I find that the "Greater Male Variability Hypothesis" is another of my triggers for irrational responses to science. It doesn't ring true to me, and I haven't found support for it that I've found convincing. However, I'm so very biased against it that I don't trust myself to have looked for it well. In 2006, on my personal blog, I posted the following quote, attributed to Bertrand Russell, although I haven't been able to confirm that it's really his:
"If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do. Whenever you find yourself getting angry about a difference of opinion, be on your guard; you will probably find, on examination, that your belief is going beyond what the evidence warrants."I'm not sure if I entirely buy into this concept: there are plenty of B.S. opinions that it's perfectly okay to get angry about. However, I think this is a case where I'm probably "going beyond" the evidence -- or perhaps not as far?
Find out the day's topic before you read: follow diffblog on Twitter! Diffblog also available on LiveJournal.
Difference Blog Reader Poll