Confidence Beyond Our Competence, the scientific method, and forcing my vote

Skepticism is NOT Cynicism... let's get it right

Science for the Win… as usual

The past few years have been an interesting deep dive into information and perspectives I’d previously skirted the periphery of. In particular, science and the many remarkable discoveries about world we inhabit.

I’ve always been curious. Curious about the world. Curious about the human condition - more accurately, the many human conditions. Curiosity is one of the characteristics I’ve used effectively to remain relevant in my professional life as a software developer.

There is always something to learn. Always a problem to solve.

The past several years I’ve re-invigorated my desire to understand more of the science behind the world we live in. This started with presentations, moved to reading, and over the past five or six years, listening to college lectures on biology, cosmology, physics, history, and more.

In a given week, I typically listen to between one and three lectures, presentations, documentaries, or discussions by scientists about science.

What I’ve learned from this is, we, the general population of the US and, likely, the world, are woefully ill-informed about most scientific topics. When I say “we”, I include myself in that number. Even with dozens/hundreds of lectures and presentations under my belt, I am NOT performing lab studies. I am, at best, a late-blooming - science passionate - lay-person.

THOUGHT EXPERIMENT
If you were dropped onto a new world, with 100 people with your level of knowledge, could you even smelt iron to make a functional cooking utensil or a basic hunting weapon? Could you create the most rudimentary tools and structures of stone? Note: You don’t have YouTube or your smart phone.

I’d quickly revert to being a dirty ape of some intelligence!

My knowledge is theoretic and surface - both because I am studying such a wide variety of topics, which limits how deeply I go into any one topic, and also because I am not following a logical and progressive course of study. It’s scattered at best.

Perhaps I am more knowledgeable than a decent percentage of the general population on a few topics. But there are scientist who work full-time, logging 8, 10, 12+ hours each day, in a specific field. They are reading and publishing papers. They are attending other lectures and conferences in their field.

They know FAR MORE than any of us in their specific domain.

And it’s not close!

It is similar to my skill at basketball compared to a third string professional player or even one who only makes the practice squad. He or she may not ever garner the limelight of star status and yet, if we were to play one-on-one, it is VERY likely I would not score a single point.

That is how much more a professional scientist in a field of study knows about the topic than the rest of us.

The number of misapprehensions that live in the general population; the amount of absolute, and perhaps, blessed ignorance that most of us are afforded to live with, is truly remarkable.

And yet, daily, the loudest, most-confident voices, those that shout above the din, are astoundingly ignorant and completely unqualified to make the assertions they make.

Not just ignorant of the hard-fought information on any number of topics but, more critically, the nature of skeptical inquiry; the scientific method.

Let’s take one issue… the country’s and world’s food supply.

We live, mostly, unaware of the sheer magnitude of advanced science that comes into play here. Biology covering basic agriculture to genetics to water delivery to clean (disease free) distribution, etc.

We go to the store, pick things off the shelf, and take them home and eat them. We do this without any true care or concern. But if you consider human history - even recent human history - this is a fantastical development.

We have FAR fewer cases of Botulism, Salmonella, parasites, and other potential deadly bacteria than even 50 years ago. Look back 100 or 150 years and food was a significantly more dangerous affair.

There are men and women, scientists, who actually wear white lab coats and test things in beakers and test tubes, educated to a level that is, to most of us, unfathomable. They make this happen.

And while it is true that most of us, regardless of our political stripes, are ignorant of how much science goes into the basics of our day to day living, the Republican Party has slid into the position of celebrating ignorance as a virtue.

When, unqualified and ignorant pundit, Candace Owens, unironically refers to science as a “pagan religion” and I see this bile lapped up by Evangelicals and other conservatives, I honestly worry about the future.

And, as stated above, it isn’t just the topical ignorance that is problematic. It is the methodological ignorance that presents the most pressing danger.

The current state of the Republican party and conservative movement in the US requires a lack of skepticism. Lots of cynicism, for sure. But cynicism, minus an epistemological grounding on how to assess information, does not qualify as reasonable skepticism.

Another case in point is when Tucker Carlson, on Joe Rogan’s podcast, waxes on about evolution, a topic he is either A) entirely ignorant about or B) lying because he needs to speak to his base.

Or C) a dangerous combination of the two.

I’m including a clip from that interview below. In less than two minutes he reveals a starting level of ignorance about evolution and the science behind it. And yet, he confidently, asserts his position.

This is one of the more stunning examples of the Dunning-Kruger affect. Confidence well-beyond his competence.

The “just a theory” Fallacy

In the most Tucker Carlson-esque fashion, he smugly states, “That’s why it is still just a theory.”

If you are not aware, in the world of science, the word “theory” does not mean what it means in common parlance.

Colloquially, we may use “theory” in place of hypothesis - though I am personally attempting to change that in my language. There is too much at stake.

---

hypothesis

noun

1. a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation.

   ---

In science, a theory is NOT a hypothesis.

---

theory

noun

A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of a natural phenomenon that is based on observations, facts, and hypotheses. Theories are developed using the scientific method, which involves the following steps:

1. Observation: The scientist observes a natural phenomenon.

2. Hypothesis: The scientist develops a hypothesis about the phenomenon.

3. Experiment: The scientist designs an experiment or collects data to test the hypothesis. 

---

Science never states an emphatic fact when arriving at a conclusion of evidentiary study. It couches its answer with the humility required to allow for additional discovery.

Some Theories

Newton had a theory on gravity. Einstein provided clarification and expansion on Newton’s theory. Both were testable and allowed for predictions that bore out the accuracy of the theory.

Gravity is a theory. Germ theory explains and allows us to effectively treat disease. Quantum Mechanics is a theory that explains and allows for predictable models of sub-atomic particles. And there are many other such theories. They are bolstered by the best evidence and the most predictable testing.

And yes, evolution is such a theory. Down to the level of genetics and many other testable qualifiers. It happened. No book, written by science illiterate prophets can dispel the mountains of evidence that support it.

Let me take a short divergence.

The Unscientific Left

Mostly centered on the left of the political spectrum are new age types. They believe in reiki healing, the law of attraction (though this one has also permeated the right), ghosts, psychics, cosmic consciousness, auras, and any number of untestable, unfalsifiable notions that are as unfounded and without evidentiary warrant as belief in God.

The difference is, if they live our political realm, they are quiet about it. It is NEVER discussed as a method to determine what good governance looks like. It is NEVER trotted out as a method to determine the direction of the country or policy.

Hearing from God, a re-do

Consider these words from George Bush:

“I am driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did."

And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East'. And, by God, I'm gonna do it.”

I’ve already discussed Mike Johnson’s insane ramblings at an event for Republican house members. You can read that in, What's Worse: "Goddammit!" or "God Told Me!"?

Now, instead of God, replace it with, Thor, the God of Thunder.

How would George Bush have been perceived had he, instead, said:

“I am driven with a mission from Thor, the God of Thunder. Thor would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then Thor, the God of Thunder would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did."

How would that play on the campaign trail?? I mean, personally, as a Thor comic book fan, it would be cool as heck… but I still wouldn’t vote for him.

And Trump, perhaps the least Evangelical figurehead to use pseudo-religiosity for political gain and to defraud an easily swayed populace, said the following after the assassination attempt.

“It was God alone who prevented the unthinkable from happening. We will fear not, but instead remain resilient in our faith and defiant in the face of wickedness.”

First, how much coaching did he get from someone who knows the evangelical mind? It is pretty genius. They love that shit! Fighting all that unholy “wickedness” is sweet, nearly erotic, nectar to Christians.

I’ve seen enough Evangelicals claim Trump surviving the assassination attempt as proof positive of a miracle. This simply indicates they do not understand miracles or don’t care to scrutinize claims.

A miracle is an abridgement of the known laws of nature. A close call is NOT a miracle. It isn’t even providential (in the divine sense of the word) - unless proven to be so.

For instance: If, it can be shown, that the bullet was traveling towards his head and an apparition appeared - with wings and a halo and redirected the bullet around his head - then, a case for a miracle could be made. But even that would require study and need to be skeptically scrutinized.

Science is, by its very nature, skeptical. It requires an, “I could be wrong” admission and forces those making big claims to publish their claims along with the methods they used to evaluate their evidence, and to publish the evidence itself. Once published, others seek to “prove” or repeat the findings or to disprove them.

And there is incentive to disprove them.

Watch this short (59 second) video from Yuval Noah Harari: Science is Ignorance.

Cynicism and dogmatic beliefs have no such requirement or incentive.

They are typically coupled with statements similar to what someone told me recently, “No amount of facts will change my mind.”

I shrugged and replied, “Apparently so.”

This is, in part, why so many conservatives buy into wildly unfounded ideas that lack the evidentiary warrant that true skepticism requires.

• The election fraud claims of Trump.

• Q and the glut of evidence-less claims that drip from that cesspool.

• The persecution complex of Christians (particularly in the US).

• The elevation of anti-vaccination proponents above their scientific counterparts.

Do all conservatives buy this uncritical analysis of information?

Nope. I’ve spoken to many who are mostly fiscal conservatives. However, they don’t speak up - and for good reason! They will be attacked!!

But in failing to loudly proclaim and functionally remove support for the anti-science element in their party, they give it cover.

In giving it cover, they relinquish their position of rationality and become, de-facto, enemies of science and progress.

---

“I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time...

... The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance”
- Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark
[read the full quote here]

---

Isaac Asimov and Carl Sagan warned us about the celebration of ignorance. That ignorance is celebrated as virtue in the current Republican party.

I am not a Democrat. I view both parties as owned by corporate powers, with scant policies to help re-build the country’s middle-class or address real issues that affect real people.

However, until I see a correction toward rationality, I will continue to vote against Republicans, along party lines, as I did, for the first time, in 2020.

For me the equation is celebratory ignorance versus the minimal level of scientific merit. It is a sour but necessary pill to swallow at this point.