My latest theory about the world is that it isn't ignorance that is going to destroy human civilisation - we are all ignorant about the vast majority of what is going on, as it's not possible to know everything about everything - but it's taking pride in our ignorance that is the problem.
If we all felt slightly embarrassed about being ignorant, or at least just admitted it and said, "Sorry, I don't actually know anything about that," then the world would be a better place. Unfortunately the human condition doesn't seem to allow us to show such weakness and we're more likely to be forthright about something which we know nothing about or which we are just accepting is true without looking into any of the evidence of alternate arguments.
The less we know, the prouder we seem and the more arch and superior we are likely to be.
These thoughts were prompted a little bit by Andrew Collings belief that Vitamin C will stop him getting swine flu (and I suppose homeopathy and its ilk are a good example of pride in ignorance and refusal to examine facts). @iszi_lawrence on twitter messaged him to say "no scientific evidence to suggest vit C helps you avoid flu. Yes, it decreases if you are ill, but taking it wont avoid infection"
The arrogant idiot Collings replied, proud of his made up ideas and himself saying, "Won't *hurt* my immune system though, will it?" Which whilst being true to some extent (though it actually might have a detrimental effect if he took too much - @henweb messaged to say "Apparently, "Taking large amounts of vitamin C can cause stomach pain, diarrhoea and flatulence.""), also rather massively misses the point. It won't *hurt* his immune system to spin round ten times saying the alphabet backwards or to do nothing. He is still standing by his idea that taking a vitamin supplement will magically protect him from a virus.
Iszi sensibly replied, "not sure, you can OD on some supplements. Rule is never take any unless a doctor tell you. Waste of money - you pee it all out."
Spectacularly missing the point, Collings replied, "I don't need a doctor to tell me to take Vitamin C! I'm sure doctors have more important things to be getting on with." Iszi's point being that a doctor wouldn't tell you to take Vitamin C and only suggest medicine when it was likely to be effective. I told Collings he was being willfully stupid and he replied that he was a renegade.
I told him he was a twat.
You should get on Twitter, it's like a 24 hour podcast.
Now I don't want to just malign Collings here. He is a lovely if feckless man and I secretly like him quite a lot. And his belief in the magic of Vitamin C is not as as ridiculous as some other things that people (including him) believe. Let's face it if large doses of Vitamin C could be proven to fight off viruses then the drug firms would be marketing it as such and doctors would prescribe it for that purpose. But it can't be proven to do that, because it doesn't. It's good for you, but that doesn't mean that taking loads of it will make it exponentially better for you.
And there are plenty of times when I have been as obstinate about something I falsely believe to be true and exhibited similar cocksurity in the face of reason.
It was just this Twitter conversation that made me think about this whole pride in ignorance thing.
Obviously religion and homeopathy and any kind of belief that can't be proven by evidence relies on this kind of arrogant pride in ignorance. Thus fundamentalist Christians can not only dispute evolution, but be absolutely delighted with themselves for proposing something much less likely with no evidence. Something that obviously isn't true, unless God exists and he's kind of deliberately trying to fuck with people's heads or is a bit crazy and doesn't think it's enough that he expects people to believe in him for absolutely no reason, but has also planted evidence which more than suggests that the world is not just a few thousand years old and that species evolved slowly.
Which I admit is possible. But not very likely. And I don't really want to be a party to worshipping such a petty and unusual deity.
But this pride in ignorance effects us all on some level, because if we don't know or care about something or it challenges the way we live our life, then it suits us to be flippant about it.
I have a friend who whilst very knowledgeable about many subjects, has absolutely no interest in sport and thinks it's stupid. He once told me that he liked the fact that when a taxi driver talks about football he can't join in with the conversation as he doesn't even have a passing knowledge of anything about it. He said he felt proud that he couldn't communicate on this level.
I pretty much agree with him, though I can have a punt at talking about football. Indeed I have previously discussed how much fun I think it would be to bluff my way through on a manly subject that I know nothing about.
But I wonder whether we are right to be proud of our lack of knowledge. Isn't it just a way to protect ourselves from admitting we don't know everything? Just because we're not interested in sport doesn't make it worthless and whilst it's OK for us to not know anything about it, it seems that being proud of our ignorance is inappropriate and arrogant and actually displays a fundamental insecurity within us. One that is carried by the whole human race.
We are obstinate and pig-headed (insert your own topical joke in here) and cock-sure (insert your own innuendo here) and pride in ignorance is probably what is going to take us down one way or the other.
Not to say we can't debate things or that one person is always right and another wrong, but I suppose I'm saying that that refusal to consider that something we believe is wrong and to wallow in our own unsupported ideas is a dangerous thing.
Though I believe if I take enough Vitamin C then everything I believe will be proven to be true.
Haven't expressed this all that well. But there's something in it.
Tim Minchin demonstrates why he beat me to the Chortle award, by discussing the subject much more cleverly and amusingly
here.
