Thread by @dasingleton

On voter fraud, pseudoscience, and haunted houses.

A huge number of people very firmly believe that Biden is stealing the election and that there has been massive voter fraud. You may not see it if you don’t visit the darker areas of social media, but it’s astounding.

(picture credit Susanna Duncombe, 1725-1812)

I see it in relatives and people I know who I thought had more sense. We should try to understand why, what an argument with them is like, and, with Thanksgiving coming, what to do.

So it is time to talk again about haunted houses. (I do this on the first day with new grad students, right beside Popper and Kuhn. I did not invent this analogy and I can’t find where I first read it, perhaps Carl Sagan? Let me know if you know the original source.)

I pity you if you argue with someone who believes in haunted houses. There are thousands of houses claimed to be haunted, and no end of people who will testify to their experience. The evidence is just overwhelming. Except …

you decide to look closely at one haunted house. You go to the house and spend a few weeks and find that the wooing noise comes from a window in the wind, and that the ghostly light is a reflection of moonlight off a pond. You take your time and explain all the claims.

If you are arguing with someone who is relatively fair minded, the likely reply is “Ok, maybe your are right about this house, but what about this other haunted house?”

At the next house, and you find that the people who swear about their experiences make money from the tours, and that the video of the ghost was doctored. It is slow work, but you finally present your evidence, and the person replies “Ok, maybe, but what about this other house?”

Sometimes the claims are just patently absurd, but that means nothing. There is always the next house. Many others will be “I don’t understand how this could happen.” You patiently explain, but there is always the next house.

After a while the claims may become more vague. “The thermometer may read normal but this room definitely feels chilly to me.” You explain that there is no way to prove or disprove this. To you, that is really bad. To them, it is a strong point.

On and on, and its exhausting. You hire help, call them haunted house fact checkers, and you go through dozens of houses. You present their detailed evidence and the person states categorically that they do not believe your haunted house fact checkers.

No they will not look at their fully listed sources, but you are just a fool for being duped by them.

Oh, and by the way, there is this creaking noise back at house number one that you never explained.

You have a life, you leave it alone, they declare victory.

This is the routine form of many arguments on public issues. Masks and distancing, hydroxychloroquine, vaccines, climate change, homeopathy. But I have even had this kind of argument with reviewers of scientific papers. Don’t fall into it.

First, instead of arguing with people saying crazy things, make and support your allies. Give allies facts and spread facts to neutrals. Like it or not, it is a numbers game, and if you are correct, a neutral armed with facts will add to your numbers.

If it is rare good-faith argument, I am down for it, but look for common ground. (“I really wish my father were a ghost. I miss him.” “Yea, there was a lot of talk about computers changing votes in Ohio in 2004. I sure wanted it to be true, but I realized it didn’t make sense.”)

If it is not good faith, make them take up their time and energy. “I don’t feel cold.” “I don’t get what you are seeing in this picture.” Pick your battles, sometimes you have to leave crazy alone. If you do get involved, no name calling, keep it short, and yes, keep it sweet.

As an ally, I feel his pain, but this this is really really not the way to go. Instead, find common ground ("Hey, we all want fair elections, and that is why states take a lot of precautions, maybe a lot more than most people know.") or give particular

https://twitter.com/CultExpert/status/1330599412163358729

facts that neutrals can think about ("You know, those jumps in the graphs were expected.")