13

Are Objectivists Mutants

Posted by Zenphamy 8 years, 11 months ago to Philosophy
109 comments | Share | Flag

Although the linked article discusses the topic of critical thinking from the viewpoint of science based medicine vs. 'complementary and alternative medicine, I find a great deal of similarity to my thoughts concerning being an Objectivist in life as well as a member of this site, lately. From childhood till now as an senior, I've often thought that there was just something different going on in my mind than that in others' minds. I've found a very few in my life that think much like I do, but they are rare.

From the Article: All emphasis added.
"There is a huge disconnect between what science-based medicine calls evidence and what alternative medicine and the general public call evidence. They are using the same word, but speaking a different language, making communication next to impossible."

"“Alternative medicine,” along with “complementary and alternative medicine” (CAM) and “integrative medicine,” is not a meaningful scientific term, but a marketing term created to lend respectability to things that we used to call by less respectable names like quackery, folk medicine, and fringe medicine." (Add Like Politics, Conservatism, Progressivism, Religion, etc. etc.)

"Today we have more sources of information, but our minds still work the old way. We prefer stories to studies, anecdotes to analyses. We see patterns where none exist. We jump to false conclusions based on insufficient evidence. Emotions trump facts. If your neighbor had a bad experience with a Toyota, you’re likely to remember his story and not buy a Toyota even if Consumer Reports says it’s the most reliable brand. That isn’t logical, but humans are not Vulcans. When we act illogically, we’re just doing what evolution has equipped us to do. It takes a lot of education and discipline to overcome our natural tendencies, and not everyone can do it."

"Ray Hyman is a psychologist and one of the founders of modern skepticism. When I asked him why some people become skeptics and others don’t, he said he thinks skeptics are mutants: something has evolved in our brains to facilitate critical thinking."

So, are we mutants? If we are, will we succeed into the future and become a successful branch of humanity? Or will we continue helping our non-mutated cousins not face extinction, even if inadvertently?


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 3.
  • Posted by strugatsky 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I would never discount the scientific method, or real medical advances. My point was that the article was not only biased, but written by a person with a rather closed mind, as I think that I have demonstrated in my comment above. Closed mindedness can just as well hide under the umbrella of science as it can under the umbrella of religion.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Why would it be considered an insult? Every evolutionary improvement has developed from a mutant, when considered to the norm at the time.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Sarah, you may well be right, but from life's experience I've known and worked with a lot of people that simply could never learn. Some might think it's a sad condition, but I think it's real.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I think that's a good example, though not necessarily scientifically sound. I doubt in our society of everyone's equal and nurture counts more than accident of birth, such studies will ever be performed, or at least published.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I don't say you're wrong, but the scientific method and critical thinking applied to medicine in particular has led to an increase of the life expectancy and quality from something like 40 or 50 around 1900 to the mid 70's today. Could it do better? Sure, there's no endeavor of humans that can't do better, but it's a cost/benefit analysis that also includes profit in a free market.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    But the question still hangs, is it in the best interest of 'mutant' Objectivists to save non-mutant humans or is it in their best interest to let them fall to the side as the remainder of the evolution of life has done?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Good example Mama, but it can work both ways. I was prescribed Statins a few years ago and within a couple of weeks started noticing severe aches in fingers and toes along with some numbing. About 3 weeks later, I started experiencing several opportunistic infections that I'd had no previous problems with--a severe bronchial infection, some boil like infections, a wart on the back of my neck that arose to the size of a pencil eraser in just 2 weeks, and increases in numbing and aches progressing up the fingers and toes. The only thing that had changed was the Statin, so I began researching and found that though rare, Statins in some can cause myopathy, neuropathy, and diminishment of the immune system. I went back to the same Dr., told him what was happening and what I'd found--he ridiculed me and told me I didn't know what I was talking about.

    I left him, quit the Statins and found another Dr. The new Dr. knew of the rare results, did some tests and concluded that I was correct. I still have some residual numbness in my toes, but I've had no other related problems. That Dr. asked me how I'd figured out my problem and I answered that through a Masters and a year in a PhD program, that I'd probably done as much research as he had--just in a different area of science.

    The silliest situation I've encountered was being sent to a dietician for advise only to find that she was damn near a 300 pounder and maybe 5'4".

    I'm in no way critical of your point, but I find that just an education and a profession does not automatically confer or imply the ability of 'critical thinking'. It's a lot of work.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by strugatsky 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I wouldn't go that far. The human brain is a form of neural network that cannot always be precisely deterministic. We are not binary computers, and can often make correct decisions (or at least more often than not) based on the totality of information without a re-traceable path. We call it intuition. When properly used, it is capable of better decision-making than the best computers. Of course, one must always understand its limitations, but that applies to everything.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 8 years, 11 months ago
    The term "mutant" has a negative connotation, but it doesn't have to be that way. All of the positive aspects of evolution regarding life required mutations that better enabled the "mutants" to survive.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Mamaemma 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It is frustrating! Sometimes I can laugh, and that's a good way to handle it! Are you considering being a veterinarian?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ CBJ 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    RE: “If a treatment currently considered to be alternative were adequately tested and proven to work, it would be incorporated into mainstream medical practice and could no longer be considered “alternative.” It would become just “medicine.” So-called “alternative” medicine can be defined as medicine that isn’t supported by good enough evidence to earn it a place in mainstream medicine.”

    Welcome to the Argument from Authority, in this case “establishment” medical wisdom dispensed by government force. “Mainstream” medicine is nothing more than theories and treatments approved by medical licensing boards and the FDA. Doctors who challenge this conventional wisdom can lose their licenses and be forced out of business. Look how many decades it took for the “mainstream” explanation of the cause of peptic ulcers to be overturned.
    http://www.slate.com/blogs/thewrongst...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_M...

    It’s typical of this kind of propaganda to label any non-mainstream medical theory as “questionable” or “quackery”. While there is plenty of actual quackery to go around, there is also plenty of legitimate science that has not gained acceptance by those who wield the power in the medical community. If we had a free market in health care articles such as this one would not matter, but until that day arrives it’s best to be as skeptical about “conventional” medicine as we are about “alternative” medicine. In both cases, health care consumers need to shop carefully.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    j; the author admits the same on herbal medicine being the origin of much of our pharmaceuticals. I can't speak for others on GG, but for myself it's not dismissive of partial evidence, but absolutely dismissive of the leaps to conclusions without sufficient, reproducible evidence. It does seem that there's much of that going on in the sciences today, not to mention social and psychological and economic studies. I think there is a lot of difference between so called studies and science experiments.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    EE's rock!! That's an interesting response,"Who are you to determine what is believable and what is not?"

    I like your answer.

    A mind truly is a terrible thing to waste.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    you aren't a mutant. You are a careful thinker and you integrate the knowledge you collect-which is work. You put in the work, as objectiviely as you can. and I hope you balance it with pursuits of happiness! :)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 8 years, 11 months ago
    I think, opposed to "feel" takes effort and time. Elevating one's consciousness in acquiring objective knowledge is not for the laze about or the person driven by emotion. Mutant? that's sci-fi BS and I'll bet you dollars to donuts that Mr. Hyman is a big fan. Thanks for the post, Zen. :)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I would say this is partly people recognizing something different about Oists. After all, that introspection (thinking before saying) doesn't tend to make one the life of the party-therefore, often, not always, you witness the introverted nature of Oists. Nice to see your comments in here OA, as usual. :)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by philosophercat 8 years, 11 months ago
    Objectivists are born tabula rasa, with no innate ideas so no room for the content or method of thought to be imposed on the brain by using it rationally. You are stuck with Hyman's ill-informed use of a scientific term. As Ayn Rand said, "Man is a being of volitional consciousness" you have to choose to use it and how you use it. Objectivists just know and care a little bit more about their use of their brains. That's why we like the feel of using reason. Hyman probably thinks sesame bagels are mutants of plain bagels.. .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 8 years, 11 months ago
    Hello Zenphamy,
    Once one has conceived and accepted that “a posteriori” is superior to “a priori” much of the world seems mad.
    Mutant..some would say, awakened, enlightened... Nature--- nurture...
    Whatever. Badge of honor.
    O.A.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ SarahMontalbano 8 years, 11 months ago
    I'm proud to have learned the skill of critical thinking. I don't think that how we think is inborn or predetermined. It's a skill like any other, but it's one of the more difficult ones to learn.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ SarahMontalbano 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Since my mother is a veterinarian she gets patients like this all the time and I get to hear the hilarity that ensues. I can only imagine how frustrating that is!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 8 years, 11 months ago
    Let's start with the word "alternative" as in Alternative Medicine. It means the difference between two or more incompatible things. Usually, the newer idea is considered the alternative. But is that bad? It's always good to be skeptical of something new, but the skepticism should not be so strong that it doesn't allow for innovation. Our history is filled with instances of new ideas and propositions that were held up because of a refusal to accept them even in the face of evidence to the contrary. Even the evidence was greeted skeptically.

    In addition, humans have imagination. Imagination is supreme in the arts. But it can be a deterrent to science. We as a race love stories, and often, the more imaginative the story, the more we tend to accept them. That is one reason why the majority of Homo Sapiens loses the sapiens part when told a good story as an explanation of what our senses tell us. The bible and religions are cases in point.

    If it's the Mutants who are the skeptics, they are also the imaginers. For they are the one who are willing to discard the usual for the new and prove the new to be better. The 20th century is filled with such examples, the greatest of which is probably the work of the patent clerk, Albert Einstein.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I don't know about that. If you make a mistake and own up to it you just go on, that is if you live in the private sector.
    As far as i can see civil servants never make mistakes individually, it is always someone else. But as always we can fit that claim, but as you and I know that never happens.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    how easy to go to google and type in " 'Definition of ' insert word. One can get the answer in a multitude of answers.

    Or open up your nearest Dictionary ...Not Fictionary. DDD - Dictionary.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo