Unnatural Acts Quotes

“The National Research Council (NRC) spent more than three years reviewing more than 500 scientific studies that had been conducted over a 20-year period and found “no conclusive and consistent evidence” that electromagnetic fields harm humans.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“The church teaches us that we can make God happy by being miserable ourselves.”—Robert Ingersoll”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“One of the problems with anecdotes is that they tend to be provided by the satisfied customers, not the unsatisfied or dead ones.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“I noted above that when I refer to an idea as unworthy of consideration (or words to that effect that might sound a bit harsher in context) I do not intend to cast aspersions on the intelligence or character of the one holding the unworthy belief. I must qualify that disclaimer. When I see or hear of anyone murdering strangers because they believe such acts please their god, I consider not only the idea but the one holding such an idea to be unworthy of any sympathetic consideration. How anyone could come up with the idea that an almighty being would be pleased by causing as much misery as possible escapes my imagination. Such a person also escapes my capacity for mercy.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“We must work hard at overcoming the natural tendency to see causal connections and other patterns where there are none by examining all the evidence, not just the data that support our gut feeling. Critical thinking, skepticism, and science did not evolve on the savannah millions of years ago. They are unnatural and go against the grain of those instincts that helped our species survive for hundreds of thousands of years.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“At the very least, one would hope that by becoming aware of the many ways our brain can trick us, we would arrive at the conclusion Bertrand Russell thought was a necessary consequence of the limits of knowledge: we should be less cocksure of our beliefs, hold them tentatively, and always be on guard against thinking our feeling of absolute certainty implies we’re right.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“This has the added negative effect of giving them the illusion of confidence. It is a hard lesson to accept, but the success of many people is due to luck, not knowledge. If a thousand people try a thousand different methods and one of them hits the jackpot, it is an illusion to think the winner necessarily had more knowledge or skill than the losers. If two psychics pick opposite winners in an athletic contest, one of them may appear to have more knowledge that the other, but the appearance is an illusion.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“Seventy-seven percent of Americans think it’s safer to talk on a hands-free phone than on a handheld phone. The empirical evidence shows otherwise. The evidence shows that the deficit in driving skill has nothing to do with holding or not holding the phone but with the distraction that comes from talking on the phone while driving. The problem is with the eyes, not the hands. The dangers of hands-free phone use while driving might be amplified by another illusion, the illusion of confidence, by deluding a driver into thinking that she can drive safely while talking on the phone as long as her hands are free. Despite your belief in your abilities to multitask, “the more attention-demanding things your brain does, the worse it does each one.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“In fact, there is good scientific evidence to support the notion that being really intelligent and knowledgeable can be a disadvantage to some thinkers because of the increased ability to come up with rationalizations in defense of a position one originally adopted for inadequate reasons. There are many reasons why smart people sometimes believe dumb things. The smarter one is, the easier it is to see patterns, fit data to a hypothesis, and draw inferences. The smarter one is, the easier it is to explain away strong evidence contrary to one’s beliefs. Also, smart people are often arrogant and incorrectly think that they cannot be deceived by others, the data, or themselves.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“About the only uncontested effect of cognitive training is that training in a specific area improves performance in that area but does not transfer to other cognitive tasks. Even learning to memorize long lists of numbers doesn’t help one learn to memorize long lists of letters. “Practice improves specific skills, not general abilities.” So, put down that Sudoku, unless your goal is to get better at doing Sudoku or you just like doing it. If you’re trying to exercise your brain, you’d do better to take a brisk walk.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“Without awareness of common pitfalls such as confirmation bias, positive-outcome bias, and subjective validation, a person trained in logic and fallacy detection is easily deceived into thinking that he or she has acquired invincible armor against assaults of unreason. Expressions like post hoc ergo propter hoc and false cause, should be informed by knowledge of evolution and how the brain works to jump to conclusions about causal connections.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“One of the first things I learned when I began teaching courses in critical thinking in 1974 was that those of us trained in philosophy needed to supplement our philosophical training with the study of various cognitive, perceptual, and affective biases or illusions. We had a lot to learn from the social scientists if we were to teach our students to think critically. Identifying fallacies, learning to test deductive arguments for validity, and the like would not be enough.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“It is not that hard to understand why most of us believe strongly in things that are palpably not true. We have a natural propensity to see causal connections where there are none and our beliefs are constantly reinforced by people we like and trust. For many people, one vivid and emotionally salient experience validated by a single neighbor or shopkeeper trumps a thousand randomized, double-blind, controlled scientific experiments.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“More than half of all Americans believe we can heal each other by psychic or spiritual means. About one-third believe in telepathy and about one-fourth believe in clairvoyance. More than one-third believe houses can be haunted. More than forty percent accept demonic possession as real. Twenty to twenty-five percent believe that the dead communicate with us. Only about forty percent of Americans accept evolution and about fifty percent believe a god created humans in their present form. Only one-third of Americans accept the Big Bang theory. Virtually all scientists accept both evolution and the Big Bang as facts. The average citizen is not impressed.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“It’s understandable that we would believe many things as children that our parents and others in our society have passed on to us as if they were absolute truths, even though they may be nothing but traditional prejudices. But why do we cling to what Mencken called the “palpably false” after we’re old enough to think for ourselves?”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“Societies progress by the free assertion of differing proposals, followed by criticism, followed by the genuine possibility of change in the light of criticism....The whole approach of an authoritarian society is anti-rational. A rational and scientific approach requires societies to be open and pluralistic.”—Karl Popper  ”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“Some scientists have actually done this and guess what? They haven’t found a significant correlation between phases of the Moon and hospital admissions in the emergency room. Nor have researchers found a significant correlation between any phase of the Moon and any of the following: the homicide rate, traffic accidents, crisis calls to police or fire stations, domestic violence, births of babies, suicides, major disasters, casino payout rates, assassinations, kidnappings, aggression by professional hockey players, or violence in prisons. That the facts go against a common belief is not so exceptional. But that people are reluctant to accept facts presented to them indicates just how unnatural critical thinking is.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“Psychologists call this natural tendency to be selective in both our memory and our perception confirmation bias. People with strong convictions often take confirmation bias to a level known as motivated reasoning. The more evidence one presents against their belief, the more motivated they become to refute the evidence and defend their conviction.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“Global warming and evolution would be controversial if the majority of scientists in those respective fields—climate science and biology—were arguing about whether there is global warming or whether evolution of species had occurred. This is obviously not the case, nor is it the case with the Apollo Moon landing, the safety of vaccines, HIV as the cause of AIDS, and the danger of cigarette smoking. These items do not become controversial just because you can find one person or many persons who disagree with the consensus. The fact that there is a consensus means that the issue is not controversial.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“There’s very little that Idi Amin and Newt Gingrich have in common, but they both used words to shape how people think about things without regard for the truth.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“What makes it reasonable to accept anthropogenic climate change is not the fact that 95% of all climate scientists agree. It’s why they agree. Even non-experts can figure out that the experts agree: a survey of all peer-reviewed abstracts on the subject ‘global climate change’ published between 1993 and 2003 showed that not a single paper rejected the position that global warming is largely caused by human behavior. Climate scientists are not arguing about whether global warming is happening. They’re not arguing about whether humans are largely responsible for global warming. They may be arguing about what action to take. In that case, they should be considered as advisors by those who make policy. Unfortunately, many of those who make policy seem to be ignoring the climate scientists in favor of beliefs pushed by gas, oil, and other corporate interests. Those interests should be considered, but not to the exclusion of the science experts. A”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“Stare decisis, or the custom of many legal systems that requires respect for judicial precedents, should not be confused with the irrelevant appeal to tradition. Judicial decisions provide rules and guidance for future courts. The custom of using earlier judicial decisions to guide later ones provides stability to the legal system. When deemed appropriate, judges will overturn or modify precedents, but it is generally agreed that this should be done only if there are compelling reasons to do so. It is possible, however, for someone to reject sound reasons for overturning a precedent by claiming that the precedent shouldn’t be overturned only because it is a precedent. In that case, the one arguing for keeping the precedent would be committing the irrelevant appeal to tradition.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“Actually, 50 million people can be wrong. Think of all the millions of people who believed the light from the stars came in through holes in a cosmic sky dome. How many people once believed in bloodletting as a way to get rid of disease? It would be good if 50 million people believed in the effectiveness of some medical treatment because the scientific evidence provides strong support for its effectiveness. It is not so good if one person believes a treatment is effective only because 50 million other people believe it is. The”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“Even so, sometimes the easiest way to get someone to dislike an argument is to get them to dislike the arguer. That’s why so many people use the Hitler card, the liberal card, the socialist card, the Tea Party card, or the atheist card. They know that by associating an opponent’s position with someone or some group their audience will consider evil, they can persuade many to reject their opponent’s arguments without even considering the evidence presented in those arguments. This also saves the lazy person from having to prove that his position is the better of the two.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“Attacking a person, rather than the person’s position or argument, is usually easier as well as psychologically more satisfying to those who divide the world into two classes of people—those who agree with them and are therefore good and right, and those who disagree with them and are therefore evil and wrong.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“Critical thinking is unnatural. Following our feelings and emotions is more likely to motivate our behavior than well-reasoned arguments. We are as likely to be persuaded by irrelevant appeals as by relevant ones, and are more likely to produce slanted, selective, biased, one-sided, incomplete arguments than well-reasoned, fair-minded, reflective, accurate, complete arguments. We often prefer attacks on a person’s motives to attacks on a person’s reasons. We make assumptions that aren’t warranted, create straw man arguments out of fragments of opposing viewpoints, offer up false dilemmas, and draw conclusions hastily. It’s amazing we’ve made so much progress!”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“There are a few rules we can follow. We should be skeptical of single studies. That should be the case even if we have every reason to trust the lab. Until the work is replicated under a variety of conditions, we should suspend judgment. We should be skeptical of studies that have no controls. We should not treat observational studies as proving causal connections, no matter how strong the correlations that are discovered. We should trust consensus science, even though the majority is not always right.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“There are a few rules we can follow. We should be skeptical of single studies. That should be the case even if we have every reason to trust the lab. Until the work is replicated under a variety of conditions, we should suspend judgment. We should be skeptical of studies that have no controls. We should not treat observational studies as proving causal connections, no matter how strong the correlations that are discovered. We should trust consensus science, even though the majority is not always right. Scientists will”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“Most of us would not consider visiting a scientist’s laboratory to investigate whether he or she was following the procedures and methods described in published papers. In fact, scientific journals do not routinely send out investigative teams to investigate the honesty and integrity of scientists whose papers are accepted for publication. Peer review does not include a review of laboratories. The process is based on trust. It is assumed that scientists will not cheat, though it is known that occasionally a small number of scientists in any field will. Catching cheaters happens occasionally, but it does not usually happen by journals sending out investigative teams to laboratories. Once”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!

“Politicians play on our fears to manipulate us.”
― Robert Carroll, Unnatural Acts: Critical Thinking, Skepticism, and Science Exposed!