Responsibilities for Correcting Woo

[moonsail]

If someone is propagating woo, e.g. "cell phones start fires at gas stations!", to people you regularly associate with, what sort of responsibility do you, as a rational human being, have

Comments

[7ghent]

I have a propensity to correct woo whenever and wherever I see it. However, the long term effect has been off-putting to people who are sensitive and possess poor critical-thinking skills. I was much more likely to hold my tongue when I was younger and more concerned with people liking me. It's kind of a mixed bag. Some people think I'm a dick, but pretty much anyone who holds that opinion because I've been outspoken in correcting their misconceptions isn't generally someone whose company I really enjoy.

Admittedly, that's a fairly cynical point of view. In terms of moral responsibility, I think that rational people have an obligation to correct bad information when it could result in harm to anyone. I would argue that all forms of irrational thought are potentially harmful, but there are degrees of direct and indirect harm. So, someone saying that cell phones start fires at gas stations isn't directly harmful in any likely scenario (unless say someone needed to call 911 from a gas station but they were afraid of starting a fire), but someone saying that vaccines cause autism is much more pernicious and directly harmful. So, the latter case definitely warrants action, where the former is more of a judgment call- is it worth the social cost?