# The Paradox of Accepting Selective Truths in Our World
Written on
Understanding Selective Acceptance of Truths
I find it deeply intriguing how some individuals can readily acknowledge one evident truth while entirely dismissing another equally apparent truth. My fascination primarily revolves around the notion that truth exists independently, and our beliefs about it hold little significance.
To illustrate this, let’s consider climate change and the Covid-19 pandemic.
There are many who correctly assert that environmental decline poses a serious threat to our future, yet at the same time, they may overlook the ongoing challenges presented by the pandemic. This duality of thought is quite perplexing.
Evident Indicators of Change
We are confronted with clear signs indicating that climate change is occurring at an alarming rate, and similarly, there are unmistakable indications that the pandemic is far from resolved. How do individuals justify prioritizing one truth over another?
A considerable amount of scientific and empirical data has accumulated, demonstrating that both our planet and we as individuals are in substantial peril. Equally robust evidence supports the notion that Covid-19 was, and continues to be, a significant public health concern.
Beliefs and Evidence in Conflict
It appears that belief plays a significant role in the case of Covid-19. When I share my perspective, I often encounter individuals who assert that their experts and their data contradict mine, suggesting that I must be mistaken. The issue here is that none have yet provided verifiable evidence to substantiate their claims against mine.
This scenario is mirrored in discussions about climate change, where critics also fail to present credible evidence that it isn’t a pressing issue, yet they remain adamant in their views.
Media Influence on Perception
I suspect that media narratives contribute significantly to this phenomenon. The portrayal of Covid-19 as being "over" and the minimization of climate change concerns is incessantly reinforced, creating significant barriers to understanding.
How can one acknowledge the reality of climate change while simultaneously denying the seriousness of Covid-19?
The Evidence Presented by Jessica Wildfire
I invite you to consider the comprehensive body of evidence compiled by Jessica Wildfire regarding Covid-19. This information should, in theory, address any queries you might have. However, I assert that many who have firmly established their positions tend to resist re-evaluating their stance, even when presented with contrary evidence.
A notable example includes a study from The Cochrane Library, which claimed that masks were ineffective. Cochrane later issued an apology for the publication, but not before it influenced a wide audience, many of whom accepted it without question. One researcher, who previously provided accurate assessments of the situation, publicly expressed regret for misleading his audience regarding masks but has not retracted his reference to the Cochrane review.
Understanding Hypotheses and Evidence
When forming a hypothesis about a subject such as Covid-19, it serves as a starting point for further investigation. This hypothesis can be confirmed or refuted through ongoing research and evidence. However, if one merely asserts their initial idea as fact without pursuing further inquiry, the likelihood of being proven wrong increases significantly.
The issue with broadly dismissing Covid-19 is that many do so without any supporting evidence.
Base Rate Fallacy and Its Implications
There exists a concept known as base rate fallacy, where individuals ignore relevant statistical information in favor of what they incorrectly perceive as pertinent. This often arises from an irrational belief that certain statistics do not apply to their situation, despite their relevance.
This brings us back to the fundamental question: how can one thoroughly investigate and present evidence for one truth while completely neglecting that process for another?
Engaging in a Dialogue
I anticipate some may push back on this topic, which is perfectly acceptable. I genuinely wish to understand your thought processes, how you arrived at your conclusions, and whether you possess any evidence to support your stance.
I’ve shared my perspective; now, can you share yours?