A fascination with errors

It is standard practice for skeptics to emphasize that they are not debunkers or naysayers, and I generally agree. The point isn't to show someone is wrong, but to determine the truth, which is a positive thing. We focus on the many ways in which truth is lost or science is misused. However, I wonder if many of us in fact do have an inner fascination with things being wrong, regardless of our protests. My recent pile of summer reading books make me think that about myself.

Every summer I go through my reading list and order a stack of books to dig into for the summer. I usually try to get a variety of topics, and this time I avoided biology. I got books on psychology and law and politics instead, but most of them are still of a skeptical nature. The two books I started reading first are the two that made me reflect on whether I just like to find mistakes. They are But They Didn't Read Me My Rights!: Myths, Oddities, and Lies About Our Legal System by Michael Cicchini and , and 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: Shattering Widespread Misconceptions about Human Behavior by Scott O. Lilienfeld....

As I've studied why people believe wrong things, one thing that often comes up is that most people hold on to cherished beliefs. They do not like to be told that they are wrong. They are slow to change their minds or reject previously held beliefs. Debunking a myth is as likely to reinforce belief in it as to correct it. I seem to be the opposite, and I wonder if a lot of other skeptics are too. I love to find out I was wrong. I get a thrill when I find out something I always thought was true is in fact false. The two books above both deal with correcting widely held myths.

I can't really argue that this is just my interest in science. One of the books has nothing at all to do with science. It deals with myths about the law. But it does the same thing I often do with science--exposed widely held beliefs that are wrong. Why am I attracted to this book? Is my skepticism not just a love of science, but a fascination with errors?

Many years ago, long before I was familiar with the skeptical movement or called myself a skeptic (although I definitely had a scientific and critical mind at the time) I happened to find a book on urban legends, by Harold van Brunvand. It was just lying around at the library, I picked it up, and was fascinated. I finished the book and soon read all of the other books on the topic by Brunvand. Again, these books did not deal with science. It simply dealt with stories that many people believe are true but are not. Yet again I was fascinated with the discovery of widely held beliefs that are wrong. I loved the debunking of these stories.

I very rarely find myself resisting these corrections. I change my mind readily, almost eagerly, and I remember the corrections. I guess there are a few examples I have used in my lectures that I later find out are wrong, and I do resist those for awhile. The viceroy butterfly mimicking the monarch butterfly is such a great example of Batesian mimickery, and I have used it in my teaching. When I discovered it may actually be Mullerian mimickery, I resisted and wasn't so happy to accept the correction, but usually that is not the case.

I don't know why I like finding errors. Maybe it is still just a love of the truth. Maybe I secretly feel superior by having privileged knowledge. Maybe I am fascinated by what leads to falsehood in all areas, not just science. But if I am honest, I have to admit I rather do like debunking. I like finding the truth but especially like it when the truth is contrary to popular belief. I wonder if this is common in skeptics.

I don't think that a fascination with common misconceptions makes me, or any skeptic, a negative naysayer. I do not dismiss things out of hand, and do not denigrate people who believe in errors nor do I constantly point out mistakes. I require evidence before I accept something is wrong. I very happily reject my previous beliefs if the evidence suggests I should. I am simply fascinated with errors.

While many people err by holding on to beliefs that are wrong, I wonder if I err by too readily accepting something is wrong. Have I rejected a common belief too quickly when in fact it is true? I cannot quickly think of any such examples, but I should reflect more on that. We all need to monitor ourselves for our biases.