Like it says on the tin, does anyone know of a good, engaging description (written or video) for why empiricism, the scientific method, standards of evidence etc. are important? It would probably cover common cognitive errors, the state of ‘knowledge’ before empiricism became established, and perhaps even cover how many scientists hold incorrect views due to their cognitive biases but evidence wins out in the end.
It’s the sort of thing that many on this board have internalised over the years, but I find that too many people I interact with don’t quite grok the principle, and I would like to introduce them to it, so that they can finally stop believing in fucking homeopathy*
Homeopathy is just a catch all for all kinds of nonsense about how ancient civilisations were scientifically advanced, aliens, whatnot, and yes, I know it probably won’t help, but I’d like to try.
For the reader short on time, Wikipedia’s list of cognitive biases is pretty enlightening. One thing to notice is how very, very long that list is; despite our best efforts, we are really bad at being objective unless we document our observations and crunch the numbers; make a conscious effort to apply rules of reason, logic and evidence; and allow others to review/shitpick our results to see if we screwed up anywhere.
The Clockwork Universe by Edward Dolnick is a very accessible history of the early development of physics and cosmology, but a lot of it is really about how the early development of scientific thought in the western world changed how people view reason and knowledge.
I’m not getting your example, but it seems to me that most people think homeopathy = naturopathy. Or in other words, using herbs and shit to cure ills. Which is not 100% crap. They do not realize that it means magic water/alcohol and if they realize that then it becomes easier to reject.