CarlShulman comments on Undiscriminating Skepticism - Less Wrong

97 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 14 March 2010 11:23PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (1329)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: simplicio 15 March 2010 05:57:42AM 4 points [-]

Ignorance of bad information can be a good thing.

True. In that respect I think part of the problem might also be the Science News Cycle as it applies to genetics. The geneticists know what they mean by "a gene for X" - merely a shorthand, that the presence of the gene affects the expression of X along with umpteen other factors. But inevitably the news media report a "gene for intelligence" as though the gene was a switch to turn intelligence on or off. Probably that type of thing has undermined any & all innatist ideas.

Comment author: CarlShulman 15 March 2010 10:08:13AM *  2 points [-]

That's primarily an issue in the titles (often set by editors). The body of the text usually has the standard litany of basic caveats.