"A new paper about to be published in the Journal of Communication questions the use of facts to add power to an argument, at least in the context of GM foods and carbon nanotubes. Once people did form an opinion they processed any new factual information in a biased manner. That is, they tended to re-interpret the information to fit in with their pre-existing ideas ..................The researchers don’t entirely dismiss the use of facts to add weight to an argument. It is circumstance-dependent. But it does raise the issue of how we often rely on the assumption that the 'facts will speak for themselves,' especially in the context of scientific debates where facts are often held up as supreme."
James N. Druckman and Toby Bolsen at Northwestern University are the researchers who did this study which is a very important study in my opinion. It raises the question, "Is a certain discovery worth making or a new study worth doing if the public wants to not believe in the new discovery?" The obvious answer is, "Of course." Think about computers, for example. I know older people today who still do not want to learn about them and use them, but millions of people all over the world do. Thank goodness for what computers have been able to do for the medical profession just to mention one example.
No, we just need to look for better ways to get people to understand and care about a particular issue. Dr. Ray Kurzweil and the Singularity is a good example of this. His thoughts and predictions are in the very early stages of recognition and acceptance, and some people will never want what he says is inevitable. Time will show us how the Singularity will play out. Meanwhile, here is a link to the article about Druckman and Bolsen's work for those of you who are thinking about how you could get more people to listen to you about your work and its importance.
http://technyou.edu.au/2010/09/facts-take-back-seat-in-science-controversy/
No comments:
Post a Comment