← Back to context

Comment by mike_hearn

3 days ago

I didn't pick the example of climate change, but the field is irrelevant. It was just an example. The argument applies equally well regardless of what the hypothetical scientists are inventing data for.

It is possible for a single person to deceive all their peers if you assume unlimited incompetence and naiveity, but that should reduce your faith in what they say just as much!

The argument uses logical induction, not deduction. Induction works fine and is the sort of ordinary reasoning used by people every day. It's normal to trust a group of people less after they were caught lying. If you don't do this, you're the one being irrational, not other people.