Skip to main content

The Evidence and the Fool


What is the meaning of “no amount of evidence will ever persuade a fool”?

This statement has a purpose for those unconvinced or persuaded by evidence. You give the most perfect data or perfect reasoning about a topic and the recipient remains unconvinced. The unwritten implication is that he/she then must be a fool.

Therefore, the statement is used to establish this: “If you accept no evidence, you must be a fool.”

The inability by others (i.e. you, me, et al.) to persuade even very intelligent people has been rampant over all of time, in science, politics, philosophy, religion, even in war. The nifty little aphorism in this question allows us to indirectly call them fools. Second hand insults, as it were. Pretty neat!

For example, Democrats think of Republicans as fools because they are unpersuaded by (their) evidence.  And vice-versa. In times past, Lutherans thought of Catholics in the same way – using the word “heretic.” And vice-versa. New science is often promoted by fools, according to established science. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Behavioral Science and Problem-Solving

I.                                       I.                 Introduction.                Concerning our general behavior, it’s high about time we all had some understanding of how we operate on ourselves, and it is just as important how we are operated on by others. This is the wheelhouse of behavioral sciences. It is a vast subject. It touches our lives constantly. It’s influence is pervasive and can be so subtle we never notice it. Behavioral sciences profoundly affect our ability and success at problem-solving, from the elementary level to highly complex wicked problems. This is discussed in Section IV. We begin with the basics of behavioral sciences, Section II, and then through the lens of multiple categories and examples, Section III. II.     ...

The Lemming Instinct

  In certain vital domains, a pervasive mediocrity among practitioners can stifle genuine advancement. When the intellectual output of a field is predominantly average, it inevitably produces research of corresponding quality. Nevertheless, some of these ideas, by sheer chance or perhaps through effective dissemination, will inevitably gain traction. A significant number of scholars and researchers will gravitate towards these trends, contributing to and propagating further work along these established lines. Such a trajectory allows an initially flawed concept to ascend to the status of mainstream orthodoxy. However, over an extended period, these prevailing ideas invariably fail to withstand rigorous scrutiny; they are ultimately and conclusively disproven. The disheartening pattern then reveals itself: rather than genuine progress, an equally unvalidated or incorrect idea often supplants the discredited one, swiftly establishing its own dominance. This cycle perpetuates, ensurin...

THE ORIGINS OF IMPOSSIBLE PROBLEMS

The Origins of Impossible Problems Introduction. Impossible problems have always been a part of the landscape of human thought. They arise from various sources, often rooted in cognitive, logical, or structural limitations. Some problems are truly unsolvable due to fundamental constraints, while others only appear impossible because of human limitations in understanding, reasoning, or approach. In many situations, we make difficult problems impossible because of our limitations, psychological and otherwise. It is a curious thought problem to consider what sort of limitations AI will reveal when we give it truly difficult problems to solve. We must hope that we humans have not transferred our complete reliance and dependence to machine-learning tools beforehand. Below are key sources of seemingly impossible problems, along with examples and a few references to philosophical and scientific thought. Impossible Problems . To explore impossible problems, we must consider our systems fo...