Science is arguably one of the greatest human constructs ever imagined. The scientific method allows for the identification of objective truth from naturally subjective animals. It aims to find truth regardless of human opinion or belief. It is self-correcting. Scientific results are reproducible and observational, everyone can see and attain the same results. Information obtained through science is shared, confirmed, and corrected by others. New information can change established understanding.
Science is based on evidence. Evidence is the data that support or refute a claim.
When we use scientific thinking to understand the world, we can relieve partisan and tribal thinking. All ideas are worth considering, regardless of group affiliation, because data does not have an agenda.
Humans, however, DO have an agenda. Any information can be misused if the audience is willing. When the audience cannot discern the facts for themselves, they can be mislead. But when the audience is informed, they can call bullshit. When the audience has the tools of science, of critical thinking, we can call bullshit.
We’re not ready for this.
The information age has transformed society, and we are not ready for this. There is no precedent in human existence for the explosion and saturation of information, and the decision-making that is the result. Within a couple of decades, regular Americans went from engaging with current events through a morning newspaper or an evening T.V. news program, to being bombarded with news and information 24 hours a day. And the world has only become more globalized and more complex during that time.
Not only are we being exposed to more information than ever, the kind of information we’re sifting through is often complicated, complex, specialized, and requires expert historical and policy knowledge that pretty much none of us possess. Our beautiful capable brains are not evolved to manage this information overload, which is why we have neurological shortcuts (see Why Are We the Way We Are) like tribalism. We must accept that we are tribal, partisan, and have in-group bias, and then actively work against those instincts.
We must accept that we are tribal, partisan, and have in-group bias, and then actively work against those instincts.
Fine, I’m partisan. Now what?
Making reasoned sense of all this information requires every person to be knowledgeable and discerning, but most people are not knowledgeable and discerning. Therefore, we have to resort to trusting our representatives to be knowledgeable and discerning, but they are often not any better at it than we are. Especially because our elected officials must balance this information overload we have as citizens with the competing interest of keeping their jobs.
Humans have not yet evolved the skills to manage the overwhelming amount of information that we are inundated with every day. The evidence for this can be seen with every new report about social media, smart phones, phishing, dieting, prescription drugs, climate change, fossil fuels, national debt, immigration, global trade policy, etc. Few of us are experts in these things, and most of us are woefully ignorant about even the basics. So en masse, we ignore way more information than we consume. And we let our groups and group leaders filter it for us. It’s a time tested approach. Just ask religion (see Why Are We the Way We Are).
Changing the way we deal with all of this information starts with one step, one move, one person, one idea. If we as individuals start with ourselves, and commit to finding objectivity in our own interactions with society, we can elect representatives that do the same. We can reset the expectations we place on our elected officials. WE can fix this.
What is your evidence?
I want to be clear here. I’m not asking you or me or anyone else to leave our opinions or feelings behind. We are human, and we have our own way of seeing the world through our own unique lens of personal experience, cultural expectations, and spiritual beliefs. It is this unique personal view that makes you perfectly qualified to participate in representative government. You live here, you pay taxes, you are unique, and you should expect your representative government to support and protect YOUR life.
But how can we make sense of so much information? How do we make these informed decisions, how do we hold our elected officials to the highest standards of conduct and integrity, how do we make sure they are collecting and utilizing information to best represent the interests of We, the People?
Thinking scientifically takes a little practice, but it’s something we can all do and it starts with one question: What is your evidence?
We can use the tools of science to help us understand and parse the vast amounts of information we encounter; the information that we use to choose our representative government. And it’s going to take some practice. It might even be a little uncomfortable. We must ask ourselves and our elected leaders: What is your evidence for that?
Okay, so how do we do it?
- Ignore the group associations of the person making the claim. We simply cannot discount information just because it comes from an opposing viewpoint. WE CANNOT DISMISS INFORMATION SOLELY BECAUSE “THEY” SAID IT. (See Us vs Them)
- Demand evidence. Ask yourself and the claimant, “What is your evidence for that?” If there is no evidence to support the claim, then it simply doesn’t matter whether you “believe” it or like it or just want it to be true. Without evidence a claim is simply an opinion or an idea.
- Evaluate the evidence. Assuming there is evidence, how reliable is it? Is the evidence actually someone’s opinion? Where did it come from? Is it a reproducible scientific study? Do experts in that field support it? Is there consensus among experts that it’s a valid understanding or a reliable data set? Do field experts draw the same conclusions from the data or can other conclusions be drawn? Has it been tried before in history? What is the detailed rationale?
- Evaluating evidence is crucial to understanding information and avoiding partisanship. I’ll get into it more throughout the website.
- Accept. Sometimes what we want to be true, just isn’t true. But having a real understanding of information allows us to build better ideas and solutions to real problems.
When we’ve made the best possible attempt to gather objective data, when we’ve evaluated the veracity of that data, when we’ve followed the evidence to it’s logical conclusion, then we have to accept the results.
BUT…when new information presents itself, we have to be willing to draw new conclusions.
