Over at Contrary Brin David has posted on the subject of disputation arenas. As I understand it a disuptation arena is where you can go to discuss issues in a sane, rational manner. That’s the important distinction, sane and rational.
Brin does point out a problem with this idea, the fact we tend to go with what our friends think, and avidly deny what our enemies think. Our need to be right affects our attempts at working out how the world works, affects our discussions, and makes it harder to reach agreement.
The dispute between creationists and darwinists (I’m a darwinist in case you’re wondering) is a good example of this. Creationists are convinced they have to be right, and cannot entertain any contradiction. Darwinists on the other hand will entertain objections, but the creationists have yet to provide any that have any worth.
In contrast the dispute between skeptics and cryptozoologists regarding the sasquatch is a matter of two pundits shrieking past each other, because neither will concede any valid point the other has. The skeptic adamantly refuses to investigate any evidence the cryptozoologist provides, while the cryptozoologist insists on equating the sasquatch with such things as the yowie of Australia and the chupacabra of Latin America.
An example of how the skeptic’s delusion works can be found in the insistence that the subject of the Patterson/Gimlin film (1967) has to be a man in some sort of ape suit, despite the fact no reliable evidence pointing in that direction has been uncovered pointing to that conclusion. This 42 years after the film came to the attention of the world.
In addition skeptics have conflated cryptozoology with paranormal matters, stubbornly ignoring the fact unidentified animals are part of the natural world and can be researched using common zoological research methods.
The result of all this delusional thinking is the demonisation of the thinking of others. Nancy Pelosi’s recent claim that the Republicans are hiring people to bring swastikas to town hall meetings on health care reform is one example. I do not doubt that some people have brought swastikas to the town halls. What I doubt is that the Republican party is sponsoring it, or that the swastikas are being used to demonstrate their political allegiance. As far as I know people could be bringing swastikas to the town halls as a comment on the health care proposals themselves, in effect saying that said proposals are statist, much as Nazism was a statist ideology.
There are other examples of how our delusions can impact our ability to learn how the world works and accept what we’ve learned. In every case our refusal to admit we are wrong, when the evidence shows that we are wrong, makes it that much harder to reach working answers to our numerous problems.
It comes down to this: so long as we refuse to address beliefs and our delusions we will not reach working solutions to our problems. Admitting we can be wrong, and that we can be wrong on any matter, is a step towards wisdom. Let’s make that step.
