Why Facts Don’t Change Our Minds
In a world filled with alternative facts, where individuals are often force fed (sometimes false) information, Elizabeth Kolbert wrote “Why Facts Don’t Change Our Minds” as a culmination of her research on the relation between strong feelings and deep understanding about issues. Her article articulates, and confirms, her belief that opinions are often formed with little to no factual backing, especially in today’s society, which proves to be a problem in a society filled with political agendas. Kolbert’s argument follows a convenient structure that moves from argument to argument, building on and drawing from previous arguments to further main idea. She explains her main ideas, chronologically as follows: she …show more content…
While being naturally inclined towards coöperation, people have a tendency to influence the opinions of others. Kolbert explains this ability to influence other through explaining the concept of a community of knowledge, where one person can influence (the influencer) another's opinions and so on, even if the influencer's opinions were based on false facts, or as commonly dubbed today, alternative facts. Kolbert explains the commonality of the influencer often not having sound information through a Yale study done by graduate students, and the book “The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone” (Riverhead) by Steven Sloman and Philip Fernbach. The Yale study and the novel both illustrate what Sloman and Fernbach have dubbed the “illusion of explanatory depth” (Solman/Fernbach) which supports the idea that people think they know more than they think they do. In the Yale experiment, a researcher asks a subject their understanding on something, then the subject is asked to write detailed explanations of how this something works, and after, they are asked to rate their understanding again. The illusion of explanatory depth explains the phenomena that accompany
In a world filled with alternative facts, where individuals are often force fed (sometimes false) information, Elizabeth Kolbert wrote “Why Facts Don’t Change Our Minds” as a culmination of her research on the relation between strong feelings and deep understanding about issues. Her article articulates, and confirms, her belief that opinions are often formed with little to no factual backing, especially in today’s society, which proves to be a problem in a society filled with political agendas. Kolbert’s argument follows a convenient structure that moves from argument to argument, building on and drawing from previous arguments to further main idea. She explains her main ideas, chronologically as follows: she …show more content…
While being naturally inclined towards coöperation, people have a tendency to influence the opinions of others. Kolbert explains this ability to influence other through explaining the concept of a community of knowledge, where one person can influence (the influencer) another's opinions and so on, even if the influencer's opinions were based on false facts, or as commonly dubbed today, alternative facts. Kolbert explains the commonality of the influencer often not having sound information through a Yale study done by graduate students, and the book “The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone” (Riverhead) by Steven Sloman and Philip Fernbach. The Yale study and the novel both illustrate what Sloman and Fernbach have dubbed the “illusion of explanatory depth” (Solman/Fernbach) which supports the idea that people think they know more than they think they do. In the Yale experiment, a researcher asks a subject their understanding on something, then the subject is asked to write detailed explanations of how this something works, and after, they are asked to rate their understanding again. The illusion of explanatory depth explains the phenomena that accompany