http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/316/5827/996?etocIn a new paper two psychologists examine why there is a resistance to scientific knowledge among adults. Here is my quick summary of the paper:
From early childhood our intuitions often clash with reality and so science often appears counterintuitive and unnatural to us. That the Earth is spherical is something that is very counterintuitive to young children. We readily accept that the Earth is round, despite the fact that this claim is counterintuitive, because it is tacitly accepted by all of society. We don't critically examine such a claim; we just accept that it as true. Evolution, for example, is not tacitly accepted by all of society, and so we must examine evolution to find out whether it is true or not. However because most of us are not qualified to asses the claims of science we can not examine the truth directly. Because of this we do not look at the claim itself, but the source of the claim. If we trust the source we will likely believe the claim, however if we distrust the source then we will not believe the claim. If a person trusts his teachers, professors, and scientists he will believe that evolution is true (most people who believe in evolution can not even explain how natural selection works). On the other hand, if he trusts his creationist parents, preacher, or Kirk Cameron he will believe that evolution is false.
Science is not special, and the same process occurs with religious, moral, and political beliefs. Instead of critically examining the claims we either trust our intuitions or appeal to authority.
Related thread, lol.
http://www.evilbore.com/forum/index.php?topic=7390.0My comment from the thread:
Forgive me for knowing that human intuition is very limited and that one should not rely on it to find out what is actually true.
