Non Sequitur by Wiley Miller for August 10, 2020

Today’s strip is frighteningly on point.

The “simple but wrong” path advertised mask-free dining at the end of the trail.

From 2016. I knew it looked familiar.

It has to be said: portrait the GOP-rebuilt TeaParty Taliban.

I’m pretty sure I’ve seen this one from Wiley. Still spot on…

An oldie but a goodie.

Good advice meme I have in my collection of wallpaper -

“THINK

Before you speak

T is it True?

H is it Helpful?

I is it Inspiring?

N is it Necessary?

K is it Kind?"

Simple, as in believing some magical being created and controls everything.

I am on the fence on this one. If you can’t explain to a 6yr old what your phd thesis is (especially hard sciences) – then you probably can’t explain anything. I generally find it exasperating when ppl start explanations with “It’s complicated…”. At the same time, whether one like it or no, the simplicity of the “Ten Commandments” (wrt agrarian soc.) is commendable.

Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leads to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leads unto life, and few there be that find it.

Can’t help but notice that the ’’wrong’’ side goes ’’left’’.

It’s called " culling the herd " . . . .

Science should never be thought of as “right”, just a workable explanation of the facts as we know them. Scientists have been wrong many, many times.

The left arrow could say “Absolutes” and the right “Changing”. People are uncomfortable with change.

Two roads diverged in a yellow wood….

Thanks Wiley, another perfect example of your smarts!

Of course there’s a third option that involves conspiracy theorists who believe they are right but are wrong.

The 50’s were a simpler time. Could be cuz I was just a kid, or maybe just too stupid to know any different.

Narrow is the path and difficult is the journey …

Some use the road less travelled without knowing why. The rest have GPS. They know where they are going, just don’t care!

This is a brilliant strip. Thank you

I’ve said this before:

Occam’s Razor: the simplest explanation that adequately describes an event is most likely to be true.

Murphy’s Blunt Instrument: The explanation that requires the most conspirators and the longest sequence of unlikely events is most likely to be believed.

Eyes and ears covered, brain off. It’s the way of things

What else is there to say????

the problem is:BOTH sides think they’re on the complicated path. Science deniers study complicated conspiracy theories, COVID “treatments”, and"decode" 45’s messages.

Science believers find it complicated to sift through misinformation let alone trust ANY report, and fight against the deniers who sabotage preventative COVID measures.

I just love that BOTH paths lead to the cliff’s edge.

In my experience, 90 times out of 100 things are “complicated” only because the explainer is trying to pull the wool over my eyes, 9 times out of 100 its because the explainer doesn’t really know what he is talking about, and 1 time out of 100 its about the Plot to the “Transformers” Cartoon.

Depends on what you consider complex. Most people just want it dumbed down to a few words in a sentence and that’s it. Others have the patience for an explanation.

As I approach the start of my octogenarian era, I have come to the conclusion that very few people enjoy thinking deeply, probing the premises and rationales underlying their beliefs, and accepting that everything they hold true may, in fact, be untrue. I’m a scientist, by nature and by training, and I’ve come to this position: “I know very, very little; and I believe nothing.” I’m comfortable living with total uncertainty, in a cold, indifferent universe. I have no need for a deity; I accept my existence as what it is, a manifestation of physics, chemistry and biology. When I want to better understand, I write essays. When I read them aloud, I know whether I’m lying to myself or not. I stay off the path of simple-minded certitude.

It kind of looks like the “Complex, but right” road is just a longer walk to the cliff.

Simple But Wrong: The GOP Platform, and ALL their candidates! True in 2016, more so today!

We all drop off the cliff eventually but the complex path takes longer AND you get to enjoy a good book. Why rush to your conclusion, when the best part is in the getting there?

" … an’ they all went to heaven in a little rowboat."

Notice that right is ‘right’ and left is ‘wrong’.

Science is not so much a matter of right vs wrong, but merely the best information we have at the moment. Science does not advance through consensus but disagreement and what we thought was “right” often turns out to be wrong. But that really is too complex for most, Wiley included.

You’re at risk of pushing the false premises that “it must be complex to be right” and/or “if it’s simple, it must be wrong”

This is exactly why executives love Power Point. Simple can easily be spun into “plausible deniability”.

We have a 5 year old as president, you can’t tell him anything!

Gotta love America. Land of the free (to be ignorant).

This cartoon has roots in the ancient story of the Choice of Heracles, which goes back to the ancient Greek sophist Prodicus, as reported by Xenophon in the “Memorabilia”; Heracles is offered a choice between the easy path of Vice and the arduous path of Virtue.

The cartoon is about people wanting quick and simple answers, no matter if they are wrong, and not bothering to take the time to learn about the issue to come up with intelligent answers. It isn’t about the 10 commandments or being able to explain complicated theories to a young child.

Simple but wrong is a LEFT turn…hmmm….

I think “convenient” could be used instead of simple. Most, if not all, conspiracy theories are often very complex, even if beyond stupid.

You have to have some background to understand the basics of science, which means education at an early age. I had a friend who hoped one day to create a philosophy that would encompass science and be understandable to everyone. I told her I often felt lucky if I could explain the concept of “toast”.

It’s not about explaining something in simplistic terms. While it’s often the more simply answer will be correct, breaking down complex situations into overly simplistic characteristics will almost always yield incorrect analysis and assumptions. It’s more like conformational bias where you start with a specific position and then find data to support it. In this case you look for the simple perspective because it’s easier to rally behind. Simplification bias is as Equally wrong as conformational bias. A little like going to the doctor and have them focus on a pain in your foot and address the fact that you have diabetes because it was was easier to explain an infection rather than the more complex underlying issues.

Shouldn’t the over the cliff gang be wearing their little red MAGA caps..??

Not quite right: Humans do not care whether an answer is simple or complex, as long as it is easy.

Take the road less traveled…

The NYTImes had a story yesterday about the conflict between doctors that reacted to treating flu patients based on their hunches, versus those that said only doing those controlled studies would tell us what really worked. Six months later all of the simple hunches & answers have been proved wrong and science is finding what actually works. Q.E.D.

Pretty much explains Washington DC and pretty much every state capitol in the country (regardless of Red or Blue)

For any given complex, expensive, time-consuming problem there exists at least one simple, cheap, easy wrong answer.

“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ’my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”

Isaac Asimov

The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.

Our great democracies still tend to think that a stupid man is more likely to be honest than a clever man, and our politicians take advantage of this prejudice by pretending to be even more stupid than nature made them.

Bertrand Russell

Too late to catch the whole thing live, but the live news coverage on WGN, where the obviously right wing news was trying for gotcha moments and trying to change the narrative of what happened last night in Chicago, which has nothing to do with the peaceful protests for change, but oh, does the right want to feed that narrative. One even suggesting that shop owners should take the law into their own hands which would create more chaos, not less. So much for them supporting the police, even though 13 were injured while arresting and doing their job correctly. There was a shootout with police with an actual armed shooter, that may have been what the looters used as an excuse to loot.

Peaceful protesters who want real change and merely want equality wait for the facts and protest peacefully, they do not loot.

People that immediately run out and loot on false information in the middle of the night based on false information about a shooting. About 100 people were arrested and likely more will be as there are cameras everywhere these days. The police need help, but they don’t need vigilantes.

Excellent…

It’s not like they weren’t warned. The signs are obvious!

A lot of science is simple and straight forward.

So much for Occam’s Razor.

And below the end of the line to the left is a bunch of Wiley Bears wearing nothing but bibs and smiles.

I believe that some of us don’t want to do the work, read, think, ask questions, research, read think, listen to others, ask more questions. That is how humans learn. Questions require answers. Answers require work, and sometimes life is complicated, but that is what lifelong learning and education mean, no?

Maybe I’m seeing it wrong, but it looks like the right-hand path heads for the cliff too, just not as quickly!

Except the simple but wrong path should be on the ‘right’ and complex but right should be on the ‘left’.

To me it is a simpler concept-life isn’t necessarily easier and that road less traveled may be harder but the rewards greater; taking the easy way out has its own quick rewards and longer lasting downfalls…..or it is just the “lemmings to the sea”.

The usual scientific explanation of why birds and airplanes fly is simple, but wrong. It is, however, a useful abstraction that is easy to work with when designing wings and aircraft. Science isn’t quite as concrete as the cartoonist thinks it is.

I do believe people take the easy way out when looking for answers. Science is so often ignored when faced with rhetoric. Unfortunately, even those of science ignore that math is more absolute than science and will bend science to support their desired results (E.g. It is a proven mathematical impossibility ribozyme sequencing occurred by chance – 4^300)

Looking at the “cartoon” for what it is, if you’re immersed in social (whatever the heck that is) media and follow it like lemmings, you take the left turn. If you’re an independent thinker, you take the right.

Occam’s Razor says that often the simple solution is the best …

And this is how Hitler rose to power.

Perhaps instead of “simple” the left sign should say “The easy answers”. A good life is NEVER easy.

I think Kaspersky (of the anti virus software) put it best.

“People are stupid and lazy.”

Most people will take the simple and easy path regardless of the consequences.

Science usually simplifies. It’s the complex conspiracy theory that’s usually wrong and the simple, but accurate explanation that’s right. The key in science is that “accurate” part.

“Simple” does not mean “wrong”, nor does “complex” mean “right”.

Well, we’re up the proverbial waterway now: Harris.

Turning and turning in the widening gyre

The falcon cannot hear the falconer;

Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;

Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,

The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere

The ceremony of innocence is drowned;

The best lack all conviction, while the worst

Are full of passionate intensity.

What about Occam’s Razor?

It makes my brain hurt, but I gotta do what I gotta do …

if the average mentality of your audience is 5, you should trade up and let them watch sesame street.

To in.amongst, respectfully about “If you can’t explain to a 6yr old what your phd thesis is (especially hard sciences) – then you probably can’t explain anything.“ – I wonder where do some people come up with that spurious criterion to test the comprehensibility of something. Try explaining the difference between an algorithm and a logarithm, or between metonimy and allegory (you’ll have to use examples, of course, but then you’ll invite more questions!).

Now, what does a 6th year old knows about life and abstract concepts, especially those depending on other abstract concepts to understand, such as the idea of interpretant in semiotics, for which you need a basic understanding of language and grammar, just to begin?