People today get labelled "deniers" the same way they are labeled "racists" or "Nazis" or "fascists".
It's obvious to most people that the human population is a net negative to the ecosystem through our actions. I can look out my window and see it with my own eyes. But because I don't believe we have "12 years" or that we're on the cusp billions dying off if we don't buy Teslas doesn't make me a denier.
This has become something of a hobby horse of mine over the last few years. I was raised as a fundamentalist, so I had a lot of anti-science indoctrination to get over, both explicit and implicit.
The main problem with this sort of thing, including the methods outlined in the article, is getting past the backfire effect. The best way around that seems to be challenging the methods used to come to a belief, rather than challenging the belief directly.
There's a technique called "street epistemology", loosely based on the Socratic method, that's specifically designed to avoid the backfire effect. See https://streetepistemology.com for more details, or https://youtu.be/v9utXKpFxCo for a great example of it in action.
3 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 20.6 ms ] threadIt's obvious to most people that the human population is a net negative to the ecosystem through our actions. I can look out my window and see it with my own eyes. But because I don't believe we have "12 years" or that we're on the cusp billions dying off if we don't buy Teslas doesn't make me a denier.
The main problem with this sort of thing, including the methods outlined in the article, is getting past the backfire effect. The best way around that seems to be challenging the methods used to come to a belief, rather than challenging the belief directly.
There's a technique called "street epistemology", loosely based on the Socratic method, that's specifically designed to avoid the backfire effect. See https://streetepistemology.com for more details, or https://youtu.be/v9utXKpFxCo for a great example of it in action.