The Trade-Off Between Skepticism and the Production of Knowledge

Is there a trade-off between skepticism and the successful production of knowledge? I will be relating this question to both the natural sciences and the human sciences. For the natural sciences, I chose to discuss how the skepticism of people on subjects such as the shape of the earth and global warming can still lead to the successful production of knowledge. In the human sciences I will discuss the reliability of tests such as the Rorschach test and the Stanford prison experiments and how they produce knowledge about human behavior successfully.

To determine whether there is a trade-off, a compromise, between the uncertainty and doubt that comes with skepticism and whether it can produce knowledge successfully, this compromise must benefit both entities involved. The doubt and uncertainty that comes with the skepticism will be satisfied through methodology to produce knowledge without the initial skepticism.

In the natural sciences, this skepticism can be based on the belief that a theory needs to be refined or finding the answer to a question that one has. On the other hand, this skepticism can come from the doubt that a theory and its conclusions are valid. Take the latter for example, science carries out the scientific methodology in terms of institutional disconfirmation. However, people known as ‘conspiracy theorists’ apply this to popular concepts. Take the shape of the earth, most people taught using conventional education would say that it is spherical or round, but the ‘conspiracy theorists’ believe that it is flat.

Mark Sargent, a prominent figure in the Flat Earth community that has been growing rapidly for the past five years conducted experiments to prove the earth is flat. He believes that being able to see buildings at water level that are far away and should be obscured by the curvature of the earth is caused not by refraction/atmospheric effects/mirage, but because the earth is flat, and water seeks to be level. He believes it is not caused by refraction because it occurs in every weather condition and light condition. He doesn’t believe when scientists say otherwise because he trusts his sense perception (seeing that Seattle can be seen from many miles away), more than the reason from science that comes with math.

People have had differing beliefs on the shape of the earth for hundreds/thousands of years. However, even now in the present, most people believe that the earth is spherical and not flat. It is only in the past three years (since November 2017) that the people who believe that the earth is flat have been recognized in general society, although they face ridicule. Mark Sargent believes that the idea of flat earthers being mainstream should have been eradicated in the first month that it occurred, but it kept growing. He believes that flat earthers are “crushing” the people who try to put them down and disprove them. He also says that those people do not confront them because they cannot disprove them.

Bob Knodel, a flat earther carried out an experiment, testing the rotation of the earth using a ring laser gyroscope: If the earth is a spinning globe, rotating at 360o every 24hrs, then there should be a 15o shift in the laser gyroscope every hour regardless of where it is placed on the earth. He carried out the experiment multiple times and found that there was a 15o shift every time. He refused to accept that and tried to prove that the reason for the shift was because it was registering the motion of the sky, so he isolated the gyroscope in a zero gauss chamber to prevent “heavenly energies” from disrupting the readings and refine his experiment, but still got the same results. He then encased the gyroscope in a bismuth chamber, but still found a shift of 15o. He says that no one experiment proves something conclusively and wanted to carry out other experiments. Jeran Campanella, a colleague of Bob Knodel conducted another experiment where light passes through two wooden boards, each with a hole in it at 17 feet and if the light passes through at the same level, then the earth is flat. If it is higher than 17 feet (23 feet for instance), then it is round. When the experiment was carried out, the light had to be held up to 23 feet.

Patricia Steere, a colleague of Mark Sargent, draws the conclusion that the earth is flat based on sense perception, “what you can observe”, rather that the reason drawn from “complicated math formulas”. She believes that the general public believe that the earth is round because “the powers that should not be have told us so”. She does not have faith that the earth is round and does not make this knowledge claim. She believes that all known conspiracies are interconnected like a “spider’s web” and in her opinion, that the shape of the earth is “at the center of it all”. When she is asked who she trusts, she says herself. She says that she will not believe that a certain event, such as the Boston Marathon bombing, occurred unless she was there, and it directly affected her.

Sargent says that flat earthers cannot be scientists because people in the education system do not allow them to do certain things. He says that the flat earth community differs on the specific aspects of the earth such as whether the earth has an infinite sky. He also says that people in the flat earth community are very suspicious of people and believes that many are working for the US government. People such as Matt Boylan AKA Math Powerland have criticized people like Patricia Steere for being frauds who secretly work for the government. People say that Patricia Steere works for the C.I.A because of the last three letters of the name Patricia. She says that she cannot prove any conspiracies that people have of her wrong because they would still believe that it had been faked or doctored. She wonders whether the people spreading lies about her know that they are lying or are so conspiratorial that they believe what they say. She then worries whether what she believes in is not true as well. She says she knows she is not.

Dr. Joe Pierre, a professor of psychiatry at UCLA, says that he could get people to admit a belief that their friends would consider strange and supports Mark Sargent saying “We tend to form beliefs based on a couple of things: One is our intuitions, just what feels right. Another is our subjective experience. For most of us who look out over the horizon, indeed, it looks flat.” He says that since there is a great amount of content online that flat earthers support the theories of a flat earth, which looks scientific, such as calculations and diagrams, he feels that it is just as reliable as the opinion of a physicist or many scientists. “Often times it actually starts with “Conventional wisdom isn’t to be trusted, governments aren’t to be trusted, scientists aren’t to be trusted.” And when you start with that premise, then you can get into all sorts of corners.”

He says that when someone like a flat earther is confronted with evidence, they will just ask more and more complicated questions. Lamar Glover, a physicist at Cal State LA talks about scientism and the scientific superiority complex. He says that flat earthers are potential scientist that have gone completely wrong. He believes that they would be more beneficial to science if their skepticism was more scientifically literate. Tim Urban, a science writer, describes the scientific method as a journey starting at point A and go through the process of thinking and collecting evidence and ending up at a conclusion that you believe is true. He describes science as the arrow, which is the process that helps to arrive at conclusions. On the other hand, he describes a process where someone starts at a conclusion and then works backwards to prove that conclusion is true. He says that his person will “cherry-pick” until they find evidence that supports their belief.

He says that flat earthers cannot be shown a piece of evidence that disproves their beliefs and accept them. He believes that the less plausible a belief system is based on reality, the bigger the need to create a reality that fits the belief. He believes that people suffer from the delusion of being “the protagonist of their own story” so they feel that everything they do is justified.