Applied Skepticism: When have you gotten through to someone?

[Eilonnwy]

A recent article posted on Boston.com talks about how facts don't have the power to change people's minds. Which, granted, many of us experience on a daily here and in our lives, especially if we're not only atheist, but skeptics.

However, despite the fact that what we do can feel useless, we do get through to people, as rare it may be. So I thought it would be fun to describe a time when you convinced someone to let go of a deeply held, but ultimately wrong, belief. Doesn't have to be religious in nature, hence it's in the general forum. Just something to lighten discussion and think of a time when all that arguing and frustration paid off. I'll give an example.

I was watching Jeopardy with my mom one day, it's an American TV game show where clues are given and you answer in the form of a question. One clue had to do with a skunk and part of the clue said, (and I'm paraphrasing) "despite what many people think, tomato juice does not remove the smell". My mother answered skunk, but then added, "That's not true, tomato juice works, I've used it."

I remember thinking about the Mythbuster's episode where they showed that it kinda sort of worked, but not really. Plus, her anecdata is not really convincing, since I know she then washes them with soap after, so maybe the soap really removes the smell? I was tempted to argue the point but I let it go. I was, however, a little shocked that she just assumed Jeopardy was wrong. My reaction would be, not to assume it was right, but look it up and confirm for myself.

Anyway, fast forward. You know where this is going, right? My dog got sprayed by a skunk. It was late at night, my mom was really upset, she had a bad day, and now the dog had gotten sprayed. She was also upset because she only had one can of tomato juice and was debating waiting until the morning, seeing if she had enough and do it tonight, or going out to a store now to buy more. In any case, she was pissed she had to give the dog a bath. It was like 11pm at night. I tried to suggest that soap will probably be okay, but she insisted, "No, I need tomato juice".

I decided to look up skunk removal remedies, some sites said tomato juice worked, but I dug deeper and found that the best method is a homemade mixture of baking soda, peroxide, and dish soap diluted in water. I also found that the reason people think tomato juice works is because of olfactory fatigue, basically they get tired of the skunk smell and with the introduction of the strong tomato smell, it basically covers up the odor but doesn't really get rid of it. However, the homemade mixture breaks down the skunk smell chemically, and if you use the tomato juice remedy and meet someone else not suffering from olfactory fatigue, they will still smell the skunk.

I took a chance and pulled my mom aside and said, "I looked it up online, I found that tomato juice just covers up the smell, but the best method is to chemically break it down with baking soda, peroxide and detergent, which I know we have in the house." Interested, she looked at the site that explained the measurements and proceeded to give the dog a bath.

I went to bed (because, late) and when I saw her the next day I asked her how it worked. She said it worked really well. I talked to her about olfactory fatigue and tomato juice, and she seemed to accept that explanation. Ultimately, she was happy to know about the new remedy because she always has those three things in the house anyway for potential future skunk mishaps.

So basically, I was able to take advantage of a situation where the usual mistaken remedy wasn't readily available, provide her with a better one, and now she knows the best way to remove skunk smell and understands more about what the old remedy does. After so many times when I try to explain things skeptically to my family, they often ignore, but for once I got through and it was a satisfying experience.

[Jaysyn]

---

A recent article posted on Boston.com talks about how facts don't have the power to change people's minds. Which, granted, many of us experience on a daily here and in our lives, especially if we're not only atheist, but skeptics.

However, despite the fact that what we do can feel useless, we do get through to people, as rare it may be. So I thought it would be fun to describe a time when you convinced someone to let go of a deeply held, but ultimately wrong, belief. Doesn't have to be religious in nature, hence it's in the general forum. Just something to lighten discussion and think of a time when all that arguing and frustration paid off. I'll give an example.

I was watching Jeopardy with my mom one day, it's an American TV game show where clues are given and you answer in the form of a question. One clue had to do with a skunk and part of the clue said, (and I'm paraphrasing) "despite what many people think, tomato juice does not remove the smell". My mother answered skunk, but then added, "That's not true, tomato juice works, I've used it."

I remember thinking about the Mythbuster's episode where they showed that it kinda sort of worked, but not really. Plus, her anecdata is not really convincing, since I know she then washes them with soap after, so maybe the soap really removes the smell? I was tempted to argue the point but I let it go. I was, however, a little shocked that she just assumed Jeopardy was wrong. My reaction would be, not to assume it was right, but look it up and confirm for myself.

Anyway, fast forward. You know where this is going, right? My dog got sprayed by a skunk. It was late at night, my mom was really upset, she had a bad day, and now the dog had gotten sprayed. She was also upset because she only had one can of tomato juice and was debating waiting until the morning, seeing if she had enough and do it tonight, or going out to a store now to buy more. In any case, she was pissed she had to give the dog a bath. It was like 11pm at night. I tried to suggest that soap will probably be okay, but she insisted, "No, I need tomato juice".

I decided to look up skunk removal remedies, some sites said tomato juice worked, but I dug deeper and found that the best method is a homemade mixture of baking soda, peroxide, and dish soap diluted in water. I also found that the reason people think tomato juice works is because of olfactory fatigue, basically they get tired of the skunk smell and with the introduction of the strong tomato smell, it basically covers up the odor but doesn't really get rid of it. However, the homemade mixture breaks down the skunk smell chemically, and if you use the tomato juice remedy and meet someone else not suffering from olfactory fatigue, they will still smell the skunk.

I took a chance and pulled my mom aside and said, "I looked it up online, I found that tomato juice just covers up the smell, but the best method is to chemically break it down with baking soda, peroxide and detergent, which I know we have in the house." Interested, she looked at the site that explained the measurements and proceeded to give the dog a bath.

I went to bed (because, late) and when I saw her the next day I asked her how it worked. She said it worked really well. I talked to her about olfactory fatigue and tomato juice, and she seemed to accept that explanation. Ultimately, she was happy to know about the new remedy because she always has those three things in the house anyway for potential future skunk mishaps.

So basically, I was able to take advantage of a situation where the usual mistaken remedy wasn't readily available, provide her with a better one, and now she knows the best way to remove skunk smell and understands more about what the old remedy does. After so many times when I try to explain things skeptically to my family, they often ignore, but for once I got through and it was a satisfying experience.

---

I thought the same as your mom, but never have had reason to look more into it, thanks for the info.

[In This Mind]

There are few people in the world who can actually extrapolate data correctly. They get to an explanation that makes enough sense to them, and then refuse to budge from that status quo. Generally, just like in your mom's example, they have to personally experience it for themselves in order for their mind to be changed. And even then, there are those who will deny evidence seen for themselves.


As an example, I know someone who is convinced that A) chickens have a vagina, B) a rooster must be present for a hen to lay eggs, and C) that the yolk is the part of the egg that becomes the chick.

In spite of having taken her out to a coop consisting only of hens and letting her collect eggs, she is still convinced that it must be a case of a neighbor's rooster wandering around. In spite of her actually watching a hen lay an egg and having butchered a chicken while she was there and actually opening it up to show her the parts, she still insists that chickens have a vagina and she just doesn't know enough about chicken anatomy to have been able to point it out. In spite of breaking a fertile and an unfertile egg in the same pan to show her the difference and having opened an egg with a partially developed embryo inside, she still insists that it's the yolk that develops and that there must have been something wrong with that embryo I showed her and that's why it died. At which point, I gave up, it wasn't worth putting an egg in the incubator just to crack it halfway through and show her when she'd just have some sort of other excuse.

To her, it was 'common sense', all the things she believed. Of course chickens must have a vagina, she does, and that's where babies come from. Of course a rooster was necessary for eggs, after all, for her to give birth to anything she needed sperm from a male of the species. And of course the yolk grew into the chick, after all, when sperm reaches the center of a human egg that's the part that develops into a baby, so since the yolk is the center of an egg it must be the part that develops into a baby. It makes sense to her, and was on some level logically worked out, so she insisted it must be true and could not have her mind changed.

Many people are the same way, including those who often consider themselves critical thinkers. It's 'logical', it's 'rational', and it makes 'sense', therefore it must be true. They never stop to consider that it was only their presuppositions and misunderstandings that led them to those 'logical, rational, sensible' conclusions, and thus they will ignore everything that disproves them because now it's more than them just having 'misinformation'. Now when you challenge them, you aren't saying they are misinformed, dangnabbit, now you are saying they are WRONG.

Sadly, to often it takes a level of trauma to cause the paradigm shift. In this case, it was your mom's desperation to have the skunk smell gone. Very few people actually are willing to test themselves in such a manner. And even those who do like to test themselves and learn new things will have their sacred cows they cling to even after having been rammed face first into the truth. They'll continue to state 'well it's just common sense' and 'well that's the way it is', years after the fact. Take my great grandfather, for example. In spite of having had his life literally saved by having open-heart surgery done by a black doctor, he still insists that 'coloured folks' aren't intelligent enough to actually become doctors. Now his excuse is 'well that doctor musta had some white blood in him'. And he can't figure out why his black daughter in law won't let him spend time with her children.


All that said, I have been able to get through to some folks. Most recently was my own mother, who has some very clear gender biases. She was talking recently about how all homosexual males are weak, effeminate, soft, so on, so forth. I casually mentioned an old friend of mine that she had known for several years and liked a lot. I brought up the fact that he had just gotten married. My mother asked what his wife's name was. Truthfully, I replied 'Thomas'. She stopped short, thought a minute to things she'd said where my friend could overhear, sighed and said 'I'm an idiot, I owe him some apologies don't I?'

[Godhead]

Facts don't change people's minds, not at all. What changes people's minds is their perception of what is fact or what isn't, which is governed by emotion. Every single one of us, atheists just as much as theists, are extremely subjective and ruled by our emotions about a topic. We all have our own way of assessing what we think is the truth, and we can argue about which method is better, but at the end of the day, what we think is ultimately ruled by emotion. This is why converting people to any kind of theism or atheism is a challenge. There's an undercurrent, a subtext where really it's all about how we feel. And it's not about burden of proof because the only proving that goes on is to ourselves. Throughout every discussion between theists and atheists, it's a constant battle of "my emotion tells me the truth" V "no, mine does". But it isn't really a battle, it's always merely a contrast between emotions. This is rarely addressed but it is what goes on beneath the surface. When you "get through to someone", what you're doing is appealing to some part of them that feels the same as you, it's a meeting point of emotions between the two parties, and if you manage to "get through to them", what you're really doing is building on that. This is why no one can really convert anyone to anything, as it is all entirely subjective and emotionally based. It's the same with advertising, they appeal to emotion. Theists feel that there's a god, atheists feel that the universe involves something other than a god.

[Tiberius]

My mother used to believe in God. Now she doesn't. The End.

+1 for Adrian.

[Pippy]

My mother used to believe in Tiberius, but now she doesn't.

I have never gotten through to someone. I explained that the oil leak is not over, far from it, to the kids at work yesterday. "Oh, but the headline says it's over"... Silly kids.

I dislike the whole "skeptic thing". You guys (disbelievers) can have the tern free-thinker. It chagrins me, but please, have it. But skeptic is mine. A skeptic is not someone who disbelieves, but actually someone who is willing to consider any information, but does not come to a concrete conclusion about anything. Even about the efficacy of tomato juice in deskunking your dog.

Thanks,
-Pip

[Autumnlicious]

And batting for Team Crazy is...

My mother used to believe in Tiberius, but now she doesn't.

I have never gotten through to someone. I explained that the oil leak is not over, far from it, to the kids at work yesterday. "Oh, but the headline says it's over"... Silly kids.

I dislike the whole "skeptic thing". You guys (disbelievers) can have the tern free-thinker. It chagrins me, but please, have it. But skeptic is mine. A skeptic is not someone who disbelieves, but actually someone who is willing to consider any information, but does not come to a concrete conclusion about anything. Even about the efficacy of tomato juice in deskunking your dog.

Thanks,
-Pip

Ladies and Gentlemen, it is a home run!

[The Omnissiunt One]

My dad keeps insisting that there must be something special about him, because various coincidences have happened throughout his life relating to people he knows. For instance, he frequently used to go into a shop where my mum worked, in a relatively nearby town to where we now live, years before they married, so must have met her several times without realising it. Aah! Spooky! Although I've pointed out to him that he engineers his own coincidences by living in the same town where most of our family lives, and that the coincidences aren't that amazing anyway, and that coincidences are bound to happen, he claims that he's a 'focal point of energy', whatever the hell that is. Normally, he's a normal, bright bloke (he's a fairly successful lawyer), but, when it comes to this, his rationality just goes out of the window. Sigh.