Knowing what’s real is often crucially important. I have to be right about the safety of a bridge before I drive over it. It also helps to know if a hurricane is coming, and if a vaccine is safe. But can I sort fact from fiction?
On the negative, I have to rely for such information on experts whom I don’t know. I can’t prove for myself that the bridge is safe, that the earth revolves around the sun, or that microorganisms cause many diseases. And expert opinion comes to me often through news organizations.
But are these experts and news organizations trustworthy? All human beings have to be selective in their recognition of reality because the world contains too much information for all of it to be recognized, remembered, and shared. Selections often reflect confirmation bias, the tendency to accept whatever confirms one’s prior beliefs, while ignoring conflicting evidence. Selectivity and confirmation bias may account for mainstream media underreporting that in late November 2020, total per-capita Covid-19 deaths in 28 European countries (the EU plus UK) were greater than in the US, a fact that challenges the view that our president was uniquely deficient in meeting the crisis. Similarly, confirmation bias may account for some media emphasizing crimes committed by illegal immigrants even though statistics show that such immigrants are more law-abiding than average Americans.
To make matters worse, what reasons do I have to trust statistics about Covid-19 deaths or immigrant criminality in the first place? We’re trusting organization which employ experts. But we know from history that reigning experts of one time are sometimes dismissed by later generations. Doctors no longer recommend bloodletting or cigarettes.
Conspiracies make matters even worse. Cigarette manufacturers conspired to cast doubt on the harmful effects of smoking cigarettes so that smokers would dismiss medical warnings. Could claims about climate change or the 2020 elections be additional conspiracies?
All is not lost. Here are some dos and don’ts to get at the truth. First, distrust all theories that avoid disproof by explaining away all contrary evidence. You can prove anything with this kind of theory, even that the moon is green cheese. The moon landing was fake, as are the so-called moon rocks. Or the landing was real but the presence of moon green cheese somehow deluded the astronauts to experience green cheese as rock. The moon rocks that we now have on earth were originally green cheese which turned to rock while entering earth’s atmosphere.
Second, be skeptical of theories that tend to enrich or otherwise benefit the people who promote them. Just as the tobacco industry dismissed the health hazards of smoking to improve their profits, the oil, gas, coal, petroleum, steel, and automotive industries stand to gain from denying the influence of greenhouse gas emissions on the climate. The incentives of those who believe in climate change are paltry by comparison (if you discount the gratification that comes from helping to save our civilization).
Third, be skeptical of theories that contradict common sense when examined closely. If Democrats manipulated the 2020 election to defeat President Trump, why didn’t they manipulate it also to favor Democrats in four more Senate races that were projected to be close, thereby gaining the Senate as well the presidency?
Fourth, although no organization is perfect, put more trust in those whose experts have been reliable in the past. Our intelligence services have kept us relatively safe since 9/11, giving us reason to trust their claim that Russia interfered with the 2016 election. The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration does a good job tracking storms, giving us reason to believe what their experts say about climate change. Covid-19 research is conducted according to the same epidemiological and bio-medical concepts and procedures that most of us rely upon to remain healthy, so it’s reasonable to believe what their claims about Covid-19.
Fifth, give more trust to organizations that have admitted errors in the past, as this indicates a respect for truth. Powerful inspectors general are a good sign of such respect. Mainstream print and broadcast news outlets correct their mistakes regularly, but the record of cable news is mixed and of social media dismal. CBS fired Dan Rather and NBC demoted Brian Williams for relatively minor errors, whereas gross errors and non-sensical conspiracy theories thrive on some cable channels and social media. Who has ever been fired or demoted on Fox News for factual errors (unrelated to their objectional personal behavior)?
Six, consult a variety of sources of information so you can tell, at least in retrospect, who was right and who was wrong. If you consult only your favorite sources of news, you risk error through confirmation bias. Exploration improves your chances of having accurate opinions, and factual knowledge can be really helpful.
Comentarios