Motivated Reasoning Mistake

He explains why UCTs are as popular as they are in modern society, and why people should nevertheless disregard and approach them with caution. What Keeley refers to as “virtues” are the reason for the popularity of UCTs. He gives the virtue of explanatory reach as the first and main reason for UCTs popularity, which is the account of all knowledge including errant data. This is in stark contrast to the received theory, which is imperfect by nature. This quality of UCTs is particularly attractive because it appeals to human rationality by allowing for no loopholes. Keely argues that errant data alone is not significant enough, and that a theory should never fit all of the data. This leads into one of the main points, concerning falsifiability and skepticism. Unfalsifiability is acceptable when the item or person under investigation is not actively trying to escape from the investigator. Keeley contends that the problem is not the innate unfalsifiability, but rather the increasing amount of skepticism required. Keely seeks a hole in the concept of conspiracy theories that accounts for a person’s innate sense that belief in a particular conspiracy theory is not justified. In the case of the natural sciences, falsifiability is acceptable because of the rigorous protocols in place, and therefore, we are warranted in believing scientific claims.

Because when some are tested most of them turn out to be wrong. Which makes sense, somehow since most of the time they come from someone's opinion, experiences, or just thoughts.

by modern science and why is it often taught as a proven fact in high

To test just exactly how E.S.P. worked, he created an experiment with Zener cards, which had one of a total 5 pictures on each of them. Rhine would draw a card form the deck and ask the subject to guess what picture was on the card. Out of the many subjects tested, most guessed only about 20% of the cards correct, but one young man averaged about 50% correct. This young man, Adam Linzmayer, would even guess up to 9 cards in a row, which was almost a one in a million chance—he did it three times. Rhine became overly excited of his findings on his belief in E.S.P. and wanted to publish the results. But upon his replication of the experiment, Linzmayer’s success rate of guessing the drawn cards greatly decreased (Lehrer, para. 12-13). This decline effect could possible be due to regressive fallacy, which is the inability to account natural and unavoidable fluctuations in experiments. For example, things like stock market prices and chronic back pain unavoidably fluctuate between prosperous and well-feeling times to poor and pain-filled times. By setting aside the idea of natural and unavoidable fluctuations, one can ultimately fall into self-deception and into post hoc

Methodologically, the hypothesis is not founded upon methodological impartiality. One of the vital limitations is the absence of

“The Mystery of Motivation” appeared in the January-February 2017 article written by Gary Drevitch, who is a senior editor for Psychology Today. Drevitch a Yale graduate, currently resides in New York City with his wife and three kids. His previous work includes senior editor at PBS, Time Inc., Scholastic and Parade Publications, and is the former editor-in-chief of Grandparents.com and an AOL blogger on weight loss and nutrition.

The contradicting results identified may result from a number of limitations found in the materials reviewed above. Possible limitations are explored below.

There are many different scientific theories that have been ignored at the time of when the idea was first come up with.

In “The Surprising Science of Motivation”, Dan Pink explained how the 21st century is requiring people to become more creative and think outside of the box. Allowing yourself to view all the possibilities instead of restricting solutions can provide more positive rewards. As a result, I find myself understanding the concept that external rewards like money are not the best way to motivate ourselves or others. Therefore, motivation lies within everyone by giving them the power to examine three elements of motivation which include autonomy, mastery, and purpose. Those that follow this motivation are not receiving cash reward but a reward of accomplishing their own task. In summary, I know understand that a person can be motivated by their

When the data is interpreted by others, it should not appear to be biased in any way. The findings are typically more reliable and valid if there is more than one person or group that has researched and represented the work. This helps to rule out the possibility of the results being biased. Valid scientific work should always have reasonable explanations for the observations made. There also should not be any pre-established conclusions in the investigations, even if the experiment had been tested previously. There is always a chance that the results may change in future

by eminent scholars is compared against with ours, our findings can hardly pale into insignificance as errors and the cause of

All scientists hold to a few foundational scientific principles no matter their particular worldview. Sometimes a worldview and a scientific discovery refuse to harmonize. When this happens, something has to give. Either the person will redefine his worldview to fit the new data or he will be forced to view the scientific evidence in such a way that it now conforms to his worldview.

Suicide is not a rational answer to man's suffering. Von Goethe himself exhorts his reader "to be a man and not follow Werther." It is hard to give Werther's character sympathy for a self-destructive tendency. Even Lotte can perceive his ruinous path: "Do you not sense that you are deceiving yourself and willing your own destruction?." Rather than being a man and admitting his culpability, he acts like a child. Werther's disposition supports his decision for taking his own life. It is not uncommon for an artist with ". . . a soft heart and a fiery imagination " to take their own life. Werther sees suicide as strength rather than weakness. In his argument with Albert over this question he states ". . . in my

Though this theory is being criticized, it is still important because many other theories are based

I strongly believe that motivation is pre-positioned on what we believe - our convictions. Therefore, in order to know if our motives are right we have to know ourselves, examine ourselves, know what our convictions are, and have the courage to stand by them.