Facts are slipperier than oiled eels. Daniel Engber, “Who Will Debunk The Debunkers?”:
This wasn’t just any sort of myth…but something he would term a ‘supermyth‘: A story concocted by respected scholars and then credulously disseminated in order to promote skeptical thinking and ‘to help us overcome our tendency towards credulous bias.’”
And so it goes, a whirligig of irony spinning around and around, down into the depths. Is there any way to escape this endless, maddening recursion? How might a skeptic keep his sanity?
This article is dizzying in a good way, like an amusement park ride for my brain. It’s also really well written.
(I love that meta-skeptic Sutton has his very own intense conviction, about Darwin, that other experts have not found persuasive. Fascinating irony.)