaying a personal story before continuing on. While Causey delves into whether or not it is morally right to allow hunting for sport. Sagan choses to question our ability to detect the truth.
alternating colour. This shows that if you were to come to any kind of conclusion
If people knew what scientists are up to, they would not be sleeping as calmly as they do today. If only they knew, they would read more carefully what the cyberpunk authors have to say.
It addresses a dilemma similar to the chicken and the egg dilemma of which comes first. In skepticisms reasoning, belief is necessary before establishing knowledge. He argues that knowledge can be used to explain beliefs just as how beliefs can be used to justify knowledge. His ideas are valid and are apparent in society. For example, in research, Williamson’s approach is represented in the process of formulating a hypothesis. Researchers use previous knowledge to formulate a hypothesis, or belief, on the outcome of their research. All in all, Williamson’s critique of skepticism is well developed and
We are burdened with far too many of these wacky stories and whopping lies, and the very least we must do is to critically evaluate the content of these mostly crazy concoctions by using our common sense.
In light of this knowledge of the inconclusiveness of our beliefs, it is a duty placed on everyone of us to be wary of trusting oneself more than you trust another. Remember, one is what one has been shown to be. One knows only what he has seen.
Clifford’s arguments for this conclusion is that if we are gullible enough to believe something without evidence then we are not only harming our individual credibility and intellect but also polluting the rest of society...
Although these two methods of reasoning conduct different approaches in the scientific method, both finalise in the deve...
To explain ways that it is used, I would also go into the framework for making a Data Informed Decision. I would go through the five main points that it hits: Reflect, Plan, Implement, Assess, and Analyse. Going into more detail, the first part of the framework is reflect. Whoever is making the
Carl Sagan's The Fine Art of Baloney Detection depicts the importance of thinking skeptically before new ideas can be accepted (Sagan, 1997). Skeptical thinking pertains to our ability to distinguish what is true from what is false in some sort of logical argument or idea. Sagan promotes nine tools for this type of thinking, six of which I believe are the most useful will be discussed throughout this essay.
...n more useful when it is simplified because it points you in the right direction so that you can fill in the details as you acquire more knowledge yourself. Its predictive power also enable us form hypothesis in the sciences that can be confirmed or disproved after experimentation. Simplification tends to explain things better and even help us to predict what ought to be. On the other hand it can be argued that these simplifications also leave out important details and may not be that useful in the long run .
...or critic arguments who call the fuel cell plan "science fiction". To the readers, it's apparent that Bayon conducted extensive research and provided readers with logical points to support his initial topic and did not leave any room for opposing argument.
"Recognizing Propaganda Techniquesand Errors of Faulty Logic." Recognizing Propaganda--Guide to Critical Thinking--Academic Support. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Jan. 2014. (RPTEOFL)