A few random, loosely connected links (and video)

[conuly]

Now, watch with your eyes shut if you're sensitive to mispeelings.

An actual quote from WD that's absurdly double-standard-ish

An article about how people really really suck at calculating risk. (So what else is new?)

And one very interesting article about how giving facts to people who are OMG SO WRONG!!! doesn't work the way we think. Depressing.

Comments

[leora.livejournal.com]

I have had conversations with people who were fact-resistant on the subject of which we were speaking. It was very frustrating. I try not to be fact-resistant, although obviously I am biased in my views of myself. I admit that I require more evidence to support a view I currently feel is false (since it needs to overcome the reasons why I think it is false) and less for a view that seems consistent with what I know (such as this article seems consistent with what I know about how humans work, so I am less skeptical of it, even for the parts that are new information to me, then if it stated something I found less plausible - something that went against my beliefs). But I try not to be totally fact-resistant.

I expect my memory for information is biased though.

I was raised with fairly strong self-esteem, and with the view that you ought to change your views when confronted with information that proved it false. With a very scientific model being praised as a virtue, such that being wrong is not a flaw if you were wrong for decent reasons, but not changing your views when you have new evidence is a flaw. I think that helps, and I don't think everyone views it that way.

So, I like to think I'm not too fact-resistant... but I know that my view is biased. :/

[chaos-by-design.livejournal.com]

I swear, people seem to want to see gender difference even in cases where there apparently isn't much of one. I don't get it.