But they're blind to all domains of evolutionary novelty, where no history of trial & error has accrued. Aren't GMOs novel?
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Fair enough, but isn't the judgement that GMOs represent the possibility of ruin the evidence-based claim under examination?
-
We're don't assume that ALL novelty holds the possibility of ruin. GMOs do, but are we intuitively disposed to think this?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I follow you, but the risk of harm from a gun is the thing to learn that makes that possible. You could miss that with GMO.
-
Contrast this with sky-diving. Affect heuristic makes it feel ruinously unsafe, which is (wisely?) mitigated by extra detail
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Yeah, I think 'food tampering' would be the operant intuition at play, but hard to imagine an ancestral parallel to GMOs.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"they profess to be evidence insensitive": we need a lot more systematic measurement of evidence insensitivity.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.