I was part of a, a committee where a student was presenting evidence, looking at implicit bias that white people have toward black faces. And across every study that she conducted, there was no evidence of bias using implicit or explicit measures. But if you did think it was true and you had that evidence, then you would. Like don't let anybody know about the superpowers that exist.
David and Tamler argue about William James' classic essay "The Will to Believe." What's more important - avoiding falsehood or discovering truth? When (if ever) is it rational to believe anything without enough evidence? What about beliefs that we can't be agnostic about? Are there hypotheses that we have to believe in order for them to come true? Does James successfully demonstrate that faith can be rational?
Plus, a philosopher at Apple who's not allowed to talk to the media - what are they hiding? And why are academics constantly telling students that academia is a nightmare?
Support Very Bad Wizards
Links: