westprog
Philosopher
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2006
- Messages
- 8,928
So why, when victory is so obvious, will it make little difference?
The answer is that it is not a matter of evaluating evidence, sifting facts and arriving at a likely conclusion. The CT guys are not people with a different viewpoint or opinion. They have a different way of thinking. They trust their intuition about such things as falling buildings far more than they trust what somebody tells them. They want it to be impossible that arabs with boxcutters can take over an aircraft, so it is impossible.
What appears to be a rational argument never is. It may seem that they are presenting evidence, but in their eyes it is something quite different. The evidence is wholly subservient to the theory. Evidence that doesn't fit the theory is bad evidence.
The victory has been obvious from day one. Rational argument will never convince them. Is there a way to do it?
The answer is that it is not a matter of evaluating evidence, sifting facts and arriving at a likely conclusion. The CT guys are not people with a different viewpoint or opinion. They have a different way of thinking. They trust their intuition about such things as falling buildings far more than they trust what somebody tells them. They want it to be impossible that arabs with boxcutters can take over an aircraft, so it is impossible.
What appears to be a rational argument never is. It may seem that they are presenting evidence, but in their eyes it is something quite different. The evidence is wholly subservient to the theory. Evidence that doesn't fit the theory is bad evidence.
The victory has been obvious from day one. Rational argument will never convince them. Is there a way to do it?