PRIDE in non-critical thinking

[dawgmom]

Oh, lordy. Now I understand why pseudo-science spreads like a virus on the internet, and why Snopes is an essential source. Some people not only don't CARE about whether they're spreading falsehoods or half-truths, but they actually become combative about it and think they have some sort of moral high ground. This example isn't about woo, but it helps me to understand why it flourishes on the net.

I actually witnessed this exchange on another board here. Someone posted that thing that's been making the rounds about giftcards and stores that are closing. Another poster responded to tell them that Snopes has debunked it. Here was the original poster's response:

I'll leave the fact-checking to people like you, who, apparently, have the time.
I just posted it, people can do their own research. Like you did.

Now, I'm of to do my Christmas shopping.

Someone responded (appropriately, I think): "You're right of course. Checking facts is such a pesky waste of time."

And here was the response they received:

How pathetic.......
to feel compelled to slam someone because they don't have the time, nor the inclination, to assure that an innocent post/email is indeed factual. I mean, is this earth-shattering, no. Just an FYI. Do your own god damned research.

Jesus fucking christ.....trite, petty shit.

How on earth does one battle that kind of willful ignorance, and indeed, PRIDE in not taking the time to check the facts?

[trotsky]

1. Hehe.

Like I told you before, you should visit the Health Scare forum more often.

Some people not only don't CARE about whether they're spreading falsehoods or half-truths, but they actually become combative about it and think they have some sort of moral high ground.

You've just described 96% of the threads in there. :D

I think it all comes down to confirmation bias. Most people WANT to believe certain things are true, and so any data that comes along to support their belief is embraced - and never fact-checked. Anyone who does bring facts to the table is summarily slammed as (pick one): 1) part of the conspiracy, 2) an ignorant dupe, 3) a "skeptic" who doesn't have an open mind. A great defense mechanism - it protects the false belief brilliantly.

[dawgmom]

4. Noooooooo!!!!

I poked my head in there this week on your advice. The stupid made my eyes cross. I could feel my blood pressure rising. ;)

[lizerdbits]

2. OK, so here's a break down

I posted a scare email.

You posted something indicating I'm wrong.

I post a condescending, belittling response since I didn't want to be wrong.

That's what it sounds like to me anyway. ("I" and "You" are obviously not the two of us, it just made writing it easier.)

[dawgmom]

3. Why not just say "oops!"

Thanks. (And sorry for posting it the way I did, without names/identifiers. I just didn't want it to be perceived as a "call-out" by the moderators.)

Yes, I do think there's some truth in what you said, but I guess I don't understand that kind of thinking either. I mean, if I make a mistake, or post something incorrect, I appreciate it when somebody corrects me. Why the "who cares" attitude about posting mis-information? I certainly don't get angry at the person who corrects me, and try to make them out to be the bad guy in the situation.

As I said, I just don't understand those kind of thought processes.

[lizerdbits]

5. Agreed

If I'm wrong I'd rather be corrected. We're all wrong sometimes, it doesn't mean we're all stupid. Stupid is refusing to admit it and resorting to acting like you're 15 as this person seems to have done. And being proud of it.

[nickgutierrez]

6. Really, who gives a shit about the truth, anyway?

:banghead:

[mr blur]

7. Doesn't this explain the Sarah Palin phenomenon?

"I didn't know that Africa isn't a country, either, so she's just regular non-elitist folks like me and that's someone I'd be happy to see in the White House. We haven't got time for facts!"?

[YankeyMCC]

8. And the crowd defends the ignorant position

a few months ago I got into a discussion with my uncle who suggested oil was a actually a 'renewable' resource, that it was generated deep in the Earth. :eyes:

This shocked me since I always thought he was a reasonably intelligent person. Anyway, I of course disputed this woo-woo idea (politely and I think calmly)

But everyone else in the room were upset with me for questioning his idea and not just leaving it alone!

[TZ]

9. They also tend to get very defensive when you fact check them

and fall back on the FREE SPEECH mantra and twist it into "why are you trying to shut me up? I think you are hiding something"!
I think its part pride..nobody wants to look like an idiot so when people jump on something thats clearly wrong what is someone going to say "Oh you are right. I'm an naive fool who should have taken the time to check before I posted this without thinking it through". People tend not to like looking like fools. I think this bs about not fact checking is a defensive mechanism for keeping one's ego intact really.

[trotsky]

10. Oh yeah, forgot about that angle.

Cripes if that card hasn't been played to death in the Health Scare Lounge too.