Psychology of Denial

Heated discussions on a hot topic.
User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1313
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: USA

Psychology of Denial

Post by Cadmusteeth » Fri Nov 18, 2016 5:51 pm

I found this article the other day and thought it was interesting.
http://qz.com/813747/how-to-talk-to-a-c ... of-denial/

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19672
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Nov 18, 2016 5:57 pm

My quick review did not notice a review of FUD nor the operation of Merchants of Doubt. Maybe thats part of "the status quo" but too many people don't "think" as much as react....and we react to messages...and when those messages are created and put out their by Big Fossil Interests.... its easy to cloud what thinking might be possible.

ie---Exxon Exec's should be put in jail==on false into to stockholders if nothing else.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 35076
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: prostrate spurge
Location: Transcona

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Gord » Sat Nov 19, 2016 3:25 am

...the “system justification” theory, which argues that people are subconsciously impelled to defend and reaffirm the status quo. As conservative white men have benefited by the current socio-economic structure, they are most therefore more likely than women or men of other backgrounds to be predisposed to preserving it....

...the “identity protective cognition” theory, which, according to a study led by Dan M. Kahan at Yale Law School, is when individuals selectively accept or dismiss risks in order to preserve a socio-economic structure beneficial to them....
Explains the US election results. :heh:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19672
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Nov 19, 2016 12:53 pm

......all fine and good.........but to me this only explains "the emotions." If hoomans are thinking beings, then one should recognize the emotions and then switch to brain mode when thinking. Evidently, not many people do that.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Walter
Poster
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:01 pm

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Walter » Sat Nov 19, 2016 2:26 pm

With use of the term denier, you are already making a judgment call, and a not so cute one at that.

You can call me a nutrition denier for ignoring 60 years of fear mongering about animal fat on the part of government “scientists”. The term makes no sense, but you can call me that if you think it will help.

Climate scientists are the same as their nutrition brethren. Their goal, as government and university scientists, is to frighten you about carbon dioxide and thereby alter your behavior to their liking. Combining the two, you should be cooking plant food on a wood stove. I assume you are doing just that. Am I right?

If you believe that nutrition and climate scientists are different species, there is nothing I can say to make you change your mind. They are, in fact, the same species. My sisters believe they are from different planets, nutrition being science fraud (love the chicken wings and pig meat), but climate science being full of integrity, honesty and humility. No questions asked.

We now teach elementary school children that the human species is as powerful, if not more so, than the rock which hit the planet 65 million years ago. That is religion, pure and simple.

As an analytical chemist, I deal with orders of magnitude (perspective) on a daily basis. Think of it this way. The cockroach will still be laughing millions of years after humans have gone extinct. And the planet will be cruising along just fine, as it always has been, ignoring the space rocks and bipedal species which hit it every now and then.

No Fear.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19672
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Nov 19, 2016 2:38 pm

The difference is re diet you are affecting yourself and not the survival of mankind.

Address issues directly...not via some dopey construct.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
robinson
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1053
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 1:55 am
Custom Title: Sometimes 0 is real cool hand

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by robinson » Sat Nov 19, 2016 3:54 pm

Walter wrote:You can call me a nutrition denier for ignoring 60 years of fear mongering about animal fat on the part of government “scientists”. The term makes no sense, but you can call me that if you think it will help.
It only helps their small fragile ego because it places you in the "bad people" camp, those who question authority, distrust government experts, and maybe think for yourself.

Nice analogy btw. Thanks.
"If you tell people the truth, make them laugh. Otherwise they will kill you"
-- Oscar Wilde

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19672
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Nov 19, 2016 4:02 pm

Making up false arguments? Ha, ha. NO: the issue is you Deniers have NO SCIENCE to back you up. You have misapplied and misconstrued facts....but the SCIENCE is in. What do you call outliers who disagree with 97% of qualified experts except ........... some version of wrong.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1136
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Hex » Sat Nov 19, 2016 4:38 pm

Walter wrote:With use of the term denier, you are already making a judgment call, and a not so cute one at that.

You can call me a nutrition denier for ignoring 60 years of fear mongering about animal fat on the part of government “scientists”. The term makes no sense, but you can call me that if you think it will help.

Climate scientists are the same as their nutrition brethren. Their goal, as government and university scientists, is to frighten you about carbon dioxide and thereby alter your behavior to their liking. Combining the two, you should be cooking plant food on a wood stove. I assume you are doing just that. Am I right?

If you believe that nutrition and climate scientists are different species, there is nothing I can say to make you change your mind. They are, in fact, the same species. My sisters believe they are from different planets, nutrition being science fraud (love the chicken wings and pig meat), but climate science being full of integrity, honesty and humility. No questions asked.

We now teach elementary school children that the human species is as powerful, if not more so, than the rock which hit the planet 65 million years ago. That is religion, pure and simple.

As an analytical chemist, I deal with orders of magnitude (perspective) on a daily basis. Think of it this way. The cockroach will still be laughing millions of years after humans have gone extinct. And the planet will be cruising along just fine, as it always has been, ignoring the space rocks and bipedal species which hit it every now and then.

No Fear.
*Takes note of of the posting name of Walter*

Man, what a stream of hypocritical nonsense.
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


Walter
Poster
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:01 pm

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Walter » Sat Nov 19, 2016 5:05 pm

I was with the National Cancer Institute in the 1970s when the saccharine scare took place. It was another beautiful example of government scientists using fear to alter behavior to their liking. It was also a wonderful example of post World War II government science in action. Nutrition and climate have, quite admirably, carried on this great tradition.

When I questioned the extrapolation of near toxic mouse doses of saccharine to near zero doses in humans, I was told “We are not going to rock the boat”.

In the 1950s through the 1970s, when Congress (full of scientists, of course) finally put its stamp of approval on the animal fat scare, there was no internet where skeptics of the lipid/heart hypothesis could express their views. Any concern about cutting the saturated fat in our diets was immediately ignored and scientists expressing those concerns were given outlier status. The brilliant idea of tying these outliers to the slaughter of European Jews had not yet entered the minds of journalists, politicians and members of the mainstream scientific community.

In a very funny way, the internet, the development of which started long ago by those damn inventors of the transistor at Bell Labs in 1947 (real, honest to goodness science and technology by the way), has turned into a big pain in the ass for the new wave of 20th and 21st Century fear mongers. Climate scientists now have to contend with geologists, physicists, chemists, mathematicians and meteorologists who are skeptical of the fear being promoted by the scientific community. Decades ago, it was wonderful being a government sponsored fear monger.

So, if you choose, you can put your faith in that government sponsored scientific community the same way my wife puts her faith in the Roman Catholic Church.

The difference? My wife’s religion is voluntary. The government’s religions are not.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19672
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Nov 19, 2016 5:14 pm

Again..... "one" difference is that all those examples were disputed by significant authorities.

No counterforce exists re AGW.

Again.... in your examples there were alternative theories.............you have none to counter AGW.

But......regardless........EACH issue stands on its own. You can organize it so that every single fact we agree on today was once disputed. You gonna tell your family physician that Johnny's 102 temp is ok because you'll put a frog on his stomach tonight?

Your position is totally specious. With any background in science at all............... you should be ashamed.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
robinson
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1053
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 1:55 am
Custom Title: Sometimes 0 is real cool hand

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by robinson » Sat Nov 19, 2016 6:22 pm

Walter wrote:So, if you choose, you can put your faith in that government sponsored scientific community the same way my wife puts her faith in the Roman Catholic Church.
Nice to see another skeptic posting. While it's often easy to see others "denial" at work, it's almost impossible to see it in ones own views.
"If you tell people the truth, make them laugh. Otherwise they will kill you"
-- Oscar Wilde

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 35076
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: prostrate spurge
Location: Transcona

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Gord » Sun Nov 20, 2016 3:21 am

robinson wrote:
Walter wrote:So, if you choose, you can put your faith in that government sponsored scientific community the same way my wife puts her faith in the Roman Catholic Church.
Nice to see another skeptic posting. While it's often easy to see others "denial" at work, it's almost impossible to see it in ones own views.
Oh good, I was worried you were unaware of it.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

Walter
Poster
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:01 pm

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Walter » Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:41 pm

Most people miss an important lesson in economics. You will not find this being taught in the public schools, colleges and universities. University of Chicago? Maybe.

In the 1950s and 60s, vegetarians, or plant food advocates, knew perfectly well that they had no chance of success in the free market. Imagine the vegetarian restaurant opening down the street from the steak and seafood place by the Chesapeake Bay, where I grew up. The steak place could easily offer salads to those who did not mind watching others tear apart steamed blue crabs while stuffing their faces with cooked cow muscle. If one was sensitive to that sight, they would have to stay home.

Since risking their own money was out of the question (relatives were not about to invest $50,000 in a plant food restaurant), they took the only step they could. They went to the government, which is where all advocates go when the market rejects their ideas. There, they convinced politicians that eating animal fat was dangerous and that a low fat / fat free industry was needed for the peasants. The rest is history. And that industry is still going strong, thanks to the mainstream scientific and medical communities, the media and wonderful organizations like the American Diabetes and Heart associations.

And do not discount the entertainment industry. Watch a situation comedy or movie and someone will likely mention the unhealthy bacon and eggs another character is eating. It is really fun since it is all based on science fraud. To be politically correct, maybe I should say confirmation bias.

The economics lesson is the same for those who think we should go back in time when we lived in harmony with the planet. My sister experienced that wonderful world while living in a small village in Nepal for three years. I want so badly to cook with wood while defecating in a hole in the ground. Those people really have no idea how lucky they are to be free of the hardships we face on a daily basis. We in the West can at least sleep better at night knowing that we are giving them warmer winters.

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1136
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Hex » Mon Nov 21, 2016 8:24 pm

Walter wrote:Most people miss an important lesson in economics. You will not find this being taught in the public schools, colleges and universities. University of Chicago? Maybe.

In the 1950s and 60s, vegetarians, or plant food advocates, knew perfectly well that they had no chance of success in the free market. Imagine the vegetarian restaurant opening down the street from the steak and seafood place by the Chesapeake Bay, where I grew up. The steak place could easily offer salads to those who did not mind watching others tear apart steamed blue crabs while stuffing their faces with cooked cow muscle. If one was sensitive to that sight, they would have to stay home.

Since risking their own money was out of the question (relatives were not about to invest $50,000 in a plant food restaurant), they took the only step they could. They went to the government, which is where all advocates go when the market rejects their ideas. There, they convinced politicians that eating animal fat was dangerous and that a low fat / fat free industry was needed for the peasants. The rest is history. And that industry is still going strong, thanks to the mainstream scientific and medical communities, the media and wonderful organizations like the American Diabetes and Heart associations.

And do not discount the entertainment industry. Watch a situation comedy or movie and someone will likely mention the unhealthy bacon and eggs another character is eating. It is really fun since it is all based on science fraud. To be politically correct, maybe I should say confirmation bias.

The economics lesson is the same for those who think we should go back in time when we lived in harmony with the planet. My sister experienced that wonderful world while living in a small village in Nepal for three years. I want so badly to cook with wood while defecating in a hole in the ground. Those people really have no idea how lucky they are to be free of the hardships we face on a daily basis. We in the West can at least sleep better at night knowing that we are giving them warmer winters.
If only we had the technology to record peoples thought process'. I'd binge watch Walters feed.
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19672
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Nov 21, 2016 10:51 pm

I'm sure you would binge, but doubt you could watch.

xxxxxxxxxxxxx What the????????????????????????

OH....I see. A senior moment: I said binge, but was thinking "purge."

.................. Nevermind ....................
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1136
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Hex » Mon Nov 21, 2016 11:05 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:I'm sure you would binge, but doubt you could watch.

xxxxxxxxxxxxx What the????????????????????????

OH....I see. A senior moment: I said binge, but was thinking "purge."

.................. Nevermind ....................
Nah, watching would be fascinating, now being in his mind... well now we are talking purging.
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


Ken Fabos
Poster
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:54 pm

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Ken Fabos » Mon Nov 21, 2016 11:22 pm

I can't take what Walter says seriously. I think science can and has revealed real links between diet and health and it should make it's way into dietary advice and labelling of foods. I think science can and has revealed real links between CO2 emissions and climate change and the cumulative externalised costs of the consequences of excessive fossil fuel burning should be incorporated into the economics of energy we use now rather than left as a burden for future generations. I want better technologies that give us enduring prosperity rather than short lived prosperity that leave a burden of enduring costs and I remain optimistic that the technologies that can do so are achievable.

It won't be taking the mainstream expert scientific advice seriously, as problematic as that may be, that will impoverish our futures, it's dismissing and ignoring it that is the more certain road to ruin.

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 35076
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: prostrate spurge
Location: Transcona

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Gord » Tue Nov 22, 2016 6:31 am

Plus, I used to cook over a wood fire and defecate in a hole. It wasn't so bad. I find it difficult to believe that anyone who can call those things "hardships" is likely to have ever actually suffered an actual hardship. Perhaps part of the struggle against coming to terms with bad things that require us to look into changing how we do stuff is our own insufferable softness.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1136
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Hex » Tue Nov 22, 2016 6:54 am

Ken Fabos wrote:It won't be taking the mainstream expert scientific advice seriously, as problematic as that may be, that will impoverish our futures, it's dismissing and ignoring it that is the more certain road to ruin.
All despite the fact of humanities quick rise in technology, medicine... hell everything that makes your life easier and better is all due to the age of enlightenment that ushered in the scientific method.

Keep griping with your inane theories but happily benefit off the backs you like to slam. :roll:
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


Ken Fabos
Poster
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:54 pm

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Ken Fabos » Tue Nov 22, 2016 10:18 am

Hex wrote:
Ken Fabos wrote:It won't be taking the mainstream expert scientific advice seriously, as problematic as that may be, that will impoverish our futures, it's dismissing and ignoring it that is the more certain road to ruin.
All despite the fact of humanities quick rise in technology, medicine... hell everything that makes your life easier and better is all due to the age of enlightenment that ushered in the scientific method.

Keep griping with your inane theories but happily benefit off the backs you like to slam. :roll:
Was that agreeing with me or aimed at me?

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 35076
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: prostrate spurge
Location: Transcona

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Gord » Tue Nov 22, 2016 10:40 am

Ken Fabos wrote:
Hex wrote:
Ken Fabos wrote:It won't be taking the mainstream expert scientific advice seriously, as problematic as that may be, that will impoverish our futures, it's dismissing and ignoring it that is the more certain road to ruin.
All despite the fact of humanities quick rise in technology, medicine... hell everything that makes your life easier and better is all due to the age of enlightenment that ushered in the scientific method.

Keep griping with your inane theories but happily benefit off the backs you like to slam. :roll:
Was that agreeing with me or aimed at me?
I thought he misread you and that it was aimed at you, but maybe he just quoted you and then directed his statement at someone else. :pardon:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1136
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Hex » Tue Nov 22, 2016 5:56 pm

Gord wrote:
Ken Fabos wrote:
Hex wrote:
Ken Fabos wrote:It won't be taking the mainstream expert scientific advice seriously, as problematic as that may be, that will impoverish our futures, it's dismissing and ignoring it that is the more certain road to ruin.
All despite the fact of humanities quick rise in technology, medicine... hell everything that makes your life easier and better is all due to the age of enlightenment that ushered in the scientific method.

Keep griping with your inane theories but happily benefit off the backs you like to slam. :roll:
Was that agreeing with me or aimed at me?
I thought he misread you and that it was aimed at you, but maybe he just quoted you and then directed his statement at someone else. :pardon:
Yes Ken it was aimed at you and I apologize. Teaches me for posting so early in the morning, in my tired mind I read, "I won't be taking the mainstream expert scientific advice seriously, as problematic as that may be, that will impoverish our futures, it's dismissing and ignoring it that is the more certain road to ruin." My mind blanked out a "t" and gave an entirely different context to your statement. Careless on my part.
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


Ken Fabos
Poster
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:54 pm

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Ken Fabos » Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:11 pm

Hex - I thought maybe it was something like that - I have done similar myself on occasions. And I sometimes think I should say what I mean much more directly and simply.

Understanding that there are serious unaccounted for consequences from using resources that have played such a central role in increasing our prosperity is problematic for us all, even if prosperity can be achieved or at least sustained by other means; how much easier for us if emissions at large scale were the non-issue the climate science deniers like to believe?

I'm not religious but I think with the climate problem we face significant tests not only of personal and individual responsibility but of the capabilities of foresight and planning, innovation and management as well as ethics of our institutions. Failure can have near biblical consequences. Of all the essential institutions of our modern societies, those of science are ones that I think do best at passing that that test; there is more open eyed honesty and truth there than most religions can manage, for all those are often claimed to be core values.

For the decades of clear warnings about the dangers of using fossil fuels to excess that understanding the workings of our climate system has given us climate science and scientists should be held in esteem and heeded. It hasn't been them that lets us down.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19672
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:24 pm

Ken Fabos wrote:I'm not religious but I think with the climate problem we face significant tests not only of personal and individual responsibility but of the capabilities of foresight and planning, innovation and management as well as ethics of our institutions.
"Think Globally but act locally" might sum that up? I've always disagreed with that notion. What individuals can do all summed up amounts to practically nill===>other than who we vote into office who actually have the power and ability to allocate resources to affect such issues. Sadly...too many of our elected leaders have been bought and paid for by Big Fossil.
Ken Fabos wrote:Failure can have near biblical consequences.
Let me FTFY: "Failure IS HAVING/WILL HAVE EVEN GREATER biblical consequences...if by biblical you mean the end of mankind.

Further: I kinda blame the climate scientists. They are just giving the facts without the emotional component so that the average Joe can tell how important the Facts are. Its how we get people like Lance who think AGW is true, but can be adapted to. In essence: Humans on Earth have already hit the iceberg........right now, we are arguing about why the boat is listing. Tempus fugit.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1136
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Hex » Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:48 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Further: I kinda blame the climate scientists. They are just giving the facts without the emotional component so that the average Joe can tell how important the Facts are. Its how we get people like Lance who think AGW is true, but can be adapted to. In essence: Humans on Earth have already hit the iceberg........right now, we are arguing about why the boat is listing. Tempus fugit.
This is a catch 22. A known problem for a very long time is the inability of scientists to be able to convey their research in such a way that would be easily understood by the masses. But, when we do trot out a spokesperson like Bill Nye or Neil Degrasse Tyson, then the idiots jam up the airwaves and internet shouting about how can a theoretical physicist talk about things like climate change. An idiotic argument for sure, but it muddies the waters enough for the average person to not know what to think.

This has been compounded by the U.S. media establishment doing decades of "fair and balanced" journalism rather than objective journalism. This is horridly lazy journalism as it appears to the viewer that the argument is 50/50 not 99.999/.001.
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


Ken Fabos
Poster
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:54 pm

Re: Psychology of Denial

Post by Ken Fabos » Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:50 am

I don't blame the scientists even if I could wish they were better able to communicate to the wider public; although, as Hex notes about the media oulets that are the primary 'informers' within our societies, lazy journalism is rife. Those informers with the greatest reach appear to have a very cavalier attitude to true balance, and the greater truth and accuracy of science based knowledge. Public policy discourse/debate is not conducted with the same rules of engagement as science and whilst science communications is held - rightly - to very high standards for accuracy and honesty the same is not true for the critics of strong climate action. Should the advocates of strong action - other than the scientists who are bound by professional codes of conduct - be similarly bound? We see examples of more serious, but not necessarily most likely, climate outcomes strongly criticised for 'alarmism', yet risk assessment is about both how much harm is possible as well as how likely.

I mentioned religion because I think there are strong grounds for religious people to take the climate consequences into consideration when assessing the ethics of their actions and of the kind of advocacy religious leaders engage in. As some in fact do - but many very influential ones do not. Even if it can be seen as purely coincidental that sinners wouldn't want to be hung upside down for eternity in a vat of crude oil or that coal gives off noxious brimstone vapors reminiscent of the mythical christian hell as it burns, or that the heat it adds to the world at large far exceeds that given by it's direct burning and has the potential to the world incrementally more hellish, or the ethical temptations embodied in these fuels - of great but not necessarily enduring prosperity and power beyond all prior imagination including making possible great machines of war for smiting enemies - can induce willing and wilfull blindness to the fact that it's a deal that comes with a catch. That is the full, enduring and irreversible consequences of their excessive use. (What was that bit again? - You mean about the world getting more hellish? All the navvies with all the shovels in the world couldn't dig up and burn enough to notice... - Not that bit - the bit about great machines of war for smiting enemies!)

I think that too many people, religious and otherwise, willingly acknowledge and approve of that prosperity and power but refuse to acknowledge the full costs and consequences - and maintain wishful thinking and illusions of endless economic growth and technology forever able to outpace those consequences. Scientists have professional standards and obligations with respect to their communications and people in positions of trust and responsibilty have legal obligations; religious leaders and politicians both seem to operate within a zone of immunity from legal accountability.