Cognitive Biases and the Authority of Science

[UniversalPotentate]

It's been a long time since I viewed the vaccine/autism debate but the issue was NEVER the vaccine, it was the MERCURY in the vaccine solution AND the administration of the vaccine into the deep tissues instead of into the mucosa.

The nano-vaccines delivered sublingually in a proper solution would NOT cause autism.

The scientific studies disconfirming autism-linked vaccination were NOT done on Mercury tainted solutions or subdernal injection and ergo are invalid.

[LukeScientiae]

Videos like this aren't just good, they're necessary. They deserve to be played in high schools and colleges the world over. The world is full of people who accept what merely seems like true to them as true in fact.

[ThisPoisonTree]

Would the Asch conformity experiment results be a good example for a cognitive bias of the bandwagon effect?

[PhilosophyFreak]

@ThisPoisonTree I'd say that the Asch experiments illustrate a form of the bandwagon effect, absolutely. But the bandwagon effect is sort of an umbrella term for a larger family of related phenomena, so I wouldn't identify the two; bandwagon is the larger category.

[ThisPoisonTree]

@PhilosophyFreak Swell! I will have to develop my understanding of biases a bit more. Thank you for the videos, they have really helped me!

[Berrycutieful]

When it comes to Vaccinations I have asked the question. What if the body of scientific authority has decided to follow previously released statements, or chose to ignore relevant information because they have a vested interest to maintain the public's perception of them? What if they have a vested interest to publish results that are skewed to eliminate a correlation to Autism because of powerful lobbyists? What if these are the motivations of most governmental employed "Scientists?"

[Dathinkingman]

can u recommend me some good books written on congnitive biases which explains each one of them?

[PhilosophyFreak]

@Dathinkingman I think the wikipedia entry under "cognitive biases" is actually a really great resource. It's about as comprehensive as you're likely to get in one place. No book covers them all. The best books are written by specialists in a particular subset of cognitive biases. I recommend just about anything by Gerd Gigerenzer or Thomas Gilovich. You'll learn a lot from their books, and they're good writers.

[Dathinkingman]

@PhilosophyFreak ok thanks u so much :) it seems i got some reading to do :P

[sAeZCrVM]

Great video, your explanations are very clear, any chance of a video about Falsification?

[PhilosophyFreak]

@sAeZCrVM Eventually! I have plans for a tutorial course on philosophy of science issues, so it'll certainly be in there. Don't know exactly when I'll get around to it, I've got a bunch of other stuff to get through before then. But thanks for the interest.

[souluniteddk]

Keep this work up please.

[PhilosophyFreak]

Thanks for the comments guys!

[menonfire12]

Great video man. I have bought some books of logic and critical reasoning that if I had not bought them before knowing about you I would have had subscribed to your Critical Thinking Academy. However that may happen some day ;-) (Sorry about my english I speak originaly spanish)

[Cromwell523]

I think that confirmation bias and apophenia are big problems for both sides in the climate-debate

[ChadSmith1452]

@Cromwell523 Incorrect. You're a scientific illiterate. There is exactly one side of the climate change "debate". Denialists merely flail wildly, and haven't a leg to hobble on.

Your idiotic perception that there is a "debate" can only have come from sources outside the competent scientific journals.

No?

Hyperbole?

Try me.

[Cromwell523]

@ChadSmith1452

wow. you are an angry little douchebag. you are right. i wasn´t talking about scientific journals. so what? how does that make me a scientific illiterate? i didn´t even mention my opinion about that matter. it should be obvious that people who are skeptic about anthropogenic global warming seem to focus on the errors of climate alarmists and that the climate scientists seem to have the desire to link everything they can find to gobal warming. it´s just natural that they do so

[ChadSmith1452]

@Cromwell523 I.

Oh Dear me, I do apologize for my harsh language...

You know, climate change denialists are sometimes likened to holocaust denialists, but this of course is an outrageously unfair disanalogy. The climate change denalist is far worse.

The one lies -or is sincerely convinced- that a great tragedy that occurred in the past did not occur; the other lies -or is sincerely convinced- that a great tragedy that may well occur in the future will not occur and can be ignored.

[ChadSmith1452]

@ChadSmith1452 II.

A far more apposite analogy for someone like Sally Ballunius or Richard Linzen would be an epidemiologist or seismologist who takes a bribe to lie about (respectively) about the likelihood of an influenza epidemic or major earthquake. But even analogy is grossly understated in terms of scale. 

Now please if you would, cite an example of confirmation bias among climate scientists?

I don't think you can.

Google "golden mean fallacy", and look in a mirror.

[ChadSmith1452]

@ChadSmith1452 eratta: *even this analogy

[adecadentsong]

I never liked philosophy (too much Kant) and always tended more toward sociology/ psychology/ semiotics. But this is everything I want philosphy to be. So, thank you!

[Steve2323ZX]

I think if Immanuel Kant proved anything, it's that everyone is biased. Our view of the world is not passive, our brains take an active role in shaping and filtering our view of reality. Like some guy who walks around with rose colored sunglasses has his perspective of the world tainted. We all have our own sunglasses permanently a fixed around our heads.

[Forkroute]

I love your series!