I wish I didn’t have to go out of my way to say this, but the vast majority of people I’ve met in the skeptical community really aren’t callous, “data beats emotions” dickbags. It’s just a pain that some super visible skeptics are exactly that, and they are trash.
-
-
I guess I am in the dickbag camp. Emotions and sensationalism can skew a proper analysis and resulting conclusions. I’ll stick with the best available boring data to make a properly informed decision. By definition, critical thinking.
-
It is best to first hyper analyse things and be super critical in order to make a judgement. Before acting upon this judgement you need to look at the emotional side of the situation to do what is right. Data is accurate however emotions enable humans to do what is right.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I left active sci-comm a while ago because of people like that, but I was so glad that you and a few others don't fall into that robotic thinking. Thanks, Dr. Gorski, for being awesome.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Are you talking about Neil De Grasse Tyson's comments? I didn't take his comments as rational or skeptical. I took them as biased and uninformed, but that's partly my bias showing - I assumed he was a gun owner. He didn't compare US gun deaths with others, like EU, UK, NZ, Aus.
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.