“Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep thoughts can be winnowed from deep nonsense.” – Carl Sagan

I ask this question of students in my classes, and they often laugh, “Of course we care what’s true!”  But inevitably, I find that as I talk about the best information we have in psychology today, several students will want to assert a belief that has long-since been left behind by researchers.  This is not so damaging in a classroom where debate and questioning are part of the learning process, but in real life, such reliance on old information can be dangerous.  A good example would be that of so-called “eyewitness testimony,” the foundation of the evidentiary process for years and years, and yet it was shown to be wildly inaccurate in research done more than two decades ago.  Reliance on eyewitness testimony has been reduced because of the research showing it is unreliable, but most people still believe that their brains are working much like a movie camera, recording accurately all that is seen.  Collectively, we had a hunch that we remember exactly what we see, but methodical investigation of that idea shows otherwise.  Every year as I teach this information, a student will be unable to accept that we are all susceptible to inaccurate recall, or reconstructed memory for an event.  They have fallen in love with a belief and are unwilling to give it up in the face of scientific fact.  In other words, they no longer care what is true, but want to continue believing the thing that feels most comfortable, or that confirms what they’ve “always thought.”

I care deeply about what is true, and that often means I must revise my ideas about something I have relied upon, even something I have thought to be true for a long while.  Rather than thinking of this as a betrayal of my former ideas, I regard these moments as exciting and interesting.  In fact, doesn’t it seem arrogant to imagine that my hunches and beliefs would all be correct, all of the time?

When Copernicus hypothesized that the earth was rotating around the sun, and that other planets also rotated in paths around the sun, he was denounced and thought to be a fool.  Galileo wrote essays also questioning the earth-centered universe, and was summarily punished as a heretic, his writings were destroyed and his liberty taken away.  And yet today we know Copernicus and Galileo were absolutely correct in their assumption that the sun is the center of our solar system, and that the earth does rotate on an axis, as well as around the sun.  These facts are no longer in question.   We are able to look at photos from space that clearly show how the planets array around our sun, and rotate in their own patterns, too.  We no longer regard this as a matter of speculation, and certainly not heresy, just as we are quite clear that the earth is round, rather than flat—which was also firmly believed at one time.  Scientific inquiry proposes and then tests, and often questions the status quo of our belief systems.  I’m okay with having my favorite ideas questioned if it means that I will be able to use the most up-to-date information available.  And even as my information is up-to-date, it is also up-for-revision by the rigorous testing of the scientific process.  I care what’s true, and urge you to care what’s true as well.