One of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard is the hostility to knowledge, reason and research. NPR had a discussion about climate change issues with two scientists and they both commented that many people believe that knowledge, reason and research are not the basis on which to make environmental policy. Dumb!
In public matters and media conflicts, there's a recurring mistake by the audience. It fails to distinguish between balance and proportion. The media typically presents two sides of the conflict--say, climate change. "We're presenting a "balanced position." What the audience hears is that there are 50% of the scientists on one side and 50% on the other.
As a result, a great deal of the public pays little attention to the conflict. They think scientists can't agree, so politicians can't agree, so why should we agree. On climate, like a great many other issues, there's a terrific amount of agreement by scientists--more than 95% agree on the seriousness of the problem. The public will never know because of the confusion between balance and proportion--and its rejection of knowledge, reason and scientific research.
Be very careful in your media consumption. And just as careful in your decision making--in any context.
Rule 1: Play close attention to so-called balanced perspectives. They may not be proportionate, and the impact on decision making could be a horrible mistake.
Rule 2: Whatever the decisionmaking context--business, family, environment-- we know that empirical analysis of results makes for the best decisions.