Can you outsmart the apples and oranges fallacy? - Elizabeth Cox

Prevodilac: Jovana Babic Lektor: Milenka Okuka

Baking apple pie? Discount orange warehouse has you covered!

Pečete pitu od jabuke? Diskont pomorandži je tu za vas!

A fruit’s a fruit, right?

Voće ko voće, zar ne?

It’s 1988, and scientist James Hansen has just testified

Godina je 1988, a naučnik Džejms Hansen je upravo svedočio pred

to the United States Congress that global warming trends

Kongresom Sjedinjenih Američkih Država da je globalno zagrevanje

are caused by human activity,

posledica ljudske delatnosti

and will pose an increasing threat to humanity in the future.

i da će vremenom sve više ugrožavati čovečanstvo.

Well, well. That’s unusually prescient for a human.

Vidi ti to. Kako neuobičajeno pronicljivo za čoveka.

Looking for a wedding dress? Try a new take on a timeless classic.

Tražite venčanicu? Probajte novu verziju bezvremenog klasika.

It’s sleek, flattering and modest— just like the traditional dress.

Doterana, laskava i skromna- baš kao i tradicionalna venčanica.

Commercials. Could anything be more insufferable?

Reklame. Da li postoji išta nepodnošljivije?

It’s 1997, and the United States Senate has called a hearing about global warming.

Godina je 1997, a Senat SAD-a je sazvao sastanak o globalnom zagrevanju.

Some expert witnesses point out that past periods in Earth’s history

Neki stručni svedoci ističu da su raniji periodi zemaljske istorije

were warmer than the 20th century.

bili topliji od 20. veka.

Because such variations existed long before humans,

Pošto su takve varijacije postojale mnogo pre ljudi,

the witnesses claim the current warming trend

svedoci tvrde da je i trenutni trend zagrevanja

is also the result of natural variation.

rezultat prirodnih varijacija.

Ah, there is something more insufferable than a commercial.

Ah, dakle postoji nešto nepodnošljivije od reklama.

Luckily for the humans, there’s one more expert witness.

Srećom po čovečanstvo, postoji još jedan stručni svedok.

Demon razuma

What are you looking at? We’re all dressed.

Zašto buljite? Svi smo obučeni.

At least we are by the logic you just used.

To jest, jesmo po logici koju si ti upravo koristio.

It’s as if you were to say apples and oranges are both fruits,

To bi bilo kao da kažeš da i jabuke i narandže spadaju u voće

therefore they taste the same.

i zbog toga imaju isti ukus.

Or that underwear, wedding dresses, and suits are all clothes,

Ili da su donji veš, venčanica i odelo odeća,

therefore, they’re all equally appropriate attire for a Senate hearing.

pa su zato podjednako prikladni za zasedanje Senata.

The European wars of the 19th century and World War I were all wars, right?

Evropski ratovi tokom 19. veka i Prvi svetski rat su ratovi, zar ne?

So World War I couldn’t be any more devastating than those other wars,

Dakle, Prvi svetski rat nije mogao biti destruktivniji od tih drugih ratova,

could it?

zar ne?

Let’s say two people have a fever.

Hajde da zamislimo da dve osobe imaju groznicu.

They must have the same disease that’s causing that fever, right?

One onda mora da imaju istu bolest koja je izaziva, zar ne?

Of course not. One fever could be caused by chicken pox,

Naravno da ne. Jednu groznicu je možda izazvla varičela,

the other by influenza, or any number of other infections.

a drugu grip ili neka druga infekcija.

Like your claim about rising global temperatures,

Kao tvoja tvrdnja o rastućoj globalnoj temperaturi,

these claims make a false analogy.

ove tvrdnje su primer pogrešne analogije.

You're assuming that because two phenomena share a characteristic,

Ti pretpostavljaš da samo zato što dva događaja dele jednu osobinu,

in this case warming, they are analogous in other ways,

u ovom slučaju zagrevanje, da su slučni i po drugim osobinama,

like the cause of that warming.

kao što je uzrok zagrevanja.

But there’s no evidence that that’s the case.

Međutim, ne postoji dokaz da je ta tvrdnja istinita.

Yes, there have been other warm periods in Earth’s history—

Da, postojali su i drugi topli periodi u istoriji Zemlje-

no one’s disputing that the climate fluctuates.

niko ne poriče da se klima vremenom menja.

But let's take a closer look at some of those older examples of global warming,

Hajde da bolje proučimo neke od tih starijih primera globalnog zagrevanja,

shall we?

šta misliš o tome?

The Cretaceous Hot Greenhouse, 92 million years ago,

Globalno zagrevanje za vreme krede, pre 92 miliona godina,

was so warm, forests covered Antarctica.

bilo je toliko toplo da je Antarktik bio pod šumama.

Volcanic activity was likely responsible for boosting atmospheric carbon dioxide

Najverovatnije je aktivnost vulkana izazvala porast ugljen-dioksida u vazduhu

and creating a greenhouse effect.

i prouzrokovala efekat staklene bašte.

The Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, 55 million years ago,

Paleocensko–eocenski toplotni maksimum je pre 55 miliona godina

was so warm, crocodiles swam the waters of the Arctic Circle.

bio toliko topao da su krokodili plivali u vodama Arktičkog polarnog kruga.

This warming may have been caused by the drying of inland seas

Ovo zagrevanje je možda nastalo zbog isušivanja epikontinentalnih mora

and release of methane, a potent greenhouse gas,

i oslobađanja metana, potentnog gasa staklene bašte,

from ocean sediments.

iz okeanskih sedimenata.

Even among these other warm periods, you’re making a false analogy.

Ti praviš pogrečnu analogiju čak i među ovim drugim toplim periodima.

Yes, they had natural causes.

Da, oni su imali prirodne uzroke.

But each had a different cause,

Ali svaki period je imao drugačiji uzrok

and involved a different amount and duration of warming.

i varirao je u količini i trajanju zagrevanja.

They’re as dissimilar as they are similar.

Koliko su slični toliko su i različiti.

Taking them together, all we can reasonably conclude

Kada ih sve uzmemo u obzir, sve što možemo da zaključimo

is that the Earth’s climate seems to change

je da se klima na Zemlji menja

in response to conditions on the planet.

zbog promene uslova na njoj.

Today, human activity is a dominant force shaping conditions on your planet,

Danas je ljudska aktivnost glavna sila koja oblikuje uslove na vašoj planeti

so the possibility that it’s driving global warming

zbog čega se mogućnost da ona izaziva globalno zagrevanje

can’t be dismissed out of hand.

ne može tako lako odbaciti.

I’ll grant that the more complicated something is,

Mada, što je nešto komplikovanije

the easier it is to make a mistaken analogy.

to je lakše napraviti pogrešnu analogiju.

That’s especially true because there are many different types of false analogy:

Ova tvrdnja se pokazala tačnom jer postoji mnogo vrsta pogrešne analogije:

that similar symptoms must share a cause,

da slični simptomi znače isti uzrok,

that similar actions must lead to similar consequences, and countless others.

da slične radnje dovode do sličnih posledica, i mnoge druge.

Most false analogies you’ll come across are far less obvious

Mnoge pogrešne analogije na koje ćeš naići su manje očigledne

than those comparing apples to oranges, and climate is notoriously complex.

od poređenja jabuka i narandži, a klima je veoma kompleksna.

It requires careful, rigorous study and evidence collection—

Ona zahteva oprezno, rigorozno istraživanje i sakupljanje dokaza-

and making a false analogy like this only impedes that process.

a širenje pogrešne analogije kao ove samo ometa taj proces.

It’s 2013, and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Godina je 2013, a Međuvladin panel o klimatskim promenama Ujedinjenih nacija

has found, aggregating decades of research,

je pomoću decenija istraživanja zaključio

that there is more than a 95% chance the global warming trend

da postoji više od 95% šanse da je trend globalnog zagrevanja

since the mid-20th century has been driven by human activity,

od sredine 20. veka posledica ljudske delatnosti,

namely the burning of fossil fuels.

uglavnom sagorevanja fosilnih goriva.

You’re both pets,

Vas dvojica ste kućni ljubimci

and he likes living in water, so you should, too.

pošto on voli da živi u vodi, to mora da znači da voliš i ti.