established 1989
 |
Carl Sagan scientist, author, and revolutionary possessor of new perspectives... wrote the book The Demon Haunted World. I have greatly enjoyed his list of "baloney detectors" that are found on page 210. I believe you will find them amusing, and perhaps, thought provoking as well!
The Fine Art of Baloney Detection
“What skeptical thinking boils down to is
the means to construct and to understand, a reasoned argument and -
especially important - to recognize a fallacious or fraudulent argument.
The question is not whether we like the conclusion that emerges out of a
train of reasoning,
but whether the conclusion follows from the premise or starting point
and whether that premise is true.”
Among the tools he suggests:
-
Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the “facts.”
-
Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.
-
Arguments from authority carry little weight - “authorities” have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps it is better to say that in science there are no authorities; at most, there are experts.
-
Spin more than one hypothesis. If there's something to explained, think of all the different ways in which it could be explained. Then think of tests by which you might systematically disprove each of the alternative. What survives, the hypothesis that resists disproof in this Darwinian selection among “multiple working hypotheses,” has a much better chance of being the right answer than if you had simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.
-
Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it’s yours. It’s only a way station in the pursuit of knowledge. Ask yourself why you like the idea. Compare it fairly with the alternatives. See if you can find reasons for rejecting it. If you don’t, others will.
-
Quantify. If whatever it is you're explaining has some measure, some numerical quantity attached to it, you’ll be much better able to discriminate among competing hypotheses.
-
If there’s a chain of argument, every link in the chain must work (including the premise) - not just most of them.
-
Occam’s Razor. This convenient rule of thumb urges us when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well, to choose the simpler.
Good luck. Remember, everything in life is based on a hypothesis… it is best to be able to distinguish the real from the baloney!
740-548-6586
before 6:00 PM EST