Why People Believe Weird Things explores the psychology behind belief in pseudoscience, conspiracy theories, and other irrational ideas. Shermer examines topics like alien abductions, creationism, and Holocaust denial, using scientific reasoning to debunk these claims. While some readers found the book informative and thought-provoking, others felt it was dated or focused too much on specific examples rather than the underlying psychology. The book's strengths lie in its explanations of logical fallacies and critical thinking, though some wished for more emphasis on the "why" behind beliefs.
Skepticism is a method, not a position
Science progresses through self-correction and convergence of evidence
Pseudoscience exploits cognitive biases and logical fallacies
Holocaust denial: A case study in historical distortion
Critical thinking skills are essential to combat weird beliefs
The power of hope drives belief in pseudoscience and the paranormal
Intelligence does not immunize against irrational beliefs
The psychology of belief: How we form and maintain our worldviews
Skepticism is a provisional approach to claims. Skepticism is a method, not a position.
Defining skepticism. Contrary to popular belief, skepticism is not about cynicism or automatic rejection of new ideas. It is a systematic approach to evaluating claims based on evidence and logical reasoning. Skeptics aim to maintain an open mind while requiring extraordinary evidence for extraordinary claims. They apply critical thinking tools like considering alternative explanations, looking for corroborating evidence, and examining the reliability of sources.
Applying skepticism. The skeptical method can be applied to any claim, from the paranormal to mainstream science. Key aspects include:
Asking for evidence
Considering the plausibility of claims
Checking for logical fallacies
Seeking expert consensus
Being willing to change one's mind with new evidence
Science is not the affirmation of a set of beliefs but a process of inquiry aimed at building a testable body of knowledge constantly open to rejection or confirmation.
The scientific method. Science advances through a process of forming hypotheses, testing them against evidence, and refining or rejecting theories based on results. This self-correcting nature distinguishes science from dogma. Scientists actively try to disprove their own ideas and those of others. Theories that withstand rigorous testing and explain a wide range of observations become accepted, but remain open to future revision.
Convergence of evidence. Strong scientific theories are supported by multiple, independent lines of evidence that all point to the same conclusion. For example, evolution is supported by:
Fossil record
Comparative anatomy
Genetics
Biogeography
Direct observation of evolution in action
This convergence makes theories robust, as it is highly unlikely that multiple lines of evidence would all support a false conclusion.
Pseudoscience is presented so that it appears scientific even though it lacks supporting evidence and plausibility.
Common tactics. Pseudoscience often mimics the trappings of real science while lacking its substance. Key characteristics include:
Cherry-picking evidence
Making unfalsifiable claims
Invoking conspiracy theories to explain lack of acceptance
Using scientific-sounding jargon inappropriately
Failing to follow the scientific method
Cognitive biases. Pseudoscience exploits natural human cognitive biases, such as:
Confirmation bias: Seeking information that confirms existing beliefs
Pattern recognition: Seeing meaningful patterns in random data
Anchoring: Relying too heavily on one piece of information
Appeal to nature: Assuming natural things are inherently good
Authority bias: Trusting claims from perceived authorities
Understanding these biases and fallacies can help individuals become more resistant to pseudoscientific claims.
How do we know the Holocaust happened? The same general method that scientists in such historical fields as archeology or paleontology use—through what William Whewell called a "consilience of inductions," or a convergence of evidence.
Convergence of evidence. The Holocaust is one of the most well-documented events in history, supported by multiple lines of evidence:
Written documents (orders, memos, blueprints)
Eyewitness testimony (survivors, liberators, perpetrators)
Physical evidence (camps, gas chambers, mass graves)
Demographic data
Nazi confessions
Denial tactics. Holocaust deniers use various techniques to sow doubt:
Cherry-picking and misrepresenting evidence
Exploiting minor discrepancies to dismiss all evidence
Presenting false dichotomies (e.g., either 6 million or none)
Shifting the burden of proof
Conspiracy theories to explain the "hoax"
Understanding how deniers distort history provides valuable lessons in critical thinking and the importance of evaluating claims based on the totality of evidence.
As skeptics and critical thinkers, we must move beyond our emotional responses because by understanding how others have gone wrong and how science is subject to social control and cultural influences, we can improve our understanding of how the world works.
Key critical thinking skills. Developing these skills can help individuals evaluate claims more effectively:
Logical reasoning
Recognizing cognitive biases
Understanding the scientific method
Evaluating sources and evidence
Considering alternative explanations
Application to everyday life. Critical thinking isn't just for academic settings. It's valuable for:
Making informed decisions
Evaluating media claims
Understanding political and social issues
Avoiding scams and misinformation
Personal growth and learning
Cultivating these skills requires practice and a willingness to challenge one's own beliefs and assumptions.
Hope springs eternal in the human breast; Man never Is, but always To be blest.
Emotional appeal. Many pseudoscientific and paranormal beliefs offer comfort, meaning, or a sense of control in an uncertain world. People are drawn to ideas that:
Promise easy solutions to complex problems
Offer a sense of specialness or hidden knowledge
Provide explanations for mysterious events
Align with existing worldviews or desires
Coping mechanism. Belief in pseudoscience or the paranormal can serve as a coping mechanism for:
Dealing with loss or grief
Facing uncertainty or lack of control
Seeking meaning or purpose
Addressing existential fears
Understanding this emotional dimension is crucial for effectively addressing and countering irrational beliefs.
Smart people believe weird things because they are skilled at defending beliefs they arrived at for non-smart reasons.
Intelligent irrationality. High intelligence can sometimes make individuals more susceptible to certain types of irrational beliefs:
Better ability to rationalize and defend beliefs
Overconfidence in one's own reasoning abilities
Skill at finding patterns (even where none exist)
Greater exposure to complex ideas that may include fringe beliefs
Examples of smart believers. History provides numerous examples of brilliant individuals holding irrational beliefs:
Arthur Conan Doyle (creator of Sherlock Holmes) believed in fairies
William Shockley (Nobel Prize-winning physicist) promoted eugenics
Linus Pauling (Nobel laureate) advocated megadoses of vitamin C
This demonstrates that critical thinking skills must be actively cultivated, even by highly intelligent individuals.
Most of us most of the time come to our beliefs for a variety of reasons having little to do with empirical evidence and logical reasoning.
Belief formation. Our beliefs are shaped by a complex interplay of factors:
Genetic predispositions
Early childhood experiences
Cultural and social influences
Emotional needs and desires
Personal experiences and traumas
Education and exposure to ideas
Belief maintenance. Once formed, beliefs are maintained through various psychological mechanisms:
Confirmation bias: Seeking information that supports existing beliefs
Cognitive dissonance: Discomfort when holding conflicting beliefs
Backfire effect: Strengthening beliefs when presented with contradictory evidence
Social reinforcement: Surrounding oneself with like-minded individuals
Understanding these psychological processes can help individuals become more aware of their own biases and more open to changing their minds when presented with new evidence.