Being the type of person I am I like to listen to people discuss a lot of topics. I believe that there is a lot of uncertainty in our world so I try to give multiple sides of an argument at least some credit. I am a firm believer in evolution, but I still listen to the reasons that creationists have problems with it. hearing dissenting opinions is a good thing because it forces you to justify why you believe what you believe.
Evidence is the key here. Statements alone don't hold a lot of sway for me. You can say that creationism is laughed out of academic circles before being examined, and that might be true, but unless I see evidence of this, I don't know if you are bullshitting or not.
My point is that evidence is the best way to make an argument. This makes the common practice of appealing to the popularity of an idea so fucked up. Instead of offering evidence people will say some number of people can't be wrong about something because so many people believe it (this is known as the bandwagon fallacy by the way). Its used a lot in commercials for restaurants or other subjective products, which might be the only place such rhetoric belongs. It is also used as evidence for moral or scientific beliefs, which is where I get frustrated.
A lot of people smoke crack, that doesn't mean its a good thing, it just means that a lot of people have a reason for smoking that crack rock. Dave Foley (one of my favorite comedic actors/comedians) makes this point rather well in his stand up act. The only thing that gives any sort of credence to religion is that a lot of people believe in it. If only one person believed in something like that they would seem crazy.
I am not saying that you should immediately assume that if a lot of people believe in some thing that they are all wrong, just don't except that alone as proof. If a lot of people believe something and all provide studies and evidence of why their beliefs are justified, and especially when its the job of the group of people you are talking about to know about the subject, then they would have a very strong argument (kinda like this).
No comments:
Post a Comment