Why do we have the tendency to believe things when they may not be true? Why do we project patterns, agency and meaning onto the world when sometimes there is none? How can we consider the probabilities of conspiracies to identify the ones that may be true? How do we encourage brave journalism that calls out conspiracies even by powerful institutions, in spite of the pejorative term ‘conspiracy theorist’?Today we have the uncomfortable topic of how our brains often believe things which aren’t true. The topic fits perfectly with our theme for series 4 of Self-transcendence vs Self-delusion. Our innate ability to notice patterns in systems, assign agency and find meaning in the world are among the reasons we’ve evolved to become so successful at predicting, understanding and creating meaningful collaborations in the world. But the issue with these abilities is that we might make the mistake of thinking what the brain assigns to the world for our own survival, is necessarily true of the world itself. Sure our brains do track the truth but truth is not always what’s needed for survival; so issues like negativity bias, confirmation bias and creating narrative stories that conveniently map onto our existing world view have become a deeply engrained part of our society. Add to this modern phenomena like the siloing of information by the internet into small echo chambers where only like minds come together; algorithmic amplification of memes led by the internet business model of “maximising engagement”; and decreasing trust in institutions, as economic inequality in the world increases exponentially, and you get a perfect storm of clashing beliefs about the truth.Fortunately, our guest today is one of the most established sceptical voices in science who reminds us that we need to track closely the difference between what can be collectively confirmed to be true, and what our brains project to be true from the inside out. He is of course, New York Times best selling author and founding publisher of Skeptic magazine Michael Shermer; he wrote for 18 years for the Scientific American. He’s written nine books but today we’re going to focus on his books “The Believing Brain” and his new release “Conspiracy: Why the rational believe the irrational”.What we discuss:00:00 Intro07:00 The philosophy of scepticism.08:45 ‘Default to truth’15:40 Moral truth VS moral relativism.19:00 Scientific revolutions overturning consensus.24:30 ‘The Believing Brain’.25:40 The ability to see patterns in the chaos, and assign agency to them.26:50 Evolution selects for assuming more things are real than not, just in case.30:10 Bayesian inference: levels of confidence in being right or wrong.32:40 ‘Agencicity’, impugning patterns with intentional agency.33:40 Most things happen randomly, and can’t be predicted.41:10 Assigning meaning to patterns in nature.43:50 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.44:40 Teleology: goal directness in life.47:50 Dennet - the intentional stance48:50 Confirmation bias.54:00 Algorithmic amplification.57:40 There are many real conspiracies.01:00:20 Tribal, proxy and paranoid conspiracism.01:03:35 Being overly suspicious - negativity bias.01:07:50 Critical thinking - how not to throw out the baby with the bathwater.01:16:50 Conflict of interest in media - shareholders vs stakeholder interest.01:18:40 The pejorative term ‘conspiracy theorist’ demotivating brave journalism.01:26:30 Reductionism and determinism evaluated.01:32:20 Remote Viewing and psi phenomena: sceptics view.01:46:30 The UFO phenomena: sceptics view.References:Michael Shermer, “The Believing Brain”Michael Shermer, “Conspiracy”Michael Shermer, “The Moral Arc”Scepticism 101 course: How to think like a scientistRemote viewing Stargate Program documentary “Third Eye Spies” Helene Cooper, Ralph Blumenthal, and Leslie Kean - ‘Glowing Auras and ‘Black Money’: The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program’, NYTimes article