Community | April 20, 2011 | 11 comments

The Science of Why We Don't Believe Science

Image
bla_bla_bla
Facts apparently are not the best way to persuade republicans to see your point of view.

To quote the article:

"And sure enough, one key predictor of whether you accept the science of global warming is whether you're a Republican or a Democrat. The two groups have been growing more divided in their views about the topic, even as the science becomes more unequivocal.

So perhaps it should come as no surprise that more education doesn't budge Republican views. On the contrary: In a 2008 Pew survey, for instance, only 19 percent of college-educated Republicans agreed that the planet is warming due to human actions, versus 31 percent of non-college educated Republicans. In other words, a higher education correlated with an increased likelihood of denying the science on the issue. Meanwhile, among Democrats and independents, more education correlated with greater acceptance of the science."

----it later states:

"You can follow the logic to its conclusion: Conservatives are more likely to embrace climate science if it comes to them via a business or religious leader, who can set the issue in the context of different values than those from which environmentalists or scientists often argue. Doing so is, effectively, to signal a détente in what Kahan has called a "culture war of fact." In other words, paradoxically, you don't lead with the facts in order to convince. You lead with the values—so as to give the facts a fighting chance."

Article is about more than just climate change science.

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/denial-science-chris-mooney
  1. groups:
    Community,   Culture,   Collective Journalism,   Learn,   6 more
  2. tags:
    Science,  Psychology,  belief,  Denial,  2 more
  3.     
    |

11 comments // The Science of Why We Don't Believe Science

  • thedirtman
    • +1
      thedirtman  

    • Don't lead with the facts - lead with the values. I wonder if this isn't the same as setting a trap.

      So, for example, I might title my story on climate change something like "Why Al Gore got it wrong on climate change". Then I go on to explain some factoid that Al didn't put in the best light in his film. Then I assert that this caused Al Gore to underestimate (not overestimate) the consequences.

    • 2 years ago
  • remanns
  • dreamsenvoy
  • jubal
  • sugarlilly
    • 0
      sugarlilly  

    • "In other words, paradoxically, you don't lead with the facts in order to convince. You lead with the values—so as to give the facts a fighting chance." yay our country

    • 2 years ago
  • dadevil
    • +2
      dadevil  

    • culture war of fact - everyone wants to spend someone else's dime!

      Rich manipulative Republicans? - Greed freeks

      Do Gooder Sheeple - Sports freaks - Sex freeks - Religion freeks - Bikers -

      Added to the "Collapse" question science Now what?

    • 2 years ago
  • coolplanet
    • +5
      coolplanet  

    • I learned long ago that the only thing that matters to republicans - the bottom line - is money.
      Fast money. Easy money.
      Money, money, money.
      Fuck everything else!
      Republicans only like science when they can make money from it.
      If it threatens their bottom line then they question science.

    • 2 years ago
  • bla_bla_bla
    • +1
      bla_bla_bla  
    • coolplanet:

      I totally agree with you as far as the rich manipulative Republicans go. But this article gets into how people deny things in the face of evidence as it challenges their core beliefs. It really goes beyond Republicans and shows how liberals do it too. And also, what about all the poor republicans who vote against their own best interests. It sheds light on why people ignore facts (science).

    • 2 years ago
  • coolplanet
    • +2
      coolplanet  
    • bla_bla_bla:

      O I definately see the denial of science going on on the left.
      Like the hysteria over radiation.
      The problem is that most Americans are completely scientifically illiterate, as studies show.
      I study history and see what happens to cultures that reject science. Nazi Germany is a good example.
      "Collapse" by Jarod Diamond is a real eye opener.
      Yes there is a utopian denial among us liberals.
      But not nearly as bad as among the idealogical conservatives.
      At least we can all basically agree on the theory of evolution!

    • 2 years ago
  • Swisher
    • +1
      Swisher  

    • Values? What about the value of facts? Republicans don't see the value of leaving a better world for their children, but do see value in continuing the use of fossil fuels for financial profit...

    • 2 years ago
  • bla_bla_bla
    • +2
      bla_bla_bla  
    • Swisher:

      Thanks for the comment swisher. The value of facts is enormous. Unfortunately this does not seem to matter when someone is entrenched in their belief system and has a "hierarchal" or "individual" type mindset (explained in the context of the article). The article explains how some have a "backlash" to the facts based on their core beliefs, and the facts don't seem to help persuade them, they make them more emboldened to oppose the conclusions (crazy, I know). That's one of the things that made this article so interesting, helping me to understand the mind of one who's core beliefs leads one to denial of scientific evidence.

    • 2 years ago
more from Community:
from the community

top videos