Something You Should Know - The Big Difference Between Being Kind and Being Nice & How Science Really Works

Episode Date: October 12, 2020

People will be more attracted to you if you appear confident. So this episode begins with short list of things you can do easily that will make you feel and appear as confident as possible. http://www.askmen.com/money/body_and_mind_150/173_better_living.html Kind and nice are two words that are often used interchangeably but they don’t mean the same thing. Truly being kind is a lot harder and riskier and has a much greater chance of making the world a better place. Listen as I speak with Houston Kraft, author of the book called Deep Kindness A Revolutionary Guide for the Way We Think, Talk, and Act in Kindness (https://amzn.to/2SFKPhj) as he explains what it means to be kind and how it can change the world.  When driving, you probably don’t think much about turning left – but left-hand turns are amazingly dangerous. Listen as I explain why avoiding left hand turns is a good idea whenever possible and why it is rare to see a UPS truck turn left. https://www.friedgoldberg.com/blog/how-left-hand-turns-affect-road-safety/  We hear a lot today about how we should “Trust the science!” So what does that really mean? What is science anyway? What makes something “scientific.” Someone who is well equipped to answer that is James C. Zimring, M.D. and Ph.D. in Immunology and professor of pathology at the University of Virginia. He is also author of the book, What Science Is and How It Really Works (https://amzn.to/2GNQQWA). Listen as he explains how science is used and sometimes misused to explain the world and why so many people don’t trust science. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Bumble knows it's hard to start conversations. Hey. No, too basic. Hi there. Still no. What about hello, handsome? Who knew you could give yourself the ick? That's why Bumble is changing how you start conversations.

You can now make the first move or not. With opening moves, you simply choose a question to be automatically sent to your matches. Then sit back and let your matches start the chat. Download Bumble and try it for yourself. Today on Something You Should Know, how to project that perfect image of confidence. Then there's more to kindness than you ever knew. I mean, how many people think of themselves as kind? Probably 10 out of 10 people would say they're kind, but I think they're actually

saying they're nice. You know, people are nice to the people because it's a reaction. Nice you if I like you. I'll be nice to you if I agree with you. Kindness is different. It's not reactive. It's proactive. Also, why you should really avoid making left-hand turns as much as possible and understanding how science really works and why a lot of people today don't trust science for two main reasons. First is, science has been wrong in the past, so why should we trust it in the future?

But then the second thing is that science, I think, is mistrusted by people as an establishment. And so depending upon what group of people you talk to, trust in science or lack thereof varies widely. All this today on Something You Should Know. People who listen to Something You Should Know are curious about the world, looking to hear new ideas and perspectives. So I want to tell you about a podcast that is full of new ideas and perspectives, and one I've started listening to called Intelligence Squared. It's the podcast where great minds meet. Listen in for some great talks on

science, tech, politics, creativity, wellness, and a lot more. A couple of recent examples, Mustafa Suleiman, the CEO of Microsoft AI, discussing the future of technology. That's pretty cool. And writer, podcaster, and filmmaker John Ronson, discussing the rise of conspiracies and culture wars. Intelligence Squared is the kind of podcast that gets you thinking a little more openly about the important conversations going on today. Being curious, you're probably just the type of person Intelligence Squared is meant for. Check out Intelligence Squared wherever you get your podcasts.

Something you should know. Fascinating intel. The world's top experts. And practical advice you can use in your life. Today, Something You Should Know with Mike Carruthers. Hi, welcome to Something You Should Know. You know, it's so much fun to do this podcast because I get to talk to so many interesting people about so many interesting topics. And one that was a lot of fun that will be coming up in the next few weeks or so was with John Cleese.

I just interviewed him the other day from Monty Python, and I've always been a big Monty Python fan. So it was a lot of fun to talk to him. He has a new book out on creativity, and I think you'll find it really interesting. First up today, confidence. Confidence is attractive. People are drawn to others who appear to be confident and in control. So if you want to appear more confident, even if you aren't feeling it, here's some advice from AskMen.com.

Let clothes leave no doubt. If you're worried that you're wearing the wrong shirt or the wrong shoes, it's going to sap your confidence. So don't leave home without feeling completely confident in your appearance. Keep your hands low. Imagine a line around your torso and keep your hands below that line. When your hands are up any higher, it gives the appearance that you're fidgeting and uncomfortable. Not a confident look.

Looking people in the eye when you speak to them exudes confidence. If you find it difficult to do, find a spot on the person's face near their eye and look at that. And don't over-explain yourself. Once you make a statement, stop talking. People who are insecure and lack confidence feel the need to keep explaining their position over and over again. So don't do that. And that is something you should know. What does it mean to be kind to others? Are we hardwired to help others and do kind things?

Or are we hardwired just to take care of ourselves and our own? Is there a benefit to being kind to you as the giver? And are you really kind, or are you just nice? These are interesting and important questions that have been studied by Houston Craft. Houston is a speaker, an author, and kindness advocate. He has a book out called Deep Kindness, a revolutionary guide for the way we think, talk, and act in kindness. Hi, Houston. Thanks so much, Michael. Excited to chat. So I think that all of us have seen, witnessed,

or been a part of amazing acts of kindness, and we've also seen amazing acts of cruelty and lack of kindness. So would you say that humans are generally kind? I think generally human beings want to be kind, but I would suggest that the actual road to becoming deeply kind, to having it be a piece of who we are, is something that requires intentional ongoing work. I think we have a disposition that wants to serve others, but we have circumstances that prevent us from that. You know, there's research around empathy. My friend Dr. Michelle Borba, as an example, has been thinking about and researching empathy for three

decades. And she says, the biggest things that cause a decrease in empathy in my capacity to understand who you are, what you're going through, the three biggest barriers are anxiety, fear, and narcissism. You think about those three words and how they've increased in our world, not necessarily as a direct fault of our own, but I think just the pressure of our world, of what social media has created. I think there's, obviously, in the current circumstances of the world, there's increased anxiety. And you start to realize that that makes sense, right? The more anxious I am, the more worried I am about what's going on in my world, the harder time I have thinking about what's going on in yours. And so while we might

want to be kind, I think it requires quite a bit more discipline and quite a bit more practice than maybe we give it credit for, right? That fluffy exterior version that we think about when it comes to kindness. I think when we think about something as light or free or as fluffy, we don't allocate the necessary resources to improve at it. So yeah, there's a gap. Well, it's interesting how people today say that the world that we live in right now is not particularly kind, that there's a lot of division and a lot of rather unkind things being said. And yet when you ask individuals, it's hard to imagine anybody saying, no, I'm not kind. I'm just a real jerk. Everybody, I think, likes to think they're

kind, don't you think? Yeah, I would say probably 10 out of 10 people would say they're kind, but I think they're actually saying they're nice. I think we're all, I heard this from a kid at a school I spoke at in Texas. He's like, you know, you talked about kindness today, and I feel like a lot of my classmates weren't listening because they think they're already there. They would say we have a kind school, but he goes, I think we have a nice school. You know, people are nice to the people because it's a reaction. I'll be nice to you if I like you. I'll be nice to you if I agree with you. But he goes, kindness is different. The way you talked about kindness today, he goes, it's not reactive, it's proactive. It requires me to make time. It requires me to look for need.

It requires me to help people, even if I don't see that they're actively hurting. And he goes, I think kindness requires a lot of work. And I think I have a lot of work to do. And I love that humble perspective that I wish more of us took, which is to say, if I look at kindness as this essential part of a meaningful life, of a successful life, and recognize every day that I have work to do, then we get to stop feeling like we've already arrived at this thing. Just because we believe in something doesn't mean we're good at it. I believe I can make that free throw, but I'm not a good basketball player because I haven't put in the time, over time, to be competent at it. Same thing's true with kindness.

I think we have a world where we say it's a good thing, but we're collectively not very good at it. And so there's work. There's work to close the gap. That is brilliant. That is a brilliant observation, I think, that people think they're kind, but really, mostly they're nice. And nothing wrong with being nice, but it's a step or two back from kindness. It's certainly, niceness, I believe, doesn't move the cultural needle forward. It maintains the status quo.

Showing up when it's comfortable, when it's convenient, but as my mentor Tyler says, a commitment to growth is a commitment to pain, which means seeking opportunities where it is uncomfortable, where it does challenge us, where we have to do something that's inconvenient. That's how we make a more compassionate world. That's great. I love, and who said that? A kid? Yeah, high school senior, small town outside of San Antonio, Texas. Well, I've always sensed that there is a lot of pent-up kindness, for lack of a better term. And that is that people want to do something, but they don't know what to do.

Like, you know, I give a couple of bucks to the guy begging for money at the intersection. Is that being kind? Is that really helping the guy? Or, you know, the world is full of problems. What can I do? I feel so insignificant. I can't really make a difference. And so I think people don't do anything. Yeah, I think abstractness reduces action. The bigger and more amorphous a concept is, the harder time I'm going to have putting it into practical, certainly practical, consistent action over time. The metaphor I always use is

the menu at the Cheesecake Factory. I don't know if you visited recently, but the menu is like 200 pages long. And when we get overwhelmed by choice, it's the paradox of choice. When there's too many choices, our brains don't work as well. So the first time I ever went to the Cheesecake Factory, I ordered the Chipotle chicken pasta, and it was delicious. And now, I don't know, eight times out of ten when I go back to the Cheesecake Factory, my most natural inclination is order that thing again. I think that concept translates to kindness. Those things like paying for the coffee for the person in that line behind you or, to your point, giving the person a dollar who's experiencing homelessness or helping the old lady across the street, those are the things that we've seen for so long. They've become the chipotle chicken pastas of kindness. So how do we think about it differently? To your point,

how do we actually know how to mobilize this big abstract idea? I use something in my brain called intersectional thinking, which is just like sort of a Venn diagram to help your brain wrap your head around really big ideas. You can use this in lots of different disciplines, but for kindness as an example, let's say instead of saying, how do I practice kindness today, which is a massive abstract question, what if instead I said, let's add one circle, one way to narrow the focus. How do I practice kindness towards a certain person in my life? Maybe that's my mom, maybe it's a roommate, maybe it's a neighbor. And that question immediately is different. How do I practice kindness towards my mom is a different premise, is a different ask than how do I practice kindness towards my roommate? To make it true, intersectional thinking,

then diagram, what if we were to add one more layer? How do I practice kindness towards my mom with a certain time frame? That could be five minutes today, right? One of the premises I believe deeply in kindness is that specificity is going to drive meaning and it's going to drive action. The more specific I am, the more likely I'm going to do that thing. And the more specific the action, the more meaningful it is to the person receiving it. One of the interesting things to me about kindness is how easy it is to put it at the – how it moves down the bottom of the, I could be kind today, but I'm just too busy. You know, it's like, that's the one thing that I just can't go out of my way today, because I have all these other more important things to do.

So how do we reframe that? Well, one of my favorite articles comes from the Wall Street Journal. Its title is, Are You As Busy As You Think? And it begs us to reframe the way we think about time. It says, what if we're never again allowed to say, I don't have time? What if I had to say, this is not my priority? Meaning, the places we allocate our time are really the things that we say we value. Whether we say them out loud or not, what we actually value are the things that we give our most precious resources to. Probably the most precious of all, of course, time. So a strategy I offer that I came up with as a result of watching a nurse interact with my mom as she was navigating stage four colon cancer I realized that all these different nurses came in out of my mom's

room but I only remember one of them and it occurred to me that all of them had a to-do list that was quite similar and yet this one her name is wonderful this one for some reason was way more memorable and I realized it was because of the things not on her to-do list, but the things on her who she wants to be list. So while she's getting things done, she still has a job to do. She made it a priority to be present, to be singing, to be joyful, to share stories, to be kind. And so a practice I've started integrating into my life and into our organization is as you're writing down your daily to-do list, what if you were to visually cue yourself to remind yourself of how important those to-be list items are by writing a to-be list above the to-do list? Let's say I have

10 things on the to-do list today, but my to-be list just has one or two. And maybe on my to-be list today is kind and grateful. And now my job is to take these abstract ideas and again, make them really specific. To be kind today looks like blank. Well, maybe it looks like sending a video to my grandma who recently had to put down her cat and I want to check in with her. So I'm going to make five minutes today to film that video and send it off to her to be grateful. I know how good that is for my mental health, my mental well-being. And when I take a walk today, I'm not going to take my device. Instead, I'm going to see if I can find five things that I'm grateful for within a 10-minute walk of my home.

So now I still have that deep human desire, right? I still have the ability to check those things off, which we love checking things off. But I'm making a priority of these abstract ideas that when I get busy, as you say, they fall naturally to the bottom of our list, unless we make time for that, which we believe is most important. We're talking about kindness and what it really means to be kind. My guest is Houston Craft, and he is author of the book Deep Kindness, a revolutionary guide for the way we think, talk, and act in kindness. Hi, this is Rob Benedict. And I am Richard Spate. We were both on a little show you might know called Supernatural.

It had a pretty good run, 15 seasons, 327 episodes. And though we have seen, of course, every episode many times, we figured, hey, now that we're wrapped, let's watch it all again. And we can't do that alone. So we're inviting the cast and crew that made the show along for the ride.

We've got writers, producers, composers, directors, and we'll, of course, have some actors on as well, including some certain guys that played some certain pretty iconic brothers. It was kind of a little bit of a left field choice in the best way possible. The note from Kripke was, he's great, we love him, but we're looking for like a really intelligent Duchovny type. With 15 seasons to explore, it's going to be the road trip of several lifetimes. So please join us and subscribe to Supernatural then and now.

Since I host a podcast, it's pretty common for me to be asked to recommend a podcast. And I tell people, if you like something you should know, you're going to like The Jordan Harbinger Show. Every episode is a conversation with a fascinating guest. Of course, a lot of podcasts are conversations with guests, but Jordan does it better than most. Recently, he had a fascinating conversation with a British woman who was recruited and radicalized by ISIS and went to prison for three years. She now works to raise awareness on this issue. It's a great conversation. And he spoke with Dr. Sarah Hill about how taking birth control not only prevents pregnancy,

it can influence a woman's partner preferences, career choices, and overall behavior due to the hormonal changes it causes. Apple named The Jordan Harbinger Show one of the best podcasts a few years back, and in a nutshell, the show is aimed at making you a better, more informed critical thinker. Check out The Jordan Harbinger Show. There's so much for you in this podcast. The Jordan Harbinger Show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. So Houston, it's my experience, and I think the experience of many people, that as wonderful as it is to be kind because it does something for the other person, there's something about being kind that gives to the giver. That's where that phrase, you know,

what you give, you get back. That there is a reward that comes back to you. And it may not be, you know, a quid pro quo kind of reward. But I guess what I'm saying is it feels good to be kind and that that in and of itself is a selfish reason to be kind. Yeah, the biggest challenge, I think, of an ongoing kindness practice would be to say, this came up in a conversation I recently had with a woman named Cleo. She said one of her self-check questions is, who am I doing this for? Now, there's tons of research, as you allude to, that giving support, giving kindness is actually better for you physically, mentally, emotionally than

receiving support. It is a healthy practice, undoubtedly. The challenge becomes when you start to expect something in return for it, right? Does it have some sort of strings attached? In giving it and you don't get the response you want, what happens, right? What is your emotional response there? For a lot of us, we naturally take that personally because there's nothing worse than trying to do something good and getting something bad or perceived negative in return. And I really like that question of who am I doing this for because it checks us. Simple story that relates to that is the story of the Sandy Hook shooting. This tragedy that happened in a community and so often in our world we wait till bad things to happen till we make sure we go and do something good but people from all over

the world saw this tragedy happen and they said here's an opportunity for me to be kind and so they sent teddy bears, stuffed animals, people from all over the country and the world sent thousands of stuffed animals to Newtown, Connecticut. So many stuffed animals, in fact, that Newtown had to rent a warehouse just to put all these things in one place. that ran the candlelit vigil said that there were more teddy bears there than there were people. And in a really profound statement, he said, don't get me wrong, a stuffed animal is great, but a teddy bear doesn't pay for counseling and a teddy bear doesn't pay for a funeral. Which to me reminds me of, tells me that kindness without empathy usually serves me, the giver, more than the person receiving. Because people sent these teddy bears, right, well-intentioned. But did they actually tune into what the community needed in that moment? Or were they just sending something so that they could feel good? Because now we're burdening a community already in need because we weren't listening first. So yes, while giving will make

us feel good, I think that self-check question can be so powerful. Who am I doing this for? And am I serving a legitimate need or am I serving a perceived need based on making myself feel good? Well, let me tell you a story. I still get a little choked up when I tell it, but there was a guy, 19-year-old kid, who was going to die. He was a patient of Miley Cyrus and he would like to meet her, that that would be something he thought was really cool. Not in some kind of dying wish thing, because he was quite a ways away from the end, but he just thought it would be really cool to meet her. And I thought, well, you know, I'm in the radio business. I was at the time, and I knew people in the record business, and I thought, well, you know, how hard can this be?

I can pull this off. Well, I took it upon myself to try to make this happen. It turned out to be a monumental task. Getting Miley Cyrus to meet him, I had to talk to I don't know how many people. And everybody said no. And everybody said, oh, she's out of the country. And we can't possibly pull this off. And no, that won't work. And how about we just send him an autographed picture. And I lobbied you know, let's make this wish come true. But it also took on a life for me. I really was going to make this happen.

I had to make this happen. And finally, it got to her, and she couldn't have been more willing, more agreeable, and more wonderful. And long story short, she basically walked up behind him at a shopping mall, tapped him on the shoulder. He turned around. There was Miley Cyrus. And she spent hours with him. And I was there.

I watched the meeting. And I got so much out of it. He did eventually die. And I have always felt good that I made this happen. But did I do it for him or did I do it for me? I think the story is a beautiful one, primarily because you were meeting a need that you listened to. You knew it's a known need and meeting a known need a legitimate need or a deep desire especially of someone who's terminal like that is a profound thing to witness another one of my favorite words is a Sanskrit word it's mudita mudita is vicarious joy so watching someone experience joy true joy gives you that

joy as well which is different I, than giving someone a gift that you really haven't asked if this is what they want or need in the moment. And you know that feeling, I had this conversation with a gentleman named David, he goes, one of my least favorite feelings in the world is having someone give me a gift that they just think they're supposed to give me because of the circumstance or the holiday or whatever. And it's not really a gift that I want or need. And now I have to pretend to like it to appease the person who's giving it. I don't know if you've ever had family who make you feel that way. I've had conversations with some of my roommates where we're like, we've told our family, this is not what we want. Please don't do this. And they do it anyways. And I think that even well

intentioned actions of kindness, if we're not listening first, can actually in some ways do more harm than good, or it benefits you way more than the person receiving it. And the story that you just shared is so profound to me, because you listen first in order to love better, which is to say, here's this need, and I'm going to do everything in my power to meet it, which makes the joy that much more authentic and your experience of witnessing that joy that much more true, right? You're sharing in his joy and not just the byproduct of your own work. You know, I've often wondered where does kindness come come from? If it's not human nature, if it's not in our genes to be kind, is it just something we learn by observing?

Is it something we're taught? There's this interesting study that Harvard did where they asked families to rank what they wanted for their kids. Do they want them to be high performing, happy, or kind? One, two, or three. And 80 something percent of families said they'd rather their kids be happy and kind over high performing.

Sounds nice? Yeah. Then they asked the kids of those same parents, what do you think your parents want you to be? High performing, happy, or kind? And the data was the exact opposite. Which reminds me that the questions that we ask at the dinner table, the measurements of success in schools and in college and in our careers don't always match up to the things that we say we value.

And until we make them important with the way we speak in conversation, with the metrics of success, then I think moments like you just described are going to continue to be beautiful accidents instead of, you know, purposeful practices. Something that I've always thought about, and I'd like to get you to respond, is that, you know, being kind is the right thing to do, but it's sometimes the hard thing to do. And I think people often don't do that act of kindness for fear that it won't work. Yeah, I think that maybe the final piece is just that we take for granted how courageous it is.

And we so often talk about the things that we're afraid of. So much of how we orient these tough conversations in our life relate to being productive, successful people in the world. But fear of failure, we always frame that through the lens of the corporations, the people, the athletes who had to fail a lot of times in order to succeed. But I think we forget about how those same fears prevent us from connection. You know, my fear of failing someone I love might prevent me from reaching out to them because I'm worried I won't know what to say. And my fear of rejection might cause me that time I tried to offer something to that person who looked like they were in need

and they rejected me or they laughed at me or they told me they needed something else. And now I feel hurt in an effort to give. And I think I take for granted how much that reduces my willingness to give the next time. So if there's one other thing I would offer, it's just a reminder that kindness requires, I think, a real cultivated courage. It's a braver action than we give it credit for. And the results are just as profound as any other success in our life. You know, when you hear the term kindness, it seems so soft. It seems so almost unnecessary. That kindness is what we do if we still have enough time after we do

all the important things. But I think you've laid out pretty well that kindness in and of itself is pretty important for a lot of reasons and for everybody. My guest has been Houston Craft. He's a speaker, author, and kindness advocate. The name of his book is Deep Kindness, a revolutionary guide for the way we think, talk, and act in kindness. And there's a link to that book at Amazon in the show notes. Thank you, Houston. Thanks so much, Mike. And there's a link to that book at Amazon in the show notes. Thank you, Houston. Thanks so much, Mike. It's been a pleasure. Hey, everyone. Join me, Megan Rinks.

And me, Melissa Demonts, for Don't Blame Me, But Am I Wrong? Each week, we deliver four fun-filled shows. In Don't Blame Me, we tackle our listeners' dilemmas with hilariously honest advice. Then we have But Am I Wrong?, which is for the listeners that didn't take our advice. Plus, we share our hot takes on current events. Then tune in to see you next Tuesday for our listener poll results from But Am I Wrong. And finally, wrap up your week with Fisting Friday, where we catch up and talk all things pop culture.

Listen to Don't Blame Me, But Am I Wrong on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. New episodes every Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday. Do you love Disney? Then you are going to love our hit podcast, Disney Countdown. I'm Megan, the Magical Millennial. And I'm the Dapper Danielle.

On every episode of our fun and family-friendly show, we count down our top 10 lists of all things Disney. There is nothing we don't cover. We are famous for rabbit holes, Disney-themed games, and fun facts you didn't know you needed, but you definitely need in your life. So if you're looking for a healthy dose of Disney magic, check out Disney Countdown wherever you get your podcasts. Science has played an important role in your life, and you know something about it. You probably took science in high school, and you learned the scientific method, and science is all around you. You hear how things are scientifically proven, and so, therefore, it must be true.

We often look at science as this authority, that if science says it is so, it is so. Well, perhaps science is a lot more messy than we like to think. After all, some things that were scientific before are not so scientific now. So how does science really work? Well, no one knows better about this than James Zimmering. He's a medical doctor with a Ph.D. in immunology, and he is professor of pathology at the University of Virginia. He's author of a book called What Science Is and How It Really Works. Hi, James. Welcome to Something You Should Know. Hi. Thanks so much for having me.

So we hear a lot today, this cry about believe the science. We must trust the science. It's often used, I think, as kind of a way to shut the conversation down, that science is this ultimate authority. So if science has spoken, there's nothing more to say. It is a fundamental problem that you point out. And this is a problem probably perpetuated as much by scientists and science enthusiasts as anyone else, and it's intensely damaging. Because if anyone claims science can prove things to an absolute certainty, then anything

that's not proven to an absolute certainty shouldn't be believed. And if absolute certainty is your standard of believing things, you're going to wander around with no beliefs at all. So, it's a fundamental misunderstanding about science that it can prove things to an absolute certainty, and it's really very damaging. That said, it's rational to believe something that's probably true, even if it's not absolutely true. And I think that's a very important distinction. So what is science? Obviously, you know, you wrote a whole book to explain it, but in a nutshell, in a sentence or two or any other person to my knowledge has come up with an answer to that question that you'll get uniform consensus on.

But I think it's fair to say a few things that can define science. First of all, science is about understanding and predicting the natural world, natural phenomena, what happens in nature. And it is a combination of experience and theory and reasoning, just like any other human belief construct. But science is linked to experience and certain types of experience much more tightly than other belief constructs are. You come at trying to understand the world through certain religions or philosophies or personal constructs. If your experience violates what you believe, it's pretty easy to

kind of discount your experience. Scientists do that too, but it's much more difficult to do that in the sciences. So I would say it's a belief construct that's linked to data, to experience, to observation of the natural world in very particular ways and by particular rules that leads to the ability to predict and control nature better than any other system that's out there. Sometimes, though, science changes its mind. Well, that's an interesting comment. Science changes its mind all the time about the explanations behind experience. But science seldom changes its mind about experience itself. What do I mean by that?

Airplanes fly. And the theory behind, the aerodynamics theory behind why airplanes fly and the physical explanations about why airplanes fly may change over time. But the fact that airplanes fly does not. And so this is a really important distinction. People are very quick to say, but science has been wrong so many times in the past. And that is true. Scientific explanations and theories have turned out to be wrong over time as we refine better and better theories. But the vaccines don't stop working. The antibiotics don't stop working. The antibiotics don't stop working. The planes don't stop flying. The cell phones don't stop working. So if you think of science

as a body of phenomenological knowledge, a body of how nature works, that really doesn't change much over time. Our theories change, but that's part of trying to refine theory to better explain what we observe. Well, that's really interesting, because it sounds like what you're saying is things sometimes work, and we're not always sure why, or we could change our minds as to why, but the point is it still works. That's right. So why do we care why it works? And the reason we care why it works is that the better we understand why it works, the more ability we have to keep it working and to come up with new things that work, right? So, theory is essential in predicting

things we have not yet encountered, both inside a phenomenon and external. However, the corpus of understanding of scientific, biology, chemistry, physics, the understanding may change, but not the body of our technologies and what we know and what we can do. And I think that it's really a tough debate about whether scientific theories are true, whether things that we guess at that we don't experience that causes what we do experience, are really there. That's a philosophically very deep pond. But to say that science gets things wrong about what actually happens, I think that's a bit misguided, and the confusion of those two areas leads to a lot of distrust about science that I think is unfounded.

Really? Is there a lot of distrust in science? I mean, because what would be better? Well, so that's one point of view. I think there's tremendous distrust in science from several different points of view. First of all, if you listen about debates about climate change or global warming, depending upon what term you want to use, if you look at debates around vaccines and whether they work or whether they're safe or whether they're dangerous, a lot of our debates around the coronavirus and COVID-19, a lot of people who don't like the conclusions that scientists would come to will mistrust science from two separate vantage points, at least.

At least two separate vantage points. The first is, science has been wrong in the past, so why should we trust it in the future? But then the second thing is that science, I think, is mistrusted by people as an establishment, that there is a conspiratorial mindset that scientists are lying or have sold out or have some hidden ulterior motives or different agenda. And so depending upon what group of people you talk to, trust in science or lack thereof varies widely. You know, I've heard the same things, you know, that science, as if it's like, you know, a bunch of guys in an office sitting around doing science-y things,

that, you know, that they have a cure for cancer, but they're hiding it, you know, because, you know. And I think, well, but don't these guys also have relatives, you know, who have cancer? Why would anyone do that? I mean, what would be the benefit? I mean, but, you know, there's all these conspiracy theories about, you know, if we cured cancer, all the businesses that would go out of business or whatever it is. It's just like, what? Yeah, well, look, I mean, obviously humans are human and humans can behave at times in not the most admirable of ways.

And corporate interests and money and pressures are all over the place. But trust me, I'm a scientist, I'm a doctor. When you see ads that say, you know, here's the cure that doctors don't want you to know about, trust me, if there was a cure, doctors would want you to know about it because they'd want you to be well and not, you know, not coming into the hospital being sick. But there is a conspiratorial mindset. There is distrust. And I would submit to you that some people purposely sow that mistrust, purposely sow that mistrust because it benefits them to do so. But science is an area of understanding on its own. It stands on its own, and it can be addressed on its own.

Well, I think an interesting example and observation is, you know, people want a coronavirus vaccine, and they want it now, and it would be great if you guys in science, you science guys would hurry it up. But if you did hurry it up, it wouldn't be really scientific because you have to go through the process of making sure it's safe and effective. Nature is what nature is, regardless of what we would like it to be. And our ability to understand it is different than our ability to fundamentally change it. But yes, these things take time to test and do properly. Vaccines are complicated things.

If you look at the history of vaccine development, what we're doing right now with the coronavirus is a breakneck pace. Actually, the amount of international collaboration on this is nothing short of astounding. But the idea that there's a vaccine, but the FDA is not releasing it for some political purpose, frankly, is absurd. I can understand why it might make sense to certain points of view, but that's just not a justifiable position. Right. Well, I also think some of the distrust, I mean, the phrase government scientist, oh my God, I mean, that just sounds just like such trouble. And science is expensive.

Somebody has to fund it. And there's always the argument of follow the money. Who's funding this research? Who's doing this science? Because you will uncover interesting things that may make the science a little murky. Well, look, I mean, there have been examples of scientific malpractice by government-funded scientists, by company-funded scientists, and by scientists with particular agendas and ideologies. There's no way to escape this. You know, again, we're humans. If I had to point to the most egregious examples, it would be the tobacco industry, who created their own scientific groups, who hired, you know, bona fide professional scientists with a lot of money and forced a research agenda that basically obscured the dangers of smoking, allowing them to continue to sell their product for decades.

And so, I mean, yes, there are examples of groups who are carrying out science-looking things, okay, that have the trappings of science that have a sinister motive behind them. However, in its strictest analysis, those are not really scientific activities, and it's hard to tell the difference. And so, the debate that you'll hear a lot about is science versus pseudoscience. And it is an important part of our society, because if there are groups out there presenting themselves as though they are scientists, and they are acting with ulterior motives and using perverted methodologies, how do you identify who those people are and how do you take their knowledge claims with the right

grain of salt? And again, it can be confusing to people and it's a very important topic. It does seem, and one of the arguments you hear, is that science starts in the fringe, you know, new ideas that aren't yet proven, and people raise their eyebrows saying, well, wait a minute, you can't be selling that because that's fringy stuff. But the argument is often made that that's where new scientific discoveries come from,

is the fringe, because it has to come from somewhere. That's right. So we need fringy things for discovery. If someone makes a fringe claim, evaluate it by a legitimate scientific process, and if it holds up, great. And if it doesn't, then you discard it. But keeping it on the fringe, refusing to test it, and just keeping it there forever is what pseudoscience does, right? Pseudoscience doesn't make progress. Pseudoscience has claims that are untestable. A classic example would be, well, I'm working with you to manipulate

some energy field around your body that'll make you feel better. And then a group of scientists will come along and say, hey, that's great if that works. Let's do a controlled trial. Let's have one group of people where you manipulate their energy field and another group of people where you pretend to manipulate their energy field so they can't tell the difference but you really don't and then we'll see uh if there's any difference and then they do the trial and then there's no difference and then the person says well the skepticism of your trial the negative energy of you making me do this prevented the thing from working. And, you know, at that point, you say, okay, well, let's, you know, your claims are clearly untestable. And therefore, we can't validate them. And we're going to have to say, no,

we don't think we don't think that's happening. So as opposed to a drug where they say, yeah, we're going to give it a placebo to one group and the drug to the other group and compare the results. Those are categorically different things. And so a lot of the fringe beliefs, if they take the form that by their very premises they cannot be tested, then that's a different thing. It's like the psychic and you say, well, so what are the winning lottery numbers for this week and they, well, it doesn't work that way. Well, it should work that way.

Yeah, clairvoyance is a funny thing. numbers for this week, and they, well, it doesn't work that way. Well, it should work that way. Yeah, clairvoyance is a funny thing. I mean, you go to a psychic, you go to a mentalist, and you'll have to reflect upon the fact that the entire experience you're having with them is them asking you questions, which you then confirm or deny, and then they focus on the things they confirm, and then they ask you more questions, and you have to say, wait a minute, you're a psychic. At some point, aren't you going to tell me something? At some point, aren't you going to make a statement? And the answer is no, because without that continuous feedback from you going, yes, no, yes, no, and then they just focusing on the hits and ignoring all the misses, it doesn't work. Science does have to make the following restriction on itself, though. If something is not testable by science, that doesn't make it false, right? If something is not, I can't

say this enough, if something is not testable by science, that doesn't make it false, it just makes it not testable, and therefore you can never lend it any scientific validity. And that's also an important distinction. I mean, people should believe what they want, but they should not believe it as though it's been scientifically vetted when it can't be. Since you study this and you talk to people, what is your sense? If you had to take the temperature of the population. Do people get this? Do people understand what it means when something is scientifically proven or not? What do you think people generally perceive this all to be? I think that most people understand that science can do things, can accomplish things

that other areas of thought have not been able to do. And at the same time, they're confused by the claims they hear. They hear contrary claims, and they're suspicious of what they're being told, and they're cautious about the enterprise behind the science. And again, I think they should be. None of us should take things without evidence. But the problem is that I think that what constitutes legitimate evidence or quality evidence has really been obscured lately. And I think a lot of people are confused by it. That having been said, there are clearly people out there who are big science enthusiasts, and there are clearly people out there who are science deniers, you know. And I don't know how to reconcile that. We are in a very complicated time now. We're in what's been called a post-fact era, where our society is struggling

even to have a common narrative about what the observable parts of our world are, and that causes fundamental problems. What's a science denier? How do you deny science? Well, so denialism or denier is kind of a dirty word, I suppose. But, you know, if someone is a climate change denier, right? So there are people out there who would say, I don't think the Earth's getting warmer

because I'm looking at satellite data and they don't support that conclusion. All right, that's not a science denier. That's actually a scientist if they're analyzing the data fairly. But if someone says, well, you know, despite all of these data, the Earth, it's just not getting warmer. Or if you've heard of the flat Earth movement, right? They basically say, look,

the Earth's flat because it's flat. And all these other things are just kind of made up by a big conspiracy. The government took pictures of people landing on the moon. There's never been a satellite. They manufactured all this data. I don't believe science as a thing. It's just one big conspiracy for the powers that should not be that are trying to manipulate us to their evil and sinister ends. That would be a science denier, someone who denies that the process of science is a legitimate effort to understand nature. And so what is it you want people to take away from this discussion? The reason to have the discussion is simultaneously to prop science up as a legitimate way to understand nature, perhaps the only way that really is useful in understanding nature, and at the same time to deflate it

from the pedestal that a lot of people have put it on that it cannot live up to. There are people out there who say, well, science is fact. And then quite rightly, other people say, well, if science is fact, then why have scientists been wrong in the past? Well, that's a very good question. But just because scientists have been wrong in the past doesn't mean that science is just another opinion. It's an opinion that's based upon a very special way of understanding the world. And it should be given the special status that it has earned via evidence regarding itself, but it is not perfect.

It's the best tool we have, but it's not a perfect tool. And so I think that the goal here is a more balanced view of science, such that we use this tool we have, which is one of the greatest tools, you know, humans are tool makers. Science is one of the greatest tools we've ever made. But that we use this tool effectively for what it was intended for, and that we don't wield it irresponsibly on either side of the issue. Well, I think that explains it pretty well. And I think you did a good job in helping people understand what science is all about. My guest has been James Zimring. He is an MD and PhD in

immunology and a professor of pathology at the University of Virginia. His book is called What Science Is and How It Really Works. And there's a link to his book in the show notes. Thank you, James. Thank you. It's really been fun to talk to you. Yeah. I remember hearing what I'm about to tell you several years ago when I interviewed Dr. Michael Roizen, who's Dr. Oz's writing partner. They'd written several books together, and this has always stuck with me. So I looked it up again to get the facts right, but here it is. When you're driving, making a left-handed turn is one of the most dangerous maneuvers you can make. Why? Well, because you're often turning in front of oncoming traffic.

Left-hand turns are so dangerous that statistically you lengthen your life if you reduce the number of left-hand turns you make. It is so much safer to make a series of right-hand turns to get to where you're going than it is to turn left, particularly if there's a lot of traffic. In fact, UPS maps out truck delivery routes to avoid left-handed turns whenever possible, just for that reason. And that is something you should know.

I mentioned before that in the last several weeks, we've seen a nice increase in the size of the audience, and we'd like to keep that momentum going. And you can help by sharing this podcast with someone you know. I'm Mike Carruthers. Thanks for listening today to Something You Should Know. Welcome to the small town of Chinook, where faith runs deep and secrets run deeper. In this new thriller, religion and crime collide when a gruesome murder rocks the isolated Montana community. Everyone is quick to point their fingers at a drug-addicted teenager, but local deputy Ruth Vogel isn't convinced.

She suspects connections to a powerful religious group. Enter federal agent V.B. Loro, who has been investigating a local church for possible criminal activity. The pair form an unlikely partnership to catch the killer, unearthing secrets that leave Ruth torn between her duty to the law, her religious convictions,

and her very own family. But something more sinister than murder is afoot, and someone is watching Ruth. Chinook, starring Kelly Marie, and someone is watching Ruth. Chinook. Starring Kelly Marie Tran and Sanaa Lathan. Listen to Chinook wherever you get your podcasts. Contained herein are the heresies of Redolph Puntwine, erstwhile monk turned traveling medical investigator.

Join me as I study the secrets of the divine plagues and uncover the blasphemous truth that ours is not a loving God and we are not its favored children. The heresies of Redolph Buntwine, wherever podcasts are available.