Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Science writer Chris Mooney finally succeeds in terrifying creationists

arroba Email

Chris who?, you ask? This guy.

He claimed to have done so here, but his claims previously flopped because they violate basic rules of common sense:

That is, if someone wants us to know that a (frequently claimed) 98% similarity between the guy fixing a computer and the chimp throwing poop proves something, I’d say it sure does. It proves that genes are only a tiny part of the story of inheritance. Seems we got a long ways to go to understand that.

Later, someone ripped his theme at Salon:, fronting the Jeremy England hype-fest (this time, the schtick is origin of life).

If you never heard of any of that stuff before, be glad. But Mooney has hit the screen again with grander plans: To modify human behaviour:

The next energy revolution won’t be in wind or solar. It will be in our brains.

The new research suggests that in making energy choices, people take into account much more than simple economic costs. Instead, they follow their peers; cling to habits; believe and act upon energy related “myths” (like the idea that it will take more energy to heat your house up again in the morning if you lower the thermostat all night); and respond to subtle, even subliminal cues.

In short, they are humans, warts and all, with a large array of flaws and foibles. “The view of most human cognition and human motivation that comes out of traditional economics is limited,” says Columbia University psychologist Elke Weber, who is consulting with the Navy on energy use. “It’s not to say that people can’t make rational decisions — but they’re not the only processes, and not the only motivations.”

So we need government to make decisions for us, like it was a Marine sergeant.

In that case, the only solution is to have much less government.  Just not paying vast pensions for civil servants would be a good thing in itself.

Science writers won’t likely lose the pom poms any time soon. So we had better.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Rvb8 when those running government are moral and just, then sure, but when run by immoral corrupt individuals, with insane philosophies, nothing we as individuals can do will compare. See for instance: http://www.numberofabortions.com/ Talk about sick, perverted and disgusting. Look at that level of slaughter. Nothing in the past compares. As the current powers that be with their lunatic ideas and insane philosophies spread, twist, distort and corrupt young minds, and confuse and weasel their way into public thought, we are almost guaranteed to see suffering and destruction on a massive scale. humbled
I would suggest News that by a mild glance at numbers, and using very basic statistics, that individuals are woefully in arrears when it comes to good rational decision making, in comparison to any government. 7 billion people making decisions each day; multiple decisions indeed. Around 192 governments making far fewer decisions daily. It is a statistical impossibility that any government can make more stupid decisions than you or any individual. You could argue that bad govt decisions effect more people adversely, but again I would suggest poor parenting is a greater evil. These decisions would be made by poor individual parents, or religious leaders, or persons in power. No! Individuals are generally quite dim, and without leadership wollow. As Hobbes noted, even bad government is prefferrable to no government. Without government News, where exactly do you think we would be? rvb8
rhampton7, perhaps that is what he is saying, but depressingly often, people who talk that way mean that the government should just make us do stuff. The problem is, government records for correct decision-making are often worse. A random assortment of Toronto homeowners and renters can greatly raise property values, just as a public housing administration can decrease it. I have seen this happen myself for too many decades to doubt it. Check Toronto vs. Detroit, once a twin city of Toronto. News
Sounds like he's saying that Rational choice theory is a woefully incomplete model of human decision making. No kidding. In their life, the average person will make many decisions that are not the most "cost efficient," and more than a few will be irrational. That's why we're humans and not computers. rhampton7
OT: drcraigvideos has a new animated video up on youtube The Moral Argument - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxiAikEk2vU Sam Harris says Craig is “The one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheists.” http://www.dennyburk.com/william-lane-craig-putting-the-fear-of-god-into-atheists/ bornagain77

Leave a Reply