Turns out I was worrying about the Gell-Mann amnesia effect

Embed from Getty Images

I suggested a couple of days ago that:

Becoming very knowledgeable about a niche subject is worrying, because you find much that has been published about it is wrong. And then it become more worrying, because you suspect this is true of every subject if only you knew.

A reader kindly sent me a link to an old Wikipedia page on the Gell-Mann amnesia effect:

The Gell-Mann amnesia effect is a claimed cognitive bias describing the tendency of individuals to critically assess media reports in a domain they are knowledgeable about, yet continue to trust reporting in other areas despite recognizing similar potential inaccuracies.

The effect is not formally recognized, but the concept has gained traction in critical thinking and media literacy discussions.

The term was coined by novelist Michael Crichton in a 2002 speech, naming it after Murray Gell-Mann, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist with whom he had discussed the phenomenon.

This is very much what I was getting at, but is it possible not to display such amnesia? You can hardly resolve to become an expert in every field of human knowledge, nor can you refuse to take on board any information unless you can vouch for its truth yourself.

All that is left to us is a sort of weak, generalised scepticism. But I suppose that's not such a bad condition to live your life under.