I'm reading Misbelief, by social psychologist Daniel Ariely.* As bizarre conspiracy theories blew up on the Internet during the Covid-19 pandemic, many of them placed Ariely at the center of the global plot by Bill Gates, George Soros and the Illuminati to manufacture a fake pandemic and fake vaccines so they could inject people with microchips, damage their brains by making them wear masks to cut off the oxygen supply to the brain, and impose a dictatorial one world government. Or something like that.
Ariely sets out to explain how people come to fervently hold such insane beliefs. He relies rather to facilely on those notorious social science experiments in which a small number of U.S. college students are subjected to weirdly structured situations, which then get generalized to all humans under circumstances which may superficially resemble the experimental conditions. Most of the time, attempts to replicate these fail. However, these are not the only grist for his mill and the broad story he tells is credible.
Essentially, the cognitive apparatus we inherit from the Pleistocene savanna doesn't work properly in the modern age. In fact it hasn't worked well ever since the neolithic revolution, as you will know if you've been reading the Bible along with me. Powerful elites and greedy tricksters have been manipulating people's beliefs for as long as we've had he written record to know about it, and people have been fooling themselves just as eagerly. But the problem has just gotten worse as the social world becomes more complicated, technology becomes more powerful, and the human impact on the planet threatens catastrophe. Acquiring the basic scientific knowledge and critical thinking skills to maintain a strong grasp on reality in the present environment is the privilege of a minority.
So, in coming posts, I'll go into a few specifics of how the cerebral cortex can lead us astray, and what, if anything, we can do about it.
*Ironically -- I suppose that's the word since he specializes in the study of dishonesty -- Ariely has been accused of scientific fraud. I acknowledge this because a reader may have heard of it. One case appears to be simply an inadvertent inaccurate presentation of a statistical analysis, that didn't really affect the conclusions. (That happened to me once, I just published a correction.) Another was the old story of attaching his name to a paper a senior author, completely unwitting that the post docs had fudged the data. The third is a rather murky story about some insurance data that the company claimed, years after the fact, that it had not in fact provided. In any case none of this should affect our evaluation of the book.