I’ve been reading a few articles over at Slate today and after watching every comments section turn into a flame war I’m starting to wonder whether radicals read reasonable articles for the same reason I occasionally read Mike Adams’ site, because it certainly seems like they’re priming themselves to be sick inside their own mouths. Although, I suppose if they had actually been sick they wouldn’t be able to stay on the article long enough to like every post that speaks the same shit they’ve been spewing.
It just goes to show that no matter what our views, all humans are pretty much the same. Accepting that view however, would imply that we all have the potential to accept facts, and some commenters make me feel like there’s some sort of reality shield some people have implanted in their brains, deflecting anything that makes sense, lest they actually learn something.
For example, in an article about a child with cancer who can’t go to daycare because of unvaccinated children, the facts in the article are completely brushed over in favor of a preconceived notion about poisoning infants, despite what the increase in survival rates, life expectancy and vaccine efficacy have shown again and again.
In the human brain, does ideology trump fact by default? Is it something that we have to grow out of? I don’t think so, many children are naturally curious and a recent study demonstrated that as a general rule, children accept a supernatural explanation for an occurrence less frequently than adults.
So is there an undercurrent of distrust of science in our society, or even a subset of it? Possibly, but it could be that a subset of the population is generating this distrust, not that they are a result of the distrust. Perhaps I’m over-thinking this?