I’ve always thought that the truth (being objective and indisputable) would win any and all arguments. How could it not?
Turns out, it doesn’t — and it’s proven more true in recent years.
The challenge is that the (objective) truth can become tainted by emotions and beliefs, or be disregarded altogether because of the same.
Back in the 80s and 90s, debates raged about the use of nuclear power. Multiple disasters had occured, the public was scared, and there was a strong belief that nuclear power was dangerous and should not be used.
In Denmark, this belief prevailed and we never built any nuclear power plants.
This is contrary to the facts, which show that nuclear power is much safer than any conventional power source at the time, and happened to be a lot cleaner too.
We know this now, and we knew it then. We had all the facts. We had the truth, but we chose to ignore it.
So, why didn’t truth win the debate?
The reason, I believe, is that people are more swayed by emotions than facts. In a situation where emotions ring stronger than facts, it doesn’t matter how right you are, you will lose the argument.
Anecdotes can be especially convincing. We tend to connect much more with stories than with numbers which is why they are so powerful.
It took me a long time to understand and I still struggle to accept it.
I continue to believe that we should strive for truth, but as truth-seekers, we should not forget that not everyone are receptive to cold, hard facts.