Hi nemo,
Why do you think it is that folks are so intransigent about their theories?
You cannot argue a libertarian out of their libertarianism or a liberal out of their liberalism. A climate sceptic will never admit that the chart of global temperatures is rising and has been for a hundred years even when you put it under their nose. A christian fundamentalist is never going to submit to Darwin's yoke or admit that nature isn't explicitly benevolent. It doesn't matter what set of competing facts you bring to the table. Scientists had to put up with a hundred years of pretending the sun orbits the earth in order to accommodate a religious orthodoxy which wouldn't permit the truth.
Are brains simply set up to be inflexible in the philosophical process? Is it because so much depends upon a framework that we don't dare let them bend?
We'd rather contort reality than admit that our theories about reality are wrong. We'll smirk contemptuously or retreat into sullen resentment waiting for an opportunity for revenge rather than open our minds to a contradictory philosophy. The whole world economy can sink into oblivion as a result of excessive risk-taking by banks, and if you are pro-bank you will blame everyone upon the planet except the banker for the ills they have created. There can be no sign of inflation in the economy, yet a person who predicted it will under no circumstances admit that this is so. They will say - well it is on its way, or they will say, the existing data aren't reliable, or they will find some eccentric with a new yardstick, or whatever.
They will never say - absolutely never say - you know, my theory was a mistake and the facts have shown it. Here's to a new truth. Here's a fork in my path of discovery and wisdom to pootle along.
Odd, that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Global_Temperature_Anomaly_1880-2010_%28Fig.A%29.gif
| 