this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2025
581 points (99.0% liked)
tumblr
5135 readers
1407 users here now
Welcome to /c/tumblr, a place for all your tumblr screenshots and news.
Our Rules:
-
Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.
-
Must be tumblr related. This one is kind of a given.
-
Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
-
No unnecessary negativity. Just because you don't like a thing doesn't mean that you need to spend the entire comment section complaining about said thing. Just downvote and move on.
Sister Communities:
-
/c/TenForward@lemmy.world - Star Trek chat, memes and shitposts
-
/c/Memes@lemmy.world - General memes
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I agree. Entirely.
If you were to then advocate against QM, decrying it as nonsense, that would be malicious ignorance.
An example from my own school years might help. I had some smart (genuinely very clever) friends, they were evangelical Christians, which was fine until we start studying evolution in biology. They literally repeatedly stood up in class and shouted that there's "no proof of evolution" and got very angry. They did this because their child-aged minds couldn't reconcile their faith in their literal interpretation of their holy book and scientific evidence. They reaction was to maliciously attack science as a whole. That is malicious ignorance.
A counter example is a colleague from years ago, a young-earther Christian, never once attacked any contrary opinions or statements. He was really cool, open and honest about what he believed, had absolute confidence in his faith, didn't push that on anyone.
I'm not trying to claim that all ignorance is malicious, and apologize if that's how my previous argument has come across.
No, it isn't. There is no ignorance in what you described above. They're not ignorant of the aforementioned "scientific evidence"—they're aware of, and deliberately rejecting that evidence, because accepting it would interfere with their pre-existing assumptions, and they don't want to confront that (very common human phenomenon in general, by the way, confirmation bias is a hell of a drug that very few people successfully work to even begin to avoid, let alone completely avoid).
Actually, this isn't malice either. Malice is, by definition, a willful commission of harm, typically upon at least one other person (you could argue that in a way, self-harm is 'malicious', but colloquially, only harm directed at others is ever really considered "malicious"). When you break it down, getting defensive over having your biases be challenged by evidence is an act of (albeit misguided) self-preservation. It's a fear reaction to their own psyches. Those friends didn't get angry with the intent to harm themselves, or others, they were trying to bail their own brains out of having to deal with a contradiction/dissonance!