“The Science of Why we Don’t Believe in Science”, an article by Chris Mooney, describes and illustrates why most humans don’t follow the path of scientific and motivational reasoning [2]. This enticing article ranges on all key aspects of the human brain, from motivated reasoning and honing in on tendencies of the human mind [5], Mooney takes critical thinking deeper than the naked eye, examining the mind along with it’s thought process. Diving further into the brain, what we perceive and the perception we lack, tie into this context, giving the article drive and logic. Taking it’s reader far beyond what what the average mind consciously perceives.
During the late 1950’s, psychologist Leon Festinger and a few other of his peers snuck in and
…show more content…
People have two sorts of inclinations. There is affirmed inclination, which supports strongly disbelieved statements, that serve as an aid to the person's current attitude or feelings towards a subject. Alternate inclination is a disconfirmed predisposition, which is the point at which the individual chooses to deny the content they strongly disagree with, since he or she discovered it to individual standards that are further deemed unacceptable [5]. Due to science articles and their wide array of information and standpoints, this leaves the reader highly susceptible to selective listening and interpretation. In this way, people will dependably utilize initial thoughts and inclined opinions, keeping in mind the end goal to deny or acknowledge logical sources. If it fails to give proper desired information, humans will tend to hold it past themselves, in a holistic state of denial. A prime example of this, is in the views of climate change, based on one’s social party [7]. In this study, it was shown that those who are less educated on the matter will have a stronger biased, than opposed to those who feel more educated on the topic. It all reduces to those who are more willing to surpass their current predispositions, in order to make room for the facts. It is emphasized that in order for one to acknowledge a logical …show more content…
Head-on endeavors to influence can often times trigger a reverse impact, where individuals not only neglect to alter their opinions when gone up against with the realities; they may hold their wrong perspectives more tirelessly than beforehand. If not conducted correctly, persuasion can quickly turn into a subconsciously higher need for pre-disposed beliefs to be held liable. Thus, creating a type of boomerang effect, putting logical beliefs and predisposed beliefs back to square
When this finding infringes on someone’s lifestyle or corporate interests, the reaction to the discovery becomes unfavorable. A contributing factor to the rejection of scientific findings is directly related to political affiliation. Since the 1970s, conservatives have experienced a continuous decay of trust in the scientific community. By 2010, the contrasting trust in the scientific community has become more evident, with liberals retaining more trust in them and conservatives reducing theirs. Climate science has contributed greatly to this conflict.
All of our interactions within this world hold a certain degree of influence that we do not often think twice about. In certain occupations this influence and power can be seen and understood. A college professor, for example, may or may not be aware of his or her influence on a student’s opinion. Professors are in a position in which they can persuade or influence a person’s opinion. Because students often find trust in what their professor is saying, it is easy to succumb to their views, beliefs, or opinions. Not all students can be persuaded so easily, however over a decade of a teaching a professor has likely influenced thousands of studen...
Tompkins displays, in her essay’s conclusion, the necessity to “piece together the story… as best I can,” because diverging perspectives inhibit a person’s ability to find, with confidence, a purely unbiased fact about any situation (9). These kinds of quandaries exist in many modern social spheres. Although much more objective, an issue, such as climate change, relies on an individual researching and uncovering facts from various sources, just as Tompkins did. Similarly, the individual must then “[believe] this version up to a point, that version not at all, another almost entirely,” so they may move forward toward a conclusion. If they fail to move toward a conclusion, they will tarry too long at the epistemological gateway and fail to effectively address the issue, by voting in misinformed politicians or not recycling. While the environment relies on more objective and easily accessible information, it exists in clear relation to Tompkins’ dilemma. Academic uncertainty halting the important flow of social progress. However, while academic uncertainty appears to be at fault, without academic uncertainty, science and fact would not achieve the proper rigor for it to call itself fact. And, without social progress,
In persuasion, the Mere Exposure Theory, the Dissonance Theory, and the Social Judgment Theory are used. Each of these theories of persuasion explains why it works or does not work in any specific setting. Depending on the theory, certain means of applying these theories can be successful or unsuccessful. The Mere Exposure Theory of persuasion states that people will be persuaded simply by repeated exposure. (G.Magee,
Bushman, Brad J., Roy F. Baumeister, and Angela D. Stack. “Catharsis, Aggression, and Persuasive Influence: Self-Fulfilling or Self-Defeating Prophecies.” Online Posting. 17 July 2001 <http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp763367.html>.
In the AOK of the natural sciences, having a skeptical approach can be quite beneficial. The natural sciences utilizes extensive methods in which they come to conclusions about the information presented, based on the various experiment...
“All over the world there are enormous numbers of smart, even gifted, people who harbor a passion for science. But that passion is unrequited. Surveys suggest that some 95 percent of Americans are “scientifically illiterate.”
The Fear of Science To live in the today's world is to be surrounded by the products of science. For it is science that gave our society color television, the bottle of aspirin, and the polyester shirt. Thus, science has greatly enhanced our society; yet, our society is still afraid of the effects of science. This fear of science can be traced back to the nineteenth century, where scientists had to be secretive in experimenting with science. Although science did wonders in the nineteenth century, many people feared science and its effects because of the uncertainty of the results of science.
The mass media plays an enormous role in influencing the public. In the age of globalization many technologies like Internet, television, newspapers, magazines, radio and so on, make news available and accessible for everyone around the world. The media can easily get any information out there to the public regarding any subject such as political views, health issues, entertainment, education, human tragedies…and those information do have an impact on our everyday life decisions, opinions and raise our awareness on a subject. The media is most of the time the only way people can get information on subject that they cannot fully understand such as science. Because “science is an encoded form of knowledge that requires translation in order to be understood” (Ungar 2000), many studies have shown that the media plays a very crucial role in raising people understanding of the scientific world and the environmental issues, especially the climate change and global warming. Climate change has become an important issue today and people need to understand how serious it is in order to take actions to prevent it from getting worse; and the only way the information can get to the public is via the mass media. Today global warming is raising many concerns and the media coverage is increasing but yet many scientists complain about the limited coverage of the subject because it seems that it is not enough compared to the gravity of the situation. Because of the lack of information, many people are still very skeptical and some are just very confused about the global warming and how it affect our atmosphere.
Demarcation between science and non-science or pseudo science is particularly important in scientific education, as it determines, for almost every member of our society, what they will accept as true regarding science, particularly creationism and evolution. Having public ...
While some people may believe that science and religion differ drastically, science and religion both require reason and faith respectively. Religion uses reason as a way of learning and growing in one’s faith. Science, on the other hand, uses reason to provide facts and explain different hypotheses. Both, though, use reason for evidence as a way of gaining more knowledge about the subject. Although science tends to favor more “natural” views of the world, religion and science fundamentally need reason and faith to obtain more knowledge about their various subjects. In looking at science and religion, the similarities and differences in faith and reason can be seen.
In the most advantageous of cases this model suggests that a receiver “considers the content of the persuasive message carefully and has favorable thoughts about the content” (Enfante, Rancer & Avtgis, 2010, p. 172). When receivers engage in cognitive thinking, they participate in the type of persuasion the authors call the “central route” (Enfante, Rancer & Avtgis, 2010, p. 172). Under the central route, the receiver employs positive feelings towards whatever the source is saying and then in turn acts or forms attitudes based off of the positive thoughts. Thus they interact thoughtfully with the information the source is attempting to get across.
Persuasion is the force exerted to influence behavior that includes a reflected change in attitude. Everyday we are bombarded with messagesfrom people who wish to influence our behavior and attitudes. Persuasion canbe used to accomplish good as well as bad, though, in my paper I willrefrain from making value judgements and only report the factual aspects. I will discuss the two basic routes to persuasion, the elements involved, andways to protect current attitudes and behaviors from change. When trying to persuade someone, there are two different methods from which to choose-the central and peripheral routes. The central route persuades by usingdirect arguments and pertinent information. The peripheral route persuadespeople by association with incidental cues
In the modern era, climate change is a variation of weather over a long period of time, and it is the most important and controversial global issue. It is arguable in different positions, especially on science, culture, and politics. These three fields all cause a lot of latent concerns. The science of climate change brings out several harmful phenomenon, such as global warming. With respect to the climate change, the culture of humanity may be changed because the changing climate is the most important key factor of forming today’s human societies. Instead, climate change is now a political issue, which will affect the public attitudes directly. In other words, it means the government tends to review and provide latest information in order to adapt and retard the climate change. Over a long period of time, climate change has been taking place because of human activities that affect the scientific, cultural, and political sides.