those phone calls yesterday. You know the sort I mean. The sort which begin with a bright voice asking, "Is that Mrs.... This is....." when you are not, and never have been, married. The sort of phone call which tells you that the person at the other end doesn't know you but is working their way through the telephone book.
I said, "No. And whatever you are selling I am not interested."
"I'm not selling anything. I'm calling from the X foundation...." I had never heard of them.
"We don't give to charity over the phone." (It's a firm rule in this house because how do you know who you are giving to if it is a "cold" call?)
"I don't want a donation. I'm trying to organise a door knock."
"I am NOT interested."
"But you just have to...."
"What part of "NO" don't you understand?"
I put the phone down. The Do Not Call Register still allows charities to call. I wish it didn't. I'd love to be rich, really rich and be able to donate a lot to charities of my choice. I'd like to know it is going to be well used.
The door knock one is the first time it has been tried on us. I have been asked to door knock by people I know but I have always refused. I do not wish to embarrass my neighbours into donating to a charity they do not support. I do not want to knock on the door of strangers asking them to support a charity they may have no interest in.
Perhaps that is wrong of me. Am I lacking in generosity? I donate to charities of my choice. I know where the money goes and what it is used on. They are issues important to me and to the recipients. I would rather give a good amount to a few than a little to many. Is that the wrong approach?
I looked up the charity which had rung us. There was almost nothing on the internet. I then looked up something else I was aware of. Yes, the charity which had rung is a splinter off the other. People have argued. This is a "new" charity now. They want to do things their way. They need money but the money isn't going to go on the needs of the individuals. It is going to go on setting up another charity we don't need.
I am of the serious opinion that charities need to come together. They need to spend less on administration and offices and fund raising. They need to get on with what they say they are there to do.
The young man at the other end had been well trained in all the necessary "patter". He was determined or, shall we say, "pushy". He didn't want to let me go until I had agreed to help.
He is being paid to make those calls. I checked on this. The new charity has to raise enough to cover the cost of using a professional fund raising organisation before it even begins the work it says it wants to do.
I wish them luck but I don't see how they can do it. They would have been better off not arguing with the parent body - and better off not phoning us.
Am I wrong to be like this?
Tuesday, 7 July 2015
Monday, 6 July 2015
Oxi - did they expect that?
I don't know enough about economics to know whether the "no" vote in Greece is a good thing or a bad thing or what will happen as a consequence of it.
I am deeply concerned for the poor in Greece - and indeed in places like Spain where serious "austerity" measures are in place. Does "austerity" work? I don't know.
Economies of countries are not like household budgets. They do not work on the same terms as Mr Micawber's simple understanding of happiness and misery. Our present state government is deeply in debt but their accountants are predicting an election "surplus" next year. Oh yes, you can do a lot with the figures if you know how.
I suspect Greece did precisely that when they handed their books over to Goldman-Sachs prior to entering that curious club which runs on the Euro. I also suspect that the United Kingdom and Denmark did well not to join the club.
If I am to be completely honest, I have doubts about the European Union. It is an interesting idea in principle but it doesn't really work.
It can't work. Some countries, particularly Germany, are stronger than others. Money talks.
The EU is also expensive to run. Of course it was supposed to be cheaper but the reality is that bureaucracy has just increased while restraints on trade grow. It has also encouraged economic migration to Europe - now seen as one big, wealthy country that can support anyone who wishes to migrate there.
Nobody seems to learn from this. Asia is, supposedly, getting more cooperative as well. There is a new Asian banking club which has similar aims to the European Central Bank. Apparently it is supposed to be "good" for "investment". I have my doubts. It means borrowing money - on the lender's terms and for the purposes of the lender of course.
Cultures across Asia are even more diverse than they are in Western Europe. The idea of "one big happy family" won't work. It can't work.
I don't know what the Greeks have voted for. I doubt they know what they have voted for. More than likely they have voted against austerity rather than for poverty - the result will be little different, except in their minds. A Greek migrant told me yesterday, "The European Union was an experiment. It doesn't work. Germany is too strong. It has too much power. They expect too much. Greece has nothing."
Perhaps he is right.
"I couldn't vote but I would have voted "oxi"," he told me, "We need to learn to stand alone. It will be hard but it has to be done."
Germany has the most to lose. Failure to keep Greece in the EU and the Euro under the current bailout terms will be seen as a massive failure for Angela Merkel.
I don't envy the Greeks but, if the rest of us could learn from their situation, they could do us a favour....ne?
I am deeply concerned for the poor in Greece - and indeed in places like Spain where serious "austerity" measures are in place. Does "austerity" work? I don't know.
Economies of countries are not like household budgets. They do not work on the same terms as Mr Micawber's simple understanding of happiness and misery. Our present state government is deeply in debt but their accountants are predicting an election "surplus" next year. Oh yes, you can do a lot with the figures if you know how.
I suspect Greece did precisely that when they handed their books over to Goldman-Sachs prior to entering that curious club which runs on the Euro. I also suspect that the United Kingdom and Denmark did well not to join the club.
If I am to be completely honest, I have doubts about the European Union. It is an interesting idea in principle but it doesn't really work.
It can't work. Some countries, particularly Germany, are stronger than others. Money talks.
The EU is also expensive to run. Of course it was supposed to be cheaper but the reality is that bureaucracy has just increased while restraints on trade grow. It has also encouraged economic migration to Europe - now seen as one big, wealthy country that can support anyone who wishes to migrate there.
Nobody seems to learn from this. Asia is, supposedly, getting more cooperative as well. There is a new Asian banking club which has similar aims to the European Central Bank. Apparently it is supposed to be "good" for "investment". I have my doubts. It means borrowing money - on the lender's terms and for the purposes of the lender of course.
Cultures across Asia are even more diverse than they are in Western Europe. The idea of "one big happy family" won't work. It can't work.
I don't know what the Greeks have voted for. I doubt they know what they have voted for. More than likely they have voted against austerity rather than for poverty - the result will be little different, except in their minds. A Greek migrant told me yesterday, "The European Union was an experiment. It doesn't work. Germany is too strong. It has too much power. They expect too much. Greece has nothing."
Perhaps he is right.
"I couldn't vote but I would have voted "oxi"," he told me, "We need to learn to stand alone. It will be hard but it has to be done."
Germany has the most to lose. Failure to keep Greece in the EU and the Euro under the current bailout terms will be seen as a massive failure for Angela Merkel.
I don't envy the Greeks but, if the rest of us could learn from their situation, they could do us a favour....ne?
Sunday, 5 July 2015
There were seven of them
crowded around a table intended for four. They wanted to sit together and the owners had accommodated their wishes.
We were there with friends. The place is cheap - we don't "do expensive" - and there are not many seats but it is very pleasant.
The seven women were obviously friends, close friends. They were talking to one another and eating their meal with obvious enjoyment.
They were ahead of us, having arrived earlier. The place was now full. They reached the simple desserts available - cheesecake or pavlova. I knew then it had to be a special occasion because one of them caught my eye and gave me a smile as I did what you are not supposed to do and passed my empty plate over to the owner - someone we know slightly. Why make his life more difficult when there is little room to move, let alone serve on the right and remove on the left?
And then, quite suddenly, the women burst into song. I doubt anyone else recognised it but I did. I can't sing it - indeed, I can't sing - but I recognised it. It was also well sung, very well sung indeed.
People stopped eating. They looked startled. It is not at all the usual thing here. People simply don't sing in public like that. Then, as I expected, they moved smoothly into "Happy Birthday".
And then, almost everyone in the place joined in the clapping.
"What was that - the first one?" the Senior Cat asked me and the friends we were with looked at me expectantly.
"It's Ukrainian," I told them, "I haven't heard it for so long."
It is a very simple thing that they use on all sorts of occasions. I knew Ukrainians in London who used to sing it. They were waiting to go to America as immigrants. I wondered for a moment how they how their lives had played out.
Afterwards, as the women wandered around the tiny shop in the other half, the woman who had caught my eye spoke to me,
"You knew our song didn't you?"
I explained how I had heard it before and she nodded. I asked her whose birthday it was and she smiled.
"It is our birthday. It is the anniversary of the day we came here - the day we were born again. We are fifty now. You understand?"
I did.
We were there with friends. The place is cheap - we don't "do expensive" - and there are not many seats but it is very pleasant.
The seven women were obviously friends, close friends. They were talking to one another and eating their meal with obvious enjoyment.
They were ahead of us, having arrived earlier. The place was now full. They reached the simple desserts available - cheesecake or pavlova. I knew then it had to be a special occasion because one of them caught my eye and gave me a smile as I did what you are not supposed to do and passed my empty plate over to the owner - someone we know slightly. Why make his life more difficult when there is little room to move, let alone serve on the right and remove on the left?
And then, quite suddenly, the women burst into song. I doubt anyone else recognised it but I did. I can't sing it - indeed, I can't sing - but I recognised it. It was also well sung, very well sung indeed.
People stopped eating. They looked startled. It is not at all the usual thing here. People simply don't sing in public like that. Then, as I expected, they moved smoothly into "Happy Birthday".
And then, almost everyone in the place joined in the clapping.
"What was that - the first one?" the Senior Cat asked me and the friends we were with looked at me expectantly.
"It's Ukrainian," I told them, "I haven't heard it for so long."
It is a very simple thing that they use on all sorts of occasions. I knew Ukrainians in London who used to sing it. They were waiting to go to America as immigrants. I wondered for a moment how they how their lives had played out.
Afterwards, as the women wandered around the tiny shop in the other half, the woman who had caught my eye spoke to me,
"You knew our song didn't you?"
I explained how I had heard it before and she nodded. I asked her whose birthday it was and she smiled.
"It is our birthday. It is the anniversary of the day we came here - the day we were born again. We are fifty now. You understand?"
I did.
Saturday, 4 July 2015
There is an open thread in the Guardian
asking people to comment on their "awful lunch". Along with the usual anti-government comments there are comments about tins of tuna, hummus and the like.
Someone mentioned his father made him baked bean sandwiches. It brought back memories of something I would rather forget but probably never will.
I went to boarding school for a while. It was a co-educational school. The boys boarded on the school grounds. The girls lived in "the hostel", a boarding house a bit over half a mile from the school. At lunch time the girls were route-marched to and from by the prefects at a rapid pace for the main meal of the day.
There was no way I could keep up so an arrangement was made that I would have a "packed lunch". Why I was not allowed to have the same hot lunch with the boy boarders was a mystery at the time.
My packed lunch, every day, consisted of stale white bread with a smear of baked beans (no butter) and, sometimes, a piece of fruit.
I tried to eat those sandwiches and I couldn't. On Mondays it was not unusual for the bread to be showing signs of mould. Even the boy boarders, who were forever hungry, couldn't face them.
I treasured the days there was a piece of fruit in my lunch. I never had a proper hot meal on a school day. The evening meal was always something like baked beans or tinned spaghetti or soup.
The girl boarders also had to set and clear the tables and do the washing up. (There were no commercial dishwashers in the kitchen.) As I normally spent the weekend with my paternal grandparents (where I was more than happy to help) I did not share in the major cleaning chores on Saturday mornings. The other girls did not mind me missing that too much as I would bring back a packet of biscuits on Sunday evening and divide them up between the members of my dormitory. Even just two biscuits each were much appreciated by hungry girls. It was illegal of course but nobody ever said anything. The wrapping went into a rubbish bin at school on Monday morning. I used to worry I would get caught but the biscuits kept all of us happy for a few hours.
Looking back now I wonder at it all. Boarding school food is often said to be awful, dire or ghastly. Complaints have been many and varied but ours genuinely was dreadful, mine worse than most. We were all constantly hungry. It wasn't necessary. Our fees were no less than any other school. It was a deliberate policy.
When I pack a lunch now it is quite a different affair. It isn't fancy but the bread is usually homemade and there will be plenty of filling in my sandwich - never ever baked beans. I might have carrot and celery strips, a banana or an apple or some grapes. I might even put a biscuit in.
Thankfully though I can still eat baked beans - properly hot baked beans on toast. That is the way they were intended to be eaten. If I had eaten the sandwiches at school I doubt I could eat baked beans now.
Someone mentioned his father made him baked bean sandwiches. It brought back memories of something I would rather forget but probably never will.
I went to boarding school for a while. It was a co-educational school. The boys boarded on the school grounds. The girls lived in "the hostel", a boarding house a bit over half a mile from the school. At lunch time the girls were route-marched to and from by the prefects at a rapid pace for the main meal of the day.
There was no way I could keep up so an arrangement was made that I would have a "packed lunch". Why I was not allowed to have the same hot lunch with the boy boarders was a mystery at the time.
My packed lunch, every day, consisted of stale white bread with a smear of baked beans (no butter) and, sometimes, a piece of fruit.
I tried to eat those sandwiches and I couldn't. On Mondays it was not unusual for the bread to be showing signs of mould. Even the boy boarders, who were forever hungry, couldn't face them.
I treasured the days there was a piece of fruit in my lunch. I never had a proper hot meal on a school day. The evening meal was always something like baked beans or tinned spaghetti or soup.
The girl boarders also had to set and clear the tables and do the washing up. (There were no commercial dishwashers in the kitchen.) As I normally spent the weekend with my paternal grandparents (where I was more than happy to help) I did not share in the major cleaning chores on Saturday mornings. The other girls did not mind me missing that too much as I would bring back a packet of biscuits on Sunday evening and divide them up between the members of my dormitory. Even just two biscuits each were much appreciated by hungry girls. It was illegal of course but nobody ever said anything. The wrapping went into a rubbish bin at school on Monday morning. I used to worry I would get caught but the biscuits kept all of us happy for a few hours.
Looking back now I wonder at it all. Boarding school food is often said to be awful, dire or ghastly. Complaints have been many and varied but ours genuinely was dreadful, mine worse than most. We were all constantly hungry. It wasn't necessary. Our fees were no less than any other school. It was a deliberate policy.
When I pack a lunch now it is quite a different affair. It isn't fancy but the bread is usually homemade and there will be plenty of filling in my sandwich - never ever baked beans. I might have carrot and celery strips, a banana or an apple or some grapes. I might even put a biscuit in.
Thankfully though I can still eat baked beans - properly hot baked beans on toast. That is the way they were intended to be eaten. If I had eaten the sandwiches at school I doubt I could eat baked beans now.
Friday, 3 July 2015
Is it right to try and get someone to change their mind
with respect to their conscience or should you respect them for not doing so?
I put the question up on Twitter yesterday - and then asked people not to respond because it is much too difficult a question to debate on Twitter. It would lead to all sorts of misunderstandings.
I came across a problem yesterday. I was asked by someone I know quite well,
"Cat, how do you get someone to change their mind?"
It is not the sort of question I like to be asked. There is no definitive answer to that sort of question - apart from "it is very difficult". There is another question I need to ask as well, "Should I be trying to change somebody's mind?"
Rather than try and answer the question I asked what the problem was.
"Well, you know D....? He's opposed to gay marriage and it is causing all sorts of problems in the office."
I do know D. His attitude was causing problems in the office?
"Oh, it's not him. It's other people. They keep trying to get him to change his mind."
I suspect the person I was talking to had also tried and she was looking for some sort of reassurance that they were "doing the right thing".
I am afraid I said, "It's none of their business."
And it isn't. D doesn't try to change their minds. When asked, I have heard him say, "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am also happy for same sex couples to have legally recognised civil unions."
I feel if someone makes that sort of statement then it should be the end of the story. It most certainly isn't my business to try and change his or her beliefs.
When I was stopped yesterday there were several stories in the media about similar issues. There is a heated discussion going on over whether one of the local councils (local authority or municipality) is right in flying the rainbow flag.
A married man with three children has resigned his position as the manager of another council because they also decided to fly the rainbow flag. He says he doesn't oppose them doing it but does not wish to be seen to personally support the decision because he too believes marriage is between a man and a woman.
And, of course, the issue of gay marriage has again been brought up in our federal parliament. It is proving divisive there as well. The media is making a major issue of it, exploiting differences of opinion. A former federal politician told me recently that he was glad he didn't have to be there when the issue is eventually voted on.
It shouldn't be a divisive issue. I also believe it is wrong to try and get someone to change their mind over the issue. D is not homophobic. He believes in equal opportunities for all - something I have seen him put into place in his workplace. He's actually very much more tolerant than many other people I know. He tries to live according to his Christian convictions - the religion he would never dream of ramming down anyone's throats.
I don't thing he is wrong or right or anything else. He has never told me what I should believe and I am not going to tell him.
It's not my business and it is not the business of those who are trying to get him to change his beliefs.
So, why do they think it is their business? What are they trying to do?
I put the question up on Twitter yesterday - and then asked people not to respond because it is much too difficult a question to debate on Twitter. It would lead to all sorts of misunderstandings.
I came across a problem yesterday. I was asked by someone I know quite well,
"Cat, how do you get someone to change their mind?"
It is not the sort of question I like to be asked. There is no definitive answer to that sort of question - apart from "it is very difficult". There is another question I need to ask as well, "Should I be trying to change somebody's mind?"
Rather than try and answer the question I asked what the problem was.
"Well, you know D....? He's opposed to gay marriage and it is causing all sorts of problems in the office."
I do know D. His attitude was causing problems in the office?
"Oh, it's not him. It's other people. They keep trying to get him to change his mind."
I suspect the person I was talking to had also tried and she was looking for some sort of reassurance that they were "doing the right thing".
I am afraid I said, "It's none of their business."
And it isn't. D doesn't try to change their minds. When asked, I have heard him say, "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am also happy for same sex couples to have legally recognised civil unions."
I feel if someone makes that sort of statement then it should be the end of the story. It most certainly isn't my business to try and change his or her beliefs.
When I was stopped yesterday there were several stories in the media about similar issues. There is a heated discussion going on over whether one of the local councils (local authority or municipality) is right in flying the rainbow flag.
A married man with three children has resigned his position as the manager of another council because they also decided to fly the rainbow flag. He says he doesn't oppose them doing it but does not wish to be seen to personally support the decision because he too believes marriage is between a man and a woman.
And, of course, the issue of gay marriage has again been brought up in our federal parliament. It is proving divisive there as well. The media is making a major issue of it, exploiting differences of opinion. A former federal politician told me recently that he was glad he didn't have to be there when the issue is eventually voted on.
It shouldn't be a divisive issue. I also believe it is wrong to try and get someone to change their mind over the issue. D is not homophobic. He believes in equal opportunities for all - something I have seen him put into place in his workplace. He's actually very much more tolerant than many other people I know. He tries to live according to his Christian convictions - the religion he would never dream of ramming down anyone's throats.
I don't thing he is wrong or right or anything else. He has never told me what I should believe and I am not going to tell him.
It's not my business and it is not the business of those who are trying to get him to change his beliefs.
So, why do they think it is their business? What are they trying to do?
Thursday, 2 July 2015
I am fortunate enough
to be able to go shopping this morning - one of those supermarket expeditions.
It is a regular Thursday morning chore - Thursdays because that is the day that the local independent supermarket chooses to discount "seniors" a little off their purchases.
I also shop in the same supermarket during the rest of the week. I don't do multiple trips by choice but by what I can carry in the tricycle basket. If I could drive and owned a car I would probably shop just once a week.
I would however still shop in the independent supermarket. I like it.
There is a larger, dimmer chain supermarket within a hundred metres - as the crow flies. It is filled with "own brand". You are "encouraged" to use the self-serve checkouts and it is deliberately laid out so that you have to traverse the entire store to get to essentials such as milk. The store recently put in a "sushi" bar - so as to compete with a tiny business in the shopping centre.
I do not go to the chain supermarket unless there is something I cannot get in the independent one.
Competition between the two is fierce. The chain supermarket sends at least two staff members in to check prices each morning. It would love to be rid of the competition.
But I want that competition to remain. I don't want that independent supermarket to die. It deserves to be there. It employs students and two people with disabilities. The people who work there are friendly.
There are occasional complaints that it is "more expensive to shop there". Is it really? They, like the greengrocer I favour, source as much local stock as possible. It's their policy. Last year a campaign by them saved a small business from going under. The larger chain was sourcing an inferior product from abroad - and charging just two cents less. It now charges the same price - for the inferior product. The same can be said for many other things. The "own brand" appears cheaper at first but size and quality can make it just as expensive or even more expensive in the end. You buy more or you buy more often.
Both places will soon have more competition. There are plans to build a new, German based, supermarket on the opposite side of the road. The chain supermarket has complained about "unfair" competition coming into the area. The independent one is worried but the manager has said the owners don't want to change their policies of employing students and sourcing locally.
I hope they don't have to because I like it that way too. Today I will pedal out in the cold and damp and be glad that I have a friendly supermarket to visit that actually cares about the customer.
It is a regular Thursday morning chore - Thursdays because that is the day that the local independent supermarket chooses to discount "seniors" a little off their purchases.
I also shop in the same supermarket during the rest of the week. I don't do multiple trips by choice but by what I can carry in the tricycle basket. If I could drive and owned a car I would probably shop just once a week.
I would however still shop in the independent supermarket. I like it.
There is a larger, dimmer chain supermarket within a hundred metres - as the crow flies. It is filled with "own brand". You are "encouraged" to use the self-serve checkouts and it is deliberately laid out so that you have to traverse the entire store to get to essentials such as milk. The store recently put in a "sushi" bar - so as to compete with a tiny business in the shopping centre.
I do not go to the chain supermarket unless there is something I cannot get in the independent one.
Competition between the two is fierce. The chain supermarket sends at least two staff members in to check prices each morning. It would love to be rid of the competition.
But I want that competition to remain. I don't want that independent supermarket to die. It deserves to be there. It employs students and two people with disabilities. The people who work there are friendly.
There are occasional complaints that it is "more expensive to shop there". Is it really? They, like the greengrocer I favour, source as much local stock as possible. It's their policy. Last year a campaign by them saved a small business from going under. The larger chain was sourcing an inferior product from abroad - and charging just two cents less. It now charges the same price - for the inferior product. The same can be said for many other things. The "own brand" appears cheaper at first but size and quality can make it just as expensive or even more expensive in the end. You buy more or you buy more often.
Both places will soon have more competition. There are plans to build a new, German based, supermarket on the opposite side of the road. The chain supermarket has complained about "unfair" competition coming into the area. The independent one is worried but the manager has said the owners don't want to change their policies of employing students and sourcing locally.
I hope they don't have to because I like it that way too. Today I will pedal out in the cold and damp and be glad that I have a friendly supermarket to visit that actually cares about the customer.
Wednesday, 1 July 2015
So is it nine out of ten or
nine out of every ten. You do know what I mean don't you?
There was an advertisement for some sort of toothpaste once - when I was kitten - which used to claim that "nine out ten dentists recommend..." I can remember reading it and then asking why we didn't use that sort of toothpaste.
The Senior Cat explained the advertisement to me. I was about six at the time but it was a valuable lesson in reading comprehension. Of course I have not read and understood everything I have read since then. Like everyone else I have sometimes read what I wanted to read into something. I still hope that the lesson the Senior Cat gave me reminds me when I most need to be reminded.
Among the many things I read now are a number of news and commentary websites. I don't read them for pleasure but because I need to be informed about what people are saying about situations that may affect my work.
Journalists are not known for accuracy. They may try but one person "on the ground" has to rely on information given to him or her by officials who may or may not have an interest in telling them what is actually going on. The officials themselves may not know. Sometimes it is necessary to rely on non-official sources. Opinion is represented as "fact".
Research, especially "scientific research" is another issue. Remember that myth about autism being caused by vaccinations? It is still believed by many people - people who desperately want to believe it. Cancer "cures" abound, as do other many other cures the desperate want to believe in.
I know that, if desperate enough, I might well believe in something like that too. I might believe despite now being trained to read something critically.
Presented with a position - even solid proof - to the contrary people will go on believing what they want to believe about controversial issues. Yesterday I tried explaining to an otherwise intelligent person that a piece of research was based on a badly biased sample. I might as well have saved my breath. He didn't want to hear that. The sample gave him the results he wants to believe in.
His thesis is going to come tumbling down and he will probably blame me.
There was an advertisement for some sort of toothpaste once - when I was kitten - which used to claim that "nine out ten dentists recommend..." I can remember reading it and then asking why we didn't use that sort of toothpaste.
The Senior Cat explained the advertisement to me. I was about six at the time but it was a valuable lesson in reading comprehension. Of course I have not read and understood everything I have read since then. Like everyone else I have sometimes read what I wanted to read into something. I still hope that the lesson the Senior Cat gave me reminds me when I most need to be reminded.
Among the many things I read now are a number of news and commentary websites. I don't read them for pleasure but because I need to be informed about what people are saying about situations that may affect my work.
Journalists are not known for accuracy. They may try but one person "on the ground" has to rely on information given to him or her by officials who may or may not have an interest in telling them what is actually going on. The officials themselves may not know. Sometimes it is necessary to rely on non-official sources. Opinion is represented as "fact".
Research, especially "scientific research" is another issue. Remember that myth about autism being caused by vaccinations? It is still believed by many people - people who desperately want to believe it. Cancer "cures" abound, as do other many other cures the desperate want to believe in.
I know that, if desperate enough, I might well believe in something like that too. I might believe despite now being trained to read something critically.
Presented with a position - even solid proof - to the contrary people will go on believing what they want to believe about controversial issues. Yesterday I tried explaining to an otherwise intelligent person that a piece of research was based on a badly biased sample. I might as well have saved my breath. He didn't want to hear that. The sample gave him the results he wants to believe in.
His thesis is going to come tumbling down and he will probably blame me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
