Wouldn’t it be great if we could get along with our left-leaning guests this holiday season, even when they go on a rant about energy and the environment over Christmas dinner? “We must solve the climate crisis!” they might say. Or “We must transition from fossil fuels to wind and solar power.” “Capitalism is destroying the world!”
If only they knew the facts, we might think, then they would not support such misguided ideas. We would therefore be tempted to politely fill them in on the benefits of carbon dioxide, hydrocarbon fuels, and free enterprise.
Alas, we would almost certainly fail, not because our facts or our logic are wrong, but because of what the 17th-century English philosopher Sir Francis Bacon called four Idols of the Mind, ways in which our thinking is misled by inherent traits and social influences. By understanding Bacon’s ideas, it will be easier to silently forgive our outspoken guests, change the topic, and offer them another serving of plum pudding.
Bacon’s first idol was the Idols of the Tribe, a bias that affects everyone. This concerns our natural tendency to put more importance on positive evidence — observations that support our point of view — than on negative evidence. We also tend to look for attractive patterns in our experience, patterns that are not necessarily consistent, significant, or even real.
A good example in the climate change case is the conclusion that because there is a correlation between increasing carbon dioxide (CO2) and increasing temperature in some time intervals, this supposedly proves that CO2 rise causes temperature rise. That the correlation does not apply in other time intervals is considered inconsequential by the true believer in man-made climate change. As singer/songwriter Paul Simon said, “A man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest.”
Next, Bacon spoke about the Idols of the Cave, specific biases that affect each of us as individuals due to due to our personalities, likes, and dislikes. For example, some people are convinced that industrialization is bad, so, in support of this personal hobbyhorse, they frequently see evidence that industrialization causes serious problems, even if the significance of this evidence is questionable. That the problems may have entirely different causes is often overlooked by people who are overly influenced by the Idols of the Cave.
Similarly, people who are dedicated to some specific branch of learning may also fall prey to the Idol of the Cave to the extent that they interpret much of what they see in the light of their own field only. Like the chemist who sees chemistry in all things, the person who focuses on human causes of climate change may see human causation even in environmental changes other experts regard as natural.
Bacon also identified the Idols of the Marketplace, prejudices that come through social interactions, particularly those that are mediated through the use of language that is equivocal. Such ambiguities result in people talking past each other since they do not really understand their opponents and may use the same terms for quite different ideas.
For instance, activists and the U.N. are often criticized for saying “climate change is real,” as this statement seems so self-evident as to be useless. Climate has been changing since the origin of the atmosphere, and it will continue to do so no matter what we do. So, of course, climate change is real, critics say; so is sunrise and gravity. This does not mean humanity causes them.
But the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change defines the term “climate change” to mean:
“a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over considerable time periods.”
So, to the promoters of the hypothesis of man-made climate change, “climate change is real” is indeed meaningful. Such confusion in the use of language is one of the reasons discussions between people of differing positions on climate change often degenerate into angry arguments that accomplish nothing.
Finally, Bacon identified the Idols of the Theatre, a tendency of people to think erroneously because of what they were taught in school. This is very prominent in the case of climate change science. Most high school, college, and university climate change courses start from a premise that science proves that human industrial activity is the primary cause of the past century’s warming and that catastrophe lies ahead if we do not change our ways. Graduates from these institutions are, therefore, strongly conditioned to accept academic dogma about climate change and not ask the questions that need to be asked if we are to come to a balanced understanding of the issue.
We might try, gradually over months, to help our guests understand what real-world data actually shows about climate change and the benefits of fossil fuels and capitalism. But, to expect to undo these four deeply entrenched Idols of the Mind over Christmas dinner is unrealistic.
I used to support the climate scare, but a geologist at a local university patiently and respectfully showed me a different way of looking at climate change, and it changed my outlook and, eventually, my career forever. We, too, can bring left-wingers over to our side of the climate debate by not viewing them as stupid or out to destroy society and instead understanding where they are coming from, recognizing that we, too, are influenced by Sir Francis Bacon’s Idols of the Mind.
When they say we must solve the climate crisis I offer them the carving knife and say, ‘You go first.’
Marxism is the goal, now do you understand? It’s not about the weather or climate and never has been. Just like the fraud of evolution, the goal was to destroy Christianity, not prove the missing link.