Why do we ignore evidence, play the lottery, distrust people, argue endlessly, and think we have all the answers? Because we are human, and usually not all that logical. Cracked looks at five logical fallacies that make us think we are right when we’re not. For example, we often think we are seeking knowledge when what we really want is to bolster the viewpoints we already hold.
It’s called the argumentative theory of reasoning, and it says that humans didn’t learn to ask questions and offer answers in order to find universal truths. We did it as a way to gain authority over others. That’s right — they think that reason itself evolved to help us bully people into getting what we want. Here’s how a proponent puts it:
“‘Reasoning doesn’t have this function of helping us to get better beliefs and make better decisions,’ said Hugo Mercier, who is a co-author of the journal article, with Dan Sperber. ‘It was a purely social phenomenon. It evolved to help us convince others and to be careful when others try to convince us.’ Truth and accuracy were beside the point.”
And as evidence, the researchers point out that after thousands of years of humans sitting around campfires and arguing about issues, these glaring flaws in our logic still exist.
Apparently, being dominant is more adaptive for evolutionary purposes than being open-minded.
Why do we ignore evidence, play the lottery, distrust people, argue endlessly, and think we have all the answers? Because we are human, and usually not all that logical. Cracked looks at five logical fallacies that make us think we are right when we’re not. For example, we often think we are seeking knowledge when what we really want is to bolster the viewpoints we already hold.
No comments:
Post a Comment