==>自然現象としてのカウンターナレッジ選好 (2009/08/26)

第3の要因: カウンターナレッジに飛びつく

The reason, suggest Jennifer Whitson of the University of Texas, Austin, and Adam Galinsky of Northwestern University, is that pattern perception compensates for feeling out of control in a sea of forces you do not comprehend. It balances the sense that life is random and restores the sense that you do understand what’s going on and might even be able to affect them. It can be more comforting to believe that a vast conspiracy explains, say, the stock market crash than to acknowledge that the financial system is beyond your comprehension, let alone control: conspiracy beliefs, write the scientists, give “causes and motives to events that are more rationally seen as accidents ... [in order to] bring the disturbing vagaries of reality under ... control.”

その理由は、AustinのUniversity of TexasのJennifer Whitsonと、Northwestern UniversityのAdam Galinskyによれば、理解できない力で制御不可能になったという感情を、パターン認識が埋め合わせていること。パターン認識は、生命はランダムだという感覚を均衡させ、何が起きているか理解し、その事態に自分が影響を及ぼせるという感覚を回復させる。株式市場の崩壊を巨大な陰謀論で説明する方が、金融システムが自分の理解を超えていると考えるよりも安心できる。陰謀論を信じれば事件の原因と動機が定まり、単なる偶発時と考えるよりも合理的だと思えるようになり、乱れて予測のつかない現実をコントロールのもとにおくことができる。
The human mind prefers to believe that mysterious, invisible forces are secretly at work rather than that the world is random. Whitson put it this way: “People see false patterns in all types of data, imagining trends in stock markets, seeing faces in static and detecting conspiracies between acquaintances. This suggests that lacking control leads to a visceral need for order, even imaginary order.”


[Sharon Begley: "Feeling Powerless? Do I Have a Conspiracy Theory for You" (2008/10/02) on News Week], [quoted in When seeing IS believing (2008/10/11)]
否定論を考えるNew Scientistの連載で、Debora MacKenzieも、この「コントロールの回復」:という魅力を、人が否定論に引きこまれる理由だと主張している。
Here's a hypothesis: denial is largely a product of the way normal people think. Most denialists are simply ordinary people doing what they believe is right. ... Whatever they are denying, denial movements have much in common with one another, not least the use of similar tactics. All set themselves up as courageous underdogs fighting a corrupt elite engaged in a conspiracy to suppress the truth or foist a malicious lie on ordinary people. This conspiracy is usually claimed to be promoting a sinister agenda: the nanny state, takeover of the world economy, government power over individuals, financial gain, atheism....

ひとつの仮説を提示しよう。否定論は普通の人の考え方から生み出される。大半の否定論者は普通の人々で、自分が信じているものが正しいと考えている。... 何を否定していても、否定運動は使っている戦術のみならず、多くの共通点を持っている。彼らはすべて自らを、真実を抑圧したり、悪意あるウソを人々に押しつけようとする陰謀に加担する腐敗したエリートたちに対して、勇敢に戦いを挑む弱者だとみなしている。陰謀は多くの場合、不吉な政策を推進するものだと主張される。たとえば、過剰福祉国家、世界経済の支配、政府による個人の支配、金融利益、無神論など。...

This common ground tells us a great deal about the underlying causes of denialism. The first thing to note is that denial finds its most fertile ground in areas where the science must be taken on trust. There is no denial of antibiotics, which visibly work. But there is denial of vaccines, which we are merely told will prevent diseases - diseases, moreover, which most of us have never seen, ironically because the vaccines work.

Similarly, global warming, evolution and the link between tobacco and cancer must be taken on trust, usually on the word of scientists, doctors and other technical experts who many non-scientists see as arrogant and alien.



[Debora MacKenzie:: "Living in denial: Why sensible people reject the truth " (2010/05/19) on New Scientist]

Many people see this as a threat to important aspects of their lives. In Texas last year, a member of a state committee who was trying to get creationism added to school science standards almost said as much when he proclaimed "somebody's got to stand up to experts".

It is this sense of loss of control that really matters. In such situations, many people prefer to reject expert evidence in favour of alternative explanations that promise to hand control back to them, even if those explanations are not supported by evidence.



All denialisms appear to be attempts like this to regain a sense of agency over uncaring nature: blaming autism on vaccines rather than an unknown natural cause, insisting that humans were made by divine plan, rejecting the idea that actions we thought were okay, such as smoking and burning coal, have turned out to be dangerous.

This is not necessarily malicious, or even explicitly anti-science. Indeed, the alternative explanations are usually portrayed as scientific. Nor is it willfully dishonest. It only requires people to think the way most people do: in terms of anecdote, emotion and cognitive short cuts. Denialist explanations may be couched in sciency language, but they rest on anecdotal evidence and the emotional appeal of regaining control.



[Debora MacKenzie:: "Living in denial: Why sensible people reject the truth " (2010/05/19) on New Scientist]


posted by Kumicit at 2010/06/13 23:54 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | ID: General | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする



コメント: [必須入力]