> "When policy is politically polarized, you need more facts," he said.

Mmmm... It seems in the world of politics, esp. populist politics, more facts don't bring better policies. They are simply ignored, or accused of being lies pushed by the ennemies.

> "We have all the facts on this we need. We don't need any more facts. In the land of truth, my friend, the man with one fact is the king."

-- Linton Barwick, In The Loop (2009)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdoN1LWGgfQ

▲

N_Lens 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

My friend was saying that we just need to show people the facts to change their minds. I showed him a pile of scientific studies indicating that it doesn't work. His response was "I still think it'll work"!

▲

prolly97 40 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

That's funny :) Though when presenting facts and studies, it's also worthwhile to think about how much of the world these studies are accurately able to explain. For physics this number is high. " For social sciences there's good reason to be skeptical. Even if (big if) a study is directionally replicable, the total proportion of the world, that can be accurately and consistently be explained isn't great.

"Economist X says there's relation R between variables P and Q" Meanwhile another economist might have found a different result.. or not have published a non-effect. Or have found the effect to be non-existent given confounders.

The danger is when/if people selectively choose studies, that just so happens to repeat what their ideology would dictate.

	▲	dansquizsoft 14 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> The danger is when/if people selectively choose studies This, in itself, assumes that all studies / papers are equally as good and methodologically sound, which is not a true assumption.

▲

baxtr an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I have looked into some of these studies and realized that it’s near impossible to change people’s minds.

Humans have a machinery reinforcing their world view. Contradicting observations and facts are usually ignored or interpreted such that it matches your already held opinion.

	▲	flutteringfool 22 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I don't think this is particularly strange when one thinks about the effect of ideology. It has a way of filtering any common reality different people have. I'm not sure how to move towards a common understanding without a larger sense of shared experience, but even then the same experience can have different interpretations. That being said, having shared experience can help, at least anecdotally, in being able to come to terms with wildly differing views. One example I have is with my brother. With the same event we had come away with a drastically different understanding. The facts between us all checked out, and we confirmed it many times. Yet the shared vocabulary gave us a way of acknowledging the others disagreement in the shared experience.

▲

RealityVoid an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Hillarious, to be honest. It still leaves me wondering... what _does_ work?

▲

N_Lens an hour ago | parent | next [-]

MDMA/Psychedelics on the carrot axis

Torment nexii on the stick axis.

▲

fhe an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

evolution -- ppl who refuse to acknowledge reality tend not to leave many offsprings. and if they do, maybe they are adhering to a more powerful reality afterall.

▲

weatherlite 39 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

That's realy inaccurate. If anything the more religious you are the more offsprings you have. Atheist societies are below replacement levels. What makes you think fact based thinking leads to more children making?

	▲	mkrecny 21 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		given the unknowability of reality - 'facts' in science are only hypotheses that have not yet been disproven by data - nobody knows why anything exists at all - a lot of weight has to be given to 'what works' - what things grind up against the machinery of reality and survive over the long term? there is a 'truth' to such things
	▲	drekipus 34 minutes ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Could it be that atheists are the ones who are ignoring reality?
	▲	twawwy 30 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[dead]

▲

miroljub 43 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

You cannot change people, you need to change people.

▲

NoMoreNicksLeft an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

What facts do you think can change my preferences? I'm sitting here telling you I want apple pie, and you're harping on about how "kale salads have all the vitamins you need!". We're talking at each other, because you failed to understand. This isn't about what you think the facts are, but about what I want to happen. I can accept those as facts and it wouldn't change anything.

	▲	lazyasciiart an hour ago \| parent [-]
		This feels unrelated to anything else being said, unless you’re arguing that literally no arguments feature a factually incorrect position.

▲

armchairhacker 18 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sometimes they are lies. Governments including Western ones have lied before (e.g. Tuskegee Syphillis), and academics have published flawed, misleading, or straight-up fabricated studies (e.g. “landmark” Alzheimer’s study).

But more often, the “fact” does not address the individual’s issues, and the individual may give a stupid counterargument (“…lie pushed by my enemies…”) but they have a legitimate one. In this case, I guarantee there are specific people who’ve been indisputably replaced by H1Bs, maybe clustered in specific reasons, and maybe specific fields. Telling these people “overall H1Bs create jobs” won’t convince them.

Like telling poor people “the economy is improving, inflation is only 0.x%”. Both may be true in general at the population level, but to the person you’re speaking to, they don’t matter; economic improvements can go to others while they suffer more.

	▲	dansquizsoft 15 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> But more often, the “fact” does not address the individual’s issues, I feel like this has been a big failing of one (left) side of politics in recent years. Quick to state 'facts' as arguments but those haven't landed as well as they have in the past (15 - 20+ years ago), for whatever reasons...

▲

throwup238 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Finally a The Thick of It reference in HN.

An AUS Utopia reference would probably be more fitting though.