We are are in the middle of a pandemic of credulous thinking. Holocaust denial, 9/11 conspiracy theories, homeopathy, vitamin cures for AIDS, Creationism, Afrocentric history – all these come under the heading of ‘counterknowledge’.
I have always been intrigued by our ability as humans to believe just about anything. We seem to have an innate gullibility to accept implausible notions at face value.
To me, evaluating reality is a very simple, logical straight forward process. What I have a hard time understanding is that I seem to very much be in the minority. Most people seem simply unable to evaluate and understand reality. There are many absurd, illogical things that people accept and believe, such as astrology, psychic mediums, tarot, homeopathy, religion, etc. Some people have such strong faith in these things that they have a large impact on their lives, religion aside. How many people do you know take astrology seriously? We see countless ads for over-the-phone psychic readings at $4.95 per minute. There’s a lot of people out there making some serious money from our unbelievable gullibility, and the spread of counterknowledge and pseudoscience.
Case in point is the sorcery of homeopathy. Homeopathy is utterly and completely ridiculous with zero plausibility or efficacy. It is pseudoscience at its worst. It is nothing but pure magical thinking. Indeed, at the very core of homeopathy is a concept that can only be considered to be magic. In homeopathy, the main principles are that “like heals like” and that dilution increases potency. Thus, in homeopathy, to cure an illness, you pick something that causes symptoms similar to those of that illness and then dilute it from 20C to 30C, where each “C” represents a 1:100 dilution. To put that into perspective, a 30C homeopathic preparation is diluted at the ratio of 1 part in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. This is not a misprint. If a container at that dilution were to contain a single molecule of the original substance, that container would have to be more than 30,000,000,000 times the size of the Earth.
A homeopathic solution is therefore so diluted that it contains no active ingredients whatsoever. It contains not even so much as a single molecule of the original ingredient. Practitioners generally admit this to be true, but maintain that the preparation contains an 'essence' or 'memory' of the original active ingredient. So we've now entered the realm favored by religious folk of making ridiculous and absurd claims that cannot be verified or refuted via the scientific method. When you're theories cannot stand up to rigorous scientific testing, you make them untestable. The argumentative equivalent of 'because'.
While it is obviously absurd to think that water can contain the 'memory' of a substance it once had contact with, science technically can't disprove it. However, by making an assertion untestable or unfalsifiable by science, this does not by default make it true. Simply put, the burden of proof lies with the claim maker, not the skeptic. Many times, religious theorists or proponents of pseudoscience seem to argue that the lack of scientific proof or a gap in scientific knowledge validates whatever absurd claim they may be making. Homeopathy/religion/etc. has to stand or fall on its own, not on the perceived failings of others. The failure of science to adequately explain a phenomena is not to be used as validation for pseudoscience. This common tactic is the equivalent of saying 'I'm thin because you're fat'.
As an example, creationism developed because we had no rational explanation for where we came from. We had a gap in our knowledge, which was filled by creationism. Enter Charles Darwin, who very effectively ‘plugged’ the gap in our knowledge with the (very) robust theory of evolution and natural selection. Sadly, and despite the absolute universal acceptance within the scientific community of the theory of evolution, the Jesus freaks just won’t let go of creationism. This demonstrates that even in the face of irrefutable, scientifically verifiable evidence, people still cling to stupid notions and irrational beliefs. Even after the gaps have been filled, some people just won’t let go. Homeopaths fall into this category.
Clearly, homeopathy is little more than a placebo. Meta-analysis done of high quality homeopathic clinical trials have demonstrated this fact. Yes, it works for some people. The placebo effect is very powerful. Did you know that green sugar pills are more effective in treating stress disorders than red ones? Or that saline injections are even more effective than sugar pills?
Another interesting fact I've noticed about homeopathy is a trait it shares with religious miracles. When people pray for miracles, or profess to have encountered one, it is generally for something that had a chance of occurring anyway. People will happily pray for God to cure their illness, but I doubt many people would pray for a severed limb to grow back. Likewise, homeopathy generally only treats conditions that have a possibility of clearing up unaided (there are, however, some homeopaths who prescribe preparations for the prevention of things like malaria. This is where homeopathy moves from laughable wizardry to dangerous pseudoscience). There is no homeopathic preparation for birth control, for example.
Homeopathy is quackery at its worst. It is potentially dangerous, and diverts people away from evidence-based, orthodox medicine. Encouraging people to abandon proven, safe, scientific based practices in favour of unproven, fairy-tale pseudoscience is not only unethical but tantamount to criminal behaviour. This is a multi-billion dollar industry that is supported and funded by governments, including the NHS in Britain.
And so this brings me back to the original question I had at the beginning of this blog, specifically why we believe what we believe.
I theorise that we believe what we do as a result of the times in which we live (for the purposes of this discussion, I’m excluding religion, which is a whole other kettle of fish). Up until a generation or two ago, we lived very rigid, structured lives. Authority was implicit in many of our institutions, such as family, school and the church. We accepted authority unquestioningly, and we did as we were told. We also believed what we were told.
In recent times, however, this has changed. Not only do we not have to believe what we are told, we are even encouraged to not believe it. We are told we can believe whatever we want. As a result of this, I believe, we are in a state of flux. We’ve gone from being told how and what to think to being told to think for ourselves, and we just don’t know how to do it. While I maintain we are capable of logical, rational thought, most of us simply don’t know how. Unfortunately, when we were told we could start thinking for ourselves, they neglected to tell us how to do it properly.
As a result, many people have a tendency to accept much of what they see at face value. We seem to have an inbuilt sheep-like mechanism of following the herd.
Modern technology has perhaps played the biggest role in counterknowledge and pseudoscience. The internet has allowed all the nut-jobs of the world to unite. A loner who comes up with some crack-pot conspiracy theory is now likely to get validation through the internet, and so instead of these ridiculous ideas quickly disappearing, the internet gives them wings, and so they spread, just waiting to be picked up by some ignorant twat incapable of rational thought. Much like a virus searching out a compromised immune system, the internet has permitted the spread of the counterknowledge/pseudoscience virus from one ‘compromised’ mind to another, until it’s reached the epidemic proportions we see today.
Television has also done a wonderful job of 'dumbing down' the population. Show’s like Psychic Mediums, Big Brother and the plethora of other ‘reality’ TV shows we seem to be being bombarded with seem to have the effect of sapping people of their intelligence. Sadly, intellectually stimulating and challenging programs seem to be few and far between. Even more sadly, most people would have a hard time even identifying a genuinely intellectually stimulating program I suspect. I’m sure there’s many people out there who find watching a group of so-called psychic mediums rid a house of evil spirits terribly stimulating.
Education also has a big role to play here. While our educational institutions are telling us to think for ourselves, they are neglecting to teach how. People need to be taught skepticism. They need to be taught to apply logic and rational thinking to the world, and to question and evaluate evidence.
We seem to have it stacked against us when it comes to rationality. The overwhelming bombardment of information we are subjected to has bred apathy and mental laziness. Counterknowledge is the cholesterol clogging our mental arteries. We need to exercise more, and we need to watch what we ‘eat’. Encouragingly, though, it’s no where near as daunting as physical exercise. Start with baby steps. Question. Does what you’re hearing, reading or seeing really make sense? Is it logical? Don’t accept everything at face value. Be healthily skeptical. The world today is full of counterknowledge-peddling crackpots. It is only through the use of rational, science based logic that we can prevail. And it’s really not that hard. We have to fight back against the rising tide of irrationalism. Let common sense prevail. We will all be so much richer for it.
I'd like to dedicate this blog to my high school history teacher, Helen Nelson. She taught me the value of healthy skepticism, and that all is not what it seems. She taught that it was OK to question, and not to accept the world as we see it at face value. And for this, I thank her. If only every high school had a teacher like her.
I have always been intrigued by our ability as humans to believe just about anything. We seem to have an innate gullibility to accept implausible notions at face value.
To me, evaluating reality is a very simple, logical straight forward process. What I have a hard time understanding is that I seem to very much be in the minority. Most people seem simply unable to evaluate and understand reality. There are many absurd, illogical things that people accept and believe, such as astrology, psychic mediums, tarot, homeopathy, religion, etc. Some people have such strong faith in these things that they have a large impact on their lives, religion aside. How many people do you know take astrology seriously? We see countless ads for over-the-phone psychic readings at $4.95 per minute. There’s a lot of people out there making some serious money from our unbelievable gullibility, and the spread of counterknowledge and pseudoscience.
Case in point is the sorcery of homeopathy. Homeopathy is utterly and completely ridiculous with zero plausibility or efficacy. It is pseudoscience at its worst. It is nothing but pure magical thinking. Indeed, at the very core of homeopathy is a concept that can only be considered to be magic. In homeopathy, the main principles are that “like heals like” and that dilution increases potency. Thus, in homeopathy, to cure an illness, you pick something that causes symptoms similar to those of that illness and then dilute it from 20C to 30C, where each “C” represents a 1:100 dilution. To put that into perspective, a 30C homeopathic preparation is diluted at the ratio of 1 part in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. This is not a misprint. If a container at that dilution were to contain a single molecule of the original substance, that container would have to be more than 30,000,000,000 times the size of the Earth.
A homeopathic solution is therefore so diluted that it contains no active ingredients whatsoever. It contains not even so much as a single molecule of the original ingredient. Practitioners generally admit this to be true, but maintain that the preparation contains an 'essence' or 'memory' of the original active ingredient. So we've now entered the realm favored by religious folk of making ridiculous and absurd claims that cannot be verified or refuted via the scientific method. When you're theories cannot stand up to rigorous scientific testing, you make them untestable. The argumentative equivalent of 'because'.
While it is obviously absurd to think that water can contain the 'memory' of a substance it once had contact with, science technically can't disprove it. However, by making an assertion untestable or unfalsifiable by science, this does not by default make it true. Simply put, the burden of proof lies with the claim maker, not the skeptic. Many times, religious theorists or proponents of pseudoscience seem to argue that the lack of scientific proof or a gap in scientific knowledge validates whatever absurd claim they may be making. Homeopathy/religion/etc. has to stand or fall on its own, not on the perceived failings of others. The failure of science to adequately explain a phenomena is not to be used as validation for pseudoscience. This common tactic is the equivalent of saying 'I'm thin because you're fat'.
As an example, creationism developed because we had no rational explanation for where we came from. We had a gap in our knowledge, which was filled by creationism. Enter Charles Darwin, who very effectively ‘plugged’ the gap in our knowledge with the (very) robust theory of evolution and natural selection. Sadly, and despite the absolute universal acceptance within the scientific community of the theory of evolution, the Jesus freaks just won’t let go of creationism. This demonstrates that even in the face of irrefutable, scientifically verifiable evidence, people still cling to stupid notions and irrational beliefs. Even after the gaps have been filled, some people just won’t let go. Homeopaths fall into this category.
Clearly, homeopathy is little more than a placebo. Meta-analysis done of high quality homeopathic clinical trials have demonstrated this fact. Yes, it works for some people. The placebo effect is very powerful. Did you know that green sugar pills are more effective in treating stress disorders than red ones? Or that saline injections are even more effective than sugar pills?
Another interesting fact I've noticed about homeopathy is a trait it shares with religious miracles. When people pray for miracles, or profess to have encountered one, it is generally for something that had a chance of occurring anyway. People will happily pray for God to cure their illness, but I doubt many people would pray for a severed limb to grow back. Likewise, homeopathy generally only treats conditions that have a possibility of clearing up unaided (there are, however, some homeopaths who prescribe preparations for the prevention of things like malaria. This is where homeopathy moves from laughable wizardry to dangerous pseudoscience). There is no homeopathic preparation for birth control, for example.
Homeopathy is quackery at its worst. It is potentially dangerous, and diverts people away from evidence-based, orthodox medicine. Encouraging people to abandon proven, safe, scientific based practices in favour of unproven, fairy-tale pseudoscience is not only unethical but tantamount to criminal behaviour. This is a multi-billion dollar industry that is supported and funded by governments, including the NHS in Britain.
And so this brings me back to the original question I had at the beginning of this blog, specifically why we believe what we believe.
I theorise that we believe what we do as a result of the times in which we live (for the purposes of this discussion, I’m excluding religion, which is a whole other kettle of fish). Up until a generation or two ago, we lived very rigid, structured lives. Authority was implicit in many of our institutions, such as family, school and the church. We accepted authority unquestioningly, and we did as we were told. We also believed what we were told.
In recent times, however, this has changed. Not only do we not have to believe what we are told, we are even encouraged to not believe it. We are told we can believe whatever we want. As a result of this, I believe, we are in a state of flux. We’ve gone from being told how and what to think to being told to think for ourselves, and we just don’t know how to do it. While I maintain we are capable of logical, rational thought, most of us simply don’t know how. Unfortunately, when we were told we could start thinking for ourselves, they neglected to tell us how to do it properly.
As a result, many people have a tendency to accept much of what they see at face value. We seem to have an inbuilt sheep-like mechanism of following the herd.
Modern technology has perhaps played the biggest role in counterknowledge and pseudoscience. The internet has allowed all the nut-jobs of the world to unite. A loner who comes up with some crack-pot conspiracy theory is now likely to get validation through the internet, and so instead of these ridiculous ideas quickly disappearing, the internet gives them wings, and so they spread, just waiting to be picked up by some ignorant twat incapable of rational thought. Much like a virus searching out a compromised immune system, the internet has permitted the spread of the counterknowledge/pseudoscience virus from one ‘compromised’ mind to another, until it’s reached the epidemic proportions we see today.
Television has also done a wonderful job of 'dumbing down' the population. Show’s like Psychic Mediums, Big Brother and the plethora of other ‘reality’ TV shows we seem to be being bombarded with seem to have the effect of sapping people of their intelligence. Sadly, intellectually stimulating and challenging programs seem to be few and far between. Even more sadly, most people would have a hard time even identifying a genuinely intellectually stimulating program I suspect. I’m sure there’s many people out there who find watching a group of so-called psychic mediums rid a house of evil spirits terribly stimulating.
Education also has a big role to play here. While our educational institutions are telling us to think for ourselves, they are neglecting to teach how. People need to be taught skepticism. They need to be taught to apply logic and rational thinking to the world, and to question and evaluate evidence.
We seem to have it stacked against us when it comes to rationality. The overwhelming bombardment of information we are subjected to has bred apathy and mental laziness. Counterknowledge is the cholesterol clogging our mental arteries. We need to exercise more, and we need to watch what we ‘eat’. Encouragingly, though, it’s no where near as daunting as physical exercise. Start with baby steps. Question. Does what you’re hearing, reading or seeing really make sense? Is it logical? Don’t accept everything at face value. Be healthily skeptical. The world today is full of counterknowledge-peddling crackpots. It is only through the use of rational, science based logic that we can prevail. And it’s really not that hard. We have to fight back against the rising tide of irrationalism. Let common sense prevail. We will all be so much richer for it.
I'd like to dedicate this blog to my high school history teacher, Helen Nelson. She taught me the value of healthy skepticism, and that all is not what it seems. She taught that it was OK to question, and not to accept the world as we see it at face value. And for this, I thank her. If only every high school had a teacher like her.
