Evidence And The "worldview Backfire Effect"

[TheSkepticChristian]

I have never suggest one should throw reason and critical thinking out the window.

 

Just an interpretation 

 

Go ahead try it but you better have a good parachute.  See reply to first item.\

 

Just an interpretation

 

The geocentric model was the consensus for some time.  Do you still think the earth is the center of the universe? 

 

The consensus is not always right, I been saying that many times. 

However, it is a bad example because the geocentric model was never a scientific consensus, it was theology, not science. 

 

I said about the consensus 

 

Scientists agree not because they like each other, scientists agree because the results of their own scientific research agree. 

Edited August 1, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[ERayR]

Just an interpretation 

 

 

Just an interpretation

 

 

The consensus is not always right, I been saying that many times. 

However, it is a bad example because the geocentric model was never a scientific consensus, it was theology, not science. 

 

I said about the consensus 

 

Have a good day at the cliffs.  

[TheSkepticChristian]

Have a good day at the cliffs.  

 

I was being sarcastic. 

 

There is more evidence for Macro-Evolution than there is for Gravity. but you dismiss Evolution as "just an interpretation"

 

but thanks a lot for illustrating the "worldview Backfire Effect"

 

The worldview Backfire effects happens because the human brain looks for explanations and patterns that don't exist. 

Edited August 1, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[Calm]

"scientists like real challenges, not pseudoscience"

Linus Pauling and vitamin C

[mfbukowski]

but ERaR and mfbukowski are saying that everything is just an interpretation, even "symptoms are evident" are just an interpretation. 

 

 

I am talking about modern scientists, or most of them. 

 

 

 

Sure, scientists look for the best interpretation. 

Please

 

It is clear you don't have a clue what I am saying.

[Robert F. Smith]

....................................................

 

....................................... the geocentric model was never a scientific consensus, it was theology, not science. 

 

.................................................

This is utter nonsense, demonstrating beyond doubt that you certainly don't know science.  Claudius Ptolemy was a pagan Roman and the greatest scholar of his day.  His establishment of geocentrism was both convincing and fully explicable based on the best observational astronomy and math.  The Ptolemaic consensus was maintained for such a long time simply because it was the best scientific theory available.  One can always cook up a theological explanation for a theory after the fact, just as Mormons can find astonishing justification for the odd astronomical views evident in their Pearl of Great Price.  However, you are putting the cart before the horse.

[mfbukowski]

This is utter nonsense, demonstrating beyond doubt that you certainly don't know science. Claudius Ptolemy was a pagan Roman and the greatest scholar of his day. His establishment of geocentrism was both convincing and fully explicable based on the best observational astronomy and math. The Ptolemaic consensus was maintained for such a long time simply because it was the best scientific theory available. One can always cook up a theological explanation for a theory after the fact, just as Mormons can find astonishing justification for the odd astronomical views evident in their Pearl of Great Price. However, you are putting the cart before the horse.

absolutely!

[thesometimesaint]

For all his great ideas Ptolemy was not what we would consider a modern day scientist. Science as we know it wasn't invented until the Age of Enlightenment some 16 centuries after Ptolemy.

 

If you want a cautionary tale of going against the religious dogma of the time a better choice would be Giordano Bruno.

 

Copernicus was the first to propose a, at the time heretical, heliocentric universe, but waited till he was on his death bed before publicly acknowledging it. He lived about two centuries before the Age of Enlightenment. Galileo paid a heavy price for his heliocentric heresies, but he wasn't burnt at the stake for them.  

[TheSkepticChristian]

absolutely!

 

Well, we are the center of the universe, everything is moving away from us, and our universe is expanding. 

 

 

This is utter nonsense, demonstrating beyond doubt that you certainly don't know science.  

 

The History of Science I guess. So, do you have a better answer for Tim-maC's question?

Edited August 2, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[ERayR]

Well, we are the center of the universe, everything is moving away from us, and our universe is expanding. 

 

 

 

The History of Science I guess. So, do you have a better answer for Tim-maC's question?

 

In several places you have stated that you would consider the possibility that you were in error, however your actions disprove this.  Every time you are presented with a different paradigm you immediately fall into your "worldview backfire" mode.  Curl up in your cocoon and enjoy.

[TheSkepticChristian]

In several places you have stated that you would consider the possibility that you were in error, however your actions disprove this.  Every time you are presented with a different paradigm you immediately fall into your "worldview backfire" mode.  Curl up in your cocoon and enjoy.

 

I trained my brain against confirmation bias and Apophenia, so not really.  

 

I may be wrong when I said, "the geocentric model was never a scientific consensus, it was theology, not science."  

 

and Robert pointed that out, did I immediately fall in my "world backfire" mode? 

 

But you are always right. 

Edited August 3, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[Stone holm]

There is a theory about truth which states the less one knows about a subject the more likelihood he or she will have firm convictions on a subject, and the more actual knowledge one has the less likely they will express themselves on it in terms of absolute certainty. Since we in general find a demonstration of confidence when trying to decide between opinions the tendency is for people in general to follow the opinions of the least knowledgeable people. One of the hardest things to do in prepping witnesses is to get them to quit using false hedges especially if they are honest knowledgeable people.

[ERayR]

But you are always right. 

 

I don't know where I ever said this.  However, it does sometimes gets lonely up here on Mt. Olympus.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I don't know where I ever said this.  However, it does sometimes gets lonely up here on Mt. Olympus.

I am here to keep you company. But perhaps I am getting old for you?

[ERayR]

I am here to keep you company. But perhaps I am getting old for you?

Age has its advantages.  At least it has a tendency to calm the impetuousness of youth.   

[TheSkepticChristian]

I don't know where I ever said this

 

When was the last time you changed your views about something very important here in the MDDB?

 

You might want to do some research about the worldview backfire effect

Edited August 3, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

When was the last time you changed your views about something very important here in the MDDB?

 

You might want to do some research about the worldview backfire effect

When was the last time you changed your views about something very important here in the MDDB?

[jkwilliams]

When was the last time you changed your views about something very important here in the MDDB?

Seems to me that, when people do change their minds here, it's on something big. True, it tends to go in the direction of not believing in Mormonism, but maybe the opposite happens once in a while.

[ERayR]

When was the last time you changed your views about something very important here in the MDDB?

 

You might want to do some research about the worldview backfire effect

 

When were we ever close enough that you would know?  You are making assumptions of which you are totally ignorant. 

Edited August 3, 2015 by ERayR

[TheSkepticChristian]

.

Edited August 3, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[Stone holm]

 

Seems to me that, when people do change their minds here, it's on something big. True, it tends to go in the direction of not believing in Mormonism, but maybe the opposite happens once in a while.

 

I suspect it would not happen very often at all, this Board is not conducive to missionary work, but it might help someone who was considering leaving the Church to hold-back realizing that there is in fact room for differing ideas in the Church and that not every member is right wing. Then again, maybe not.

[jkwilliams]

I suspect it would not happen very often at all, this Board is not conducive to missionary work, but it might help someone who was considering leaving the Church to hold-back realizing that there is in fact room for differing ideas in the Church and that not every member is right wing. Then again, maybe not.

I know quite a few people (including myself) who used to be defenders of the faith on this board but who have since gone over to the dark side. The only person I know who went the other way is Don Bradley, but then that's a different situation, IMO.

[Stone holm]

 

I know quite a few people (including myself) who used to be defenders of the faith on this board but who have since gone over to the dark side. The only person I know who went the other way is Don Bradley, but then that's a different situation, IMO.

 

I wonder what that says about the arguments presented on this Board. Maybe the Church is right in not wanting to have anyone question the position of GAs on any subject. Perhaps we have to hone our debating skills to keep the hard right from driving people to the Dark Side.

[jkwilliams]

I wonder what that says about the arguments presented on this Board. Maybe the Church is right in not wanting to have anyone question the position of GAs on any subject. Perhaps we have to hone our debating skills to keep the hard right from driving people to the Dark Side.

I don't think it necessarily speaks to the quality of the arguments. Speaking for myself and a few friends who have said the same, participating in apologetics was a way to deal with nagging doubts, even if we were not conscious of those doubts. In a way, we were trying to convince ourselves more than anyone. Eventually, it just didn't work anymore.

[TheSkepticChristian]

When was the last time you changed your views about something very important here in the MDDB?

 

I used to be against SSM gay rights. No worldview backfire effect for me.

 

What about you?

 

PS it seems I was wrong in post 101, and Robert pointed that out.

I am not afraid to admit when I am wrong

 

 

I know quite a few people (including myself) who used to be defenders of the faith on this board but who have since gone over to the dark side.

 

and it has been a while for me too

Edited August 3, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian