3 kinds of bias that shape your worldview | J. Marshall Shepherd

Translator: Lenka Abelovská Reviewer: Linda Magáthová

I'm a meteorologist by degree,

Som vyštudovaný meteorológ,

I have a bachelor's, master's and PhD in physical meteorology,

mám bakalársky, magisterský a doktorský titul

so I'm a meteorologist, card carrying.

z fyzikálnej meteorológie, mám preukaz.

And so with that comes four questions, always.

S tým zakaždým prichádzajú štyri otázky.

This is one prediction I will always get right.

Toto je predpoveď, ktorá sa mi vždy vyplní.

(Laughter)

(smiech)

And those questions are,

A tie otázky sú:

"Marshall, what channel are you on?"

„Marshall, na ktorom si kanáli?“

(Laughter)

(smiech)

"Dr. Shepherd, what's the weather going to be tomorrow?"

„Dr. Shepherd, aké bude zajtra počasie?“

(Laughter)

(smiech)

And oh, I love this one:

A túto milujem:

"My daughter is getting married next September, it's an outdoor wedding.

„Moja dcéra sa ide v septembri vydávať, obrad bude vonku.

Is it going to rain?"

Bude pršať?“

(Laughter)

(smiech)

Not kidding, I get those, and I don't know the answer to that,

Nežartujem, naozaj také dostávam.

Nepoznám odpovede; veda tu nepomôže.

the science isn't there.

But the one I get a lot these days is,

Ale najčastejšie sa ma dnes pýtajú:

"Dr. Shepherd, do you believe in climate change?"

„Dr. Shepherd, veríte na klimatické zmeny?“

"Do you believe in global warming?"

„Veríte na globálne otepľovanie?“

Now, I have to gather myself every time I get that question.

Po takej otázke sa vždy musím pozbierať.

Because it's an ill-posed question --

Pretože je to zle položená otázka:

science isn't a belief system.

Veda nie je založená na viere.

My son, he's 10 -- he believes in the tooth fairy.

Môj 10-ročný syn verí na zubnú vílu.

And he needs to get over that, because I'm losing dollars, fast.

A musí s tým prestať, lebo ma to rýchlo oberá o doláre.

(Laughter)

(smiech)

But he believes in the tooth fairy.

Ale on verí na zubnú vílu.

But consider this.

No povážte toto:

Bank of America building, there, in Atlanta.

Budova Bank of America, tu, v Atlante.

You never hear anyone say,

Nikdy nepočujete nikoho povedať:

"Do you believe, if you go to the top of that building

„Veríš, že keď pôjdeš na strechu tej budovy

and throw a ball off, it's going to fall?"

a hodíš z nej loptu, spadne?“

You never hear that, because gravity is a thing.

To nezačujete, lebo gravitáciu všetci poznajú.

So why don't we hear the question,

Tak prečo nepočujeme otázku:

"Do you believe in gravity?"

„Veríš na gravitáciu?“

But of course, we hear the question,

Samozrejme však počujeme otázku:

"Do you believe in global warming?"

„Veríš na globálne otepľovanie?“

Well, consider these facts.

Nuž, uvážte tieto fakty:

The American Association for the Advancement of Science, AAAS,

Americká asociácia pre napredovanie vedy, AAAS,

one of the leading organizations in science,

jedna z popredných vedeckých organizácií,

queried scientists and the public on different science topics.

sa vedcov a verejnosti pýtala na rôzne témy.

Here are some of them:

Tu sú niektoré z nich:

genetically modified food, animal research, human evolution.

GMO, pokusy na zvieratách, ľudská evolúcia.

And look at what the scientists say about those,

A pozrite sa, čo o nich povedali vedci,

the people that actually study those topics, in red,

ktorí tie témy študujú, tu červenou,

versus the gray, what the public thinks.

verzus verejnosť, tu sivou.

How did we get there?

Ako sme sa sem dostali?

How did we get there?

Ako toto nastalo?

That scientists and the public are so far apart on these science issues.

Že vedci a verejnosť sú si v tom natoľko vzdialení!

Well, I'll come a little bit closer to home for me,

Nuž, prejdem k tomu, čím sa ja sám zaoberám:

climate change.

klimatické zmeny.

Eighty-seven percent of scientists

87 % vedcov verí,

believe that humans are contributing to climate change.

že ľudia prispievajú ku klimatickým zmenám.

But only 50 percent of the public?

Ale iba 50 % verejnosti?

How did we get there?

Ako k tomu došlo?

So it begs the question,

To teda vedie k otázke,

what shapes perceptions about science?

čo formuje vnímanie vedy.

It's an interesting question

Je to zaujímavá otázka

and one that I've been thinking about quite a bit.

a veľa o nej premýšľam.

I think that one thing that shapes perceptions in the public, about science,

Myslím, že to, ako verejnosť vníma vedu,

is belief systems and biases.

formujú rôzne presvedčenia a predsudky.

Belief systems and biases.

Systémy viery a predpojatosti.

Go with me for a moment.

Chvíľu ma sledujte.

Because I want to talk about three elements of that:

Chcem vám totiž povedať o ich troch komponentoch:

confirmation bias, Dunning-Kruger effect

Konfirmačné skreslenie, Dunning-Krugerov efekt

and cognitive dissonance.

a kognitívna disonancia.

Now, these sound like big, fancy, academic terms, and they are.

Znejú ako veľké, efektné akademické pojmy. Aj sú.

But when I describe them, you're going to be like, "Oh!

Ale keď ich popíšem, uvedomíte si:

I recognize that; I even know somebody that does that."

„Á, to poznám! Dokonca poznám niekoho, kto to robí.“

Confirmation bias.

Konfirmačné skreslenie.

Finding evidence that supports what we already believe.

Nachádzanie dôkazov, ktoré podporujú to, čomu veríme.

Now, we're probably all a little bit guilty of that at times.

Asi všetci sme tým občas vinní.

Take a look at this.

Pozrite sa na toto.

I'm on Twitter.

Som na Twitteri.

And often, when it snows,

A keď sneží,

I'll get this tweet back to me.

často dostanem tento tweet:

(Laughter)

(smiech)

"Hey, Dr. Shepherd, I have 20 inches of global warming in my yard,

„Hej, Dr. Shepherd, mám na dvore pol metra globálneho otepľovania;

what are you guys talking about, climate change?"

o čom to hovoríte, aké klimatické zmeny?“

I get that tweet a lot, actually.

Taký tweet dostávam skutočne často.

It's a cute tweet, it makes me chuckle as well.

Je to zlaté a aj sa na tom zachichocem.

But it's oh, so fundamentally scientifically flawed.

Ale je to vedecky táák zásadne chybné!

Because it illustrates

Pretože to ukazuje,

that the person tweeting doesn't understand

že autor nerozumie

the difference between weather and climate.

rozdielu medzi počasím a klímou.

I often say, weather is your mood

Často hovorím, že počasie je vaša nálada

and climate is your personality.

a klíma je váš temperament.

Think about that.

Porozmýšľajte o tom.

Weather is your mood, climate is your personality.

Počasie je vaša nálada, klíma je váš temperament.

Your mood today doesn't necessarily tell me anything about your personality,

Vaša dnešná nálada mi nepovie nič o vašom temperamente,

nor does a cold day tell me anything about climate change,

ani chladný deň mi nepovie nič o klimatickej zmene,

or a hot day, for that matter.

rovnako ako ani horúci deň.

Dunning-Kruger.

Dunning-Krugerov efekt.

Two scholars from Cornell came up with the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Prišli s ním dvaja vedci z Cornellu.

If you go look up the peer-reviewed paper for this,

Ak si o tom vyhľadáte vedecký článok,

you will see all kinds of fancy terminology:

uvidíte veľa efektnej terminológie:

it's an illusory superiority complex, thinking we know things.

Je to iluzórny komplex nadradenosti ohľadom vedomostí.

In other words, people think they know more than they do.

Skrátka, ľudia si myslia, že vedia viac, než naozaj vedia.

Or they underestimate what they don't know.

Alebo podceňujú, koľko toho nevedia.

And then, there's cognitive dissonance.

A potom je tu kognitívna disonancia.

Cognitive dissonance is interesting.

Tá je zaujímavá.

We just recently had Groundhog Day, right?

Nedávno bol Groundhog Day, že?

Now, there's no better definition of cognitive dissonance

Nie je lepšej definície kognitívnej disonancie,

than intelligent people asking me if a rodent's forecast is accurate.

než že sa ma inteligentní ľudia pýtajú, či je svišťova predpoveď správna.

(Laughter)

(smiech)

But I get that, all of the time.

Ale zakaždým sa ma pýtajú.

(Laughter)

(smiech)

But I also hear about the Farmer's Almanac.

Ale počúvam aj o Farmárovom roku.

We grew up on the Farmer's Almanac, people are familiar with it.

Vyrástli sme na Farmárovom roku, ľudia ho poznajú.

The problem is, it's only about 37 percent accurate,

Problém je, že len 37 % jeho predpovedí je správnych,

according to studies at Penn State University.

podľa štúdií na Penn State University.

But we're in an era of science

Ale žijeme v ére vedy,

where we actually can forecast the weather.

kedy skutočne vieme predpovedať počasie.

And believe it or not, and I know some of you are like, "Yeah, right,"

Verte či nie (viem, že niektorí z vás si vravia: „No, iste!“),

we're about 90 percent accurate, or more, with weather forecast.

naše predpovede sú správne aspoň na 90 %.

You just tend to remember the occasional miss, you do.

Máte však tendenciu pamätať si občasné chyby.

(Laughter)

(smiech)

So confirmation bias, Dunning-Kruger and cognitive dissonance.

Teda konfirmačné skreslenie, Dunning-Kruger a kognitívna disonancia.

I think those shape biases and perceptions that people have about science.

Myslím si, že tie formujú predsudky a dojmy ľudí o vede.

But then, there's literacy and misinformation

Ale potom sú tu gramotnosť a nesprávne informácie,

that keep us boxed in, as well.

aj tie nás obmedzujú.

During the hurricane season of 2017,

Počas obdobia hurikánov v 2017

media outlets had to actually assign reporters

museli médiá dokonca poveriť reportérov

to dismiss fake information about the weather forecast.

vyvracaním falošných predpovedí počasia.

That's the era that we're in.

To je doba, v ktorej žijeme.

I deal with this all the time in social media.

Na sociálnych sieťach sa s tým stále stretávam.

Someone will tweet a forecast --

Niekto tweetuje predpoveď,

that's a forecast for Hurricane Irma, but here's the problem:

toto je o hurikáne Irma, ale problém je,

it didn't come from the Hurricane Center.

že to nie je z Hurikánového centra.

But people were tweeting and sharing this; it went viral.

Ale ľudia to zdieľali a stalo sa to virálnym.

It didn't come from the National Hurricane Center at all.

A pritom to vôbec neprišlo z Národného hurikánového centra.

So I spent 12 years of my career at NASA

12 rokov svojej kariéry som robil v NASA,

before coming to the University of Georgia,

než som prešiel na University of Georgia,

and I chair their Earth Science Advisory Committee,

a predsedal som Poradnému výboru vied o Zemi.

I was just up there last week in DC.

Akurát minulý týždeň som bol tam, v DC.

And I saw some really interesting things.

A videl som pár veľmi zaujímavých vecí.

Here's a NASA model and science data from satellite

Tu je model NASA a vedecké dáta zo satelitu

showing the 2017 hurricane season.

o období hurikánov roku 2017.

You see Hurricane Harvey there?

Vidíte tam hurikán Harvey?

Look at all the dust coming off of Africa.

Pozrite na všetok ten prach prichádzajúci z Afriky

Look at the wildfires up in northwest US and in western Canada.

a požiare na severozápade USA a západe Kanady.

There comes Hurricane Irma.

Tu prichádza hurikán Irma.

This is fascinating to me.

Toto ma fascinuje.

But admittedly, I'm a weather geek.

Ale priznávam, že ja som zaťažený na počasie.

But more importantly, it illustrates that we have the technology

Dôležité je, že to ukazuje, že máme technológiu

to not only observe the weather and climate system,

nielen na pozorovanie počasia a klimatického systému,

but predict it.

ale i na ich predpovedanie.

There's scientific understanding,

Máme vedecké poznatky,

so there's no need for some of those perceptions and biases

teda netreba tie dojmy a predsudky,

that we've been talking about.

o ktorých som hovoril.

We have knowledge.

Máme vedomosti.

But think about this ...

Ale pomyslite na toto:

This is Houston, Texas, after Hurricane Harvey.

Tu je Houston, v Texase, po hurikáne Harvey.

Now, I write a contribution for "Forbes" magazine periodically,

Pravidelne prispievam do časopisu Forbes

and I wrote an article a week before Hurricane Harvey made landfall, saying,

a týždeň pred tým, než ten hurikán zasiahol pevninu,

"There's probably going to be 40 to 50 inches of rainfall."

som napísal, že zrejme naprší niečo vyše metra zrážok.

I wrote that a week before it happened.

Napísal som to týždeň vopred.

But yet, when you talk to people in Houston,

Ale keď hovoríte s ľuďmi v Houstone, vravia:

people are saying, "We had no idea it was going to be this bad."

„Nemali sme tušenia, že to bude také zlé.“

I'm just...

A ja len...

(Sigh)

(povzdych)

(Laughter)

(smiech)

A week before.

Týždeň vopred.

But --

Ale...

I know, it's amusing, but the reality is,

Ja viem, je to zábavné, ale v skutočnosti

we all struggle with perceiving something outside of our experience level.

máme všetci problém vnímať niečo mimo našich skúseností.

People in Houston get rain all of the time,

Ľudia v Houstone sú zvyknutí na častý dážď,

they flood all of the time.

bežne sú tam záplavy.

But they've never experienced that.

Ale nikdy nezažili niečo také.

Houston gets about 34 inches of rainfall for the entire year.

V Houstone padne asi 86 cm zrážok za celý rok.

They got 50 inches in three days.

Zrazu prišlo 1,3 metra za tri dni.

That's an anomaly event, that's outside of the normal.

Je to anomália, je to mimo normálu.

Takže systémy viery, predpojatosť, gramotnosť a falošné informácie.

So belief systems and biases, literacy and misinformation.

How do we step out of the boxes that are cornering our perceptions?

Ako vystúpime zo škatúľ, čo krivia naše vnemy?

Well we don't even have to go to Houston, we can come very close to home.

Nemusíme ani ísť do Houstonu, stačí zájsť celkom blízko.

(Laughter)

(smiech)

Remember "Snowpocalypse?"

Spomínate na „Snowpocalypse“?

(Laughter)

(smiech)

Snowmageddon?

„Snowmageddon“?

Snowzilla?

„Snowzilla“?

Whatever you want to call it.

Akokoľvek to chcete volať.

All two inches of it.

Celých tých 5 centimetrov.

(Laughter)

(smiech)

Two inches of snow shut the city of Atlanta down.

5 centimetrov snehu odrovnalo Atlantu.

(Laughter)

(smiech)

But the reality is, we were in a winter storm watch,

Ale bolo vydané upozornenie na snehovú búrku,

we went to a winter weather advisory,

a potom výstraha pred zimným počasím,

and a lot of people perceived that as being a downgrade,

čo mnohí vnímali ako zníženie rizika:

"Oh, it's not going to be as bad."

„Ó, to nebude také zlé!“

When in fact, the perception was that it was not going to be as bad,

Dojem teda bol, že to nebude až také zlé,

but it was actually an upgrade.

lenže v skutočnosti šlo o zvýšenie.

Things were getting worse as the models were coming in.

Zhoršovalo sa to, ako prichádzali nové modely,

So that's an example of how we get boxed in by our perceptions.

To je príklad, kedy sme v škatuli svojich dojmov.

So, the question becomes,

Otázkou teda je,

how do we expand our radius?

ako rozšírime svoj obzor.

The area of a circle is "pi r squared".

Plocha kruhu je pí krát r na druhú.

We increase the radius, we increase the area.

Zväčšíme obzor, zväčšíme plochu.

How do we expand our radius of understanding about science?

Ako zväčšíme svoj obzor porozumenia vede?

Here are my thoughts.

Tu sú moje úvahy.

You take inventory of your own biases.

Vezmite si súpis svojich predpojatostí.

And I'm challenging you all to do that.

A vyzývam vás všetkých, aby ste to spravili.

Take an inventory of your own biases.

Vezmite si súpis svojich predpojatostí.

Where do they come from?

Odkiaľ pochádzajú?

Your upbringing, your political perspective, your faith --

Vaša výchova, politické presvedčenie, viera –

what shapes your own biases?

– čo formuje vaše predpojatosti?

Then, evaluate your sources --

Potom zhodnoťte svoje zdroje:

where do you get your information on science?

Odkiaľ máte informácie o vede?

What do you read, what do you listen to,

Čo čítate, čo počúvate,

to consume your information on science?

odkiaľ máte informácie o vede?

And then, it's important to speak out.

Potom je dôležité o tom otvorene prehovoriť:

Talk about how you evaluated your biases and evaluated your sources.

Ako vyhodnocujete svoje predpojatosti, svoje zdroje?

I want you to listen to this little 40-second clip

Vypočujte si tento 40-sekundový klip

from one of the top TV meteorologists in the US, Greg Fishel,

jedného z top televíznych meteorológov USA,

Greg Fishel, v Raleigh, oblasť Durham.

in the Raleigh, Durham area.

He's revered in that region.

V tej oblasti je uctievaný.

But he was a climate skeptic.

Ale bol klimatoskeptikom.

But listen to what he says about speaking out.

No vypočujte si, čo o tom vraví:

Greg Fishel: The mistake I was making

Greg Fishel: Mojou chybou bolo,

and didn't realize until very recently,

a uvedomil som si to len nedávno,

was that I was only looking for information

že som hľadal iba informácie,

to support what I already thought,

ktoré podporovali, čo som si už myslel,

and was not interested in listening to anything contrary.

a nezaujímal som sa o nič protirečiace.

And so I woke up one morning,

Raz som sa zobudil

and there was this question in my mind,

s touto otázkou v mysli:

"Greg, are you engaging in confirmation bias?

„Greg, nie si pod vplyvom konfirmačného skreslenia?

Are you only looking for information to support what you already think?"

Nehľadáš iba informácie podporujúce, čo si už myslíš?“

And if I was honest with myself, and I tried to be,

A ako som sa snažil byť k sebe úprimný,

I admitted that was going on.

uznal som, že sa to deje.

And so the more I talked to scientists

A tak, čím viac som hovoril s vedcami

and read peer-reviewed literature

a čítal vedeckú literatúru

and tried to conduct myself the way I'd been taught to conduct myself

a snažil sa správať, ako ma to naučili

at Penn State when I was a student,

na Penn State, kde som študoval,

it became very difficult for me to make the argument

tým ťažšie pre mňa bolo argumentovať,

that we weren't at least having some effect.

že nemáme aspoň nejaký vplyv.

Maybe there was still a doubt as to how much,

Možno ostáva pochybnosť o tom, aký veľký,

but to say "nothing" was not a responsible thing for me to do

ale tvrdiť „žiadny“ by bolo nezodpovedné

as a scientist or a person.

odo mňa ako vedca či osoby.

JMS: Greg Fishel just talked about expanding his radius

JMS: Greg Fishel práve hovoril o rozšírení svojho obzoru

of understanding of science.

pochopenia vedy.

And when we expand our radius,

A keď si rozširujeme obzor,

it's not about making a better future,

nie je to pre vylepšenie budúcnosti,

but it's about preserving life as we know it.

ale pre uchovanie života, ako ho poznáme.

So as we think about expanding our own radius in understanding science,

Takže naše rozširovanie obzorov v pochopení vedy

it's critical for Athens, Georgia, for Atlanta, Georgia,

je kľúčové pre Atény i Atlantu v štáte Georgia,

for the state of Georgia, and for the world.

pre celý štát Georgia a pre celý svet.

So expand your radius.

Takže rozšírte svoj obzor.

Thank you.

Ďakujem.

(Applause)

(potlesk)