In a very simple model of knowledge, we accept ideas — believe them — on the basis of good justification. The more the evidence and the better the reasoning, the more likely we are to believe a knowledge claim. Alas that such a fine idea should be flawed!
It would appear, instead, that attempts to counter misinformation often have exactly the opposite effect: the very attempt to debunk a myth may entrench it the more firmly in people’s minds. The Debunking Handbook, by John Cook and Stephan Lewandowsky, downloadable free on the website of Skeptical Science, treats some of the psychological factors of which communicators should be aware in trying to counter false information and the myths within which they are very often embedded. It identifies three major “backfire effects”: countering a myth involves talking about it and thus making it more familiar; providing an explanation that is overly complicated may make people reject it in favour of a simpler myth; counter-arguments that threaten people’s worldviews may strengthen their own views in resistance. I recommend highly this short, clear, free pamphlet. It adds some interesting complexity to a TOK treatment of the relationship between justification and belief.
Read more…
Did you like this? Share it:
I pass this on. Eileen
