| | Thanks Marcus.
I agree that some shows use that line in an obviously absurd way, but it wouldn't make good humor if it wasn't mocking real behaviors. And there is enough of this kind of behavior to go around. I frequently witness people believing the most bizarre theories because they're so bizarre, and go against common sense. It's as if someone saying something that doesn't seem to go with the common sense view must have knowledge that we don't have.
In economics, theories that are "non-intuitive" are more easily accepted. If you were to show the foolishness of the theories, you'd be ignored. They'd believe that you must be too simple-minded to understand the complexity of the theories (that they don't even understand). It's like the witch-doctor thing all over again. They accept that these other people must have theories, or data, or tools that we don't have access to, and therefore their theories must be true. And this is based on the complexity and seeming irrationality of the theories. I think the 'reasoning' goes something like "These people have an enormously complex theory I can't even begin to understand, so they must have good reason for it. On the other hand, this other group has a simple theory that's so easy, a child could get it. I can only assume that they're not smart enough or educated enough to understand the complex theory".
If a person's theory or system of thought is impenetrable, it's taken as a sign that they know something you don't know. And so people turn off their minds and accept 'authority'. Instead of determining on what basis these people claim such a preposterous theory, they accept it willingly. On the other hand, if a theory or system of thought is readily understandable, it doesn't leave any mystery.
This is the way bad ideas are rationalized. If it doesn't make sense, it must be because the person behind it is smarter than us. And this is just one example of how an objective evaluation of an idea is traded for an evaluation based on the character of the person presenting the idea. It's not a new phenomenon. Throughout history, people have been happy to accept the random whims of a witch-doctor because they seemed to know things that nobody else knew. This is just one method by which social metaphysics is accepted.
Now you're right that if people practiced it consistently, they wouldn't last long. But that hasn't stopped a lot of irrational premises. I'm not particularly concerned that people will start believing everything they hear. I think the trend this adds to is the accepting of 'authority' instead of one's own mind. That's a big battle we Objectivists have to fight because you can't change minds who meekly conform to whatever they're told by the ruling class.
Some people propose that being the ruling class (in this case, the intellectual class) will solve this problem, because then people would blindly follow us. I personally don't believe liberty is ever safe as long as the majority of the people are willing to do whatever they're told, or believe whatever is said. Our rights will never really be secure until people are willing to use their own minds.
|
|
