Skip to Content
Author's profile photo Jonathan Becher

The Baloney Detection Kit

Over the holiday break, I read ‘The Demon-Haunted Book: Science as a Candle in the Dark’ by Carl Sagan. The book is not nearly as well-known as “Cosmos” but should be. It introduces the scientific methodto non-scientists and provides advice on how to apply critical thinking. In Sagan’s words:

What skeptical thinking boils down to is the means to construct, and to understand, a reasoned argument and – especially important – to recognize a fallacious or fraudulent argument.

The above quote is from my favorite section called ‘The Fine Art of Baloney Detection’ in which Sagan introduces a series of tools to identify bad arguments and construct better alternatives. Among other things, we are reminded not to confuse correlation with cause, to avoid weasel words, and to watch for slippery slope arguments. Sagan also cautions against falling prey to the confirmation bias; a common issue among executives:

Don’t get too attached to your own ideas, lest you get reluctant to reject them even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

Inspired by Carl Sagan’s ideas, Michael Shermer, the editor of Skeptic Magazine, proposed a 10-point checklistto assess the believability of a claim. Watch a video of him explaining:

For those who don’t have the time or inclination to watch the entire video, here’s an abbreviated version of the Baloney Detection Kit:

  1. How reliable is the source of the claim?
  2. Does the source make similar claims?
  3. Have the claims been verified by somebody else?
  4. Does this fit with the way the world works?
  5. Has anyone tried to disprove the claim?
  6. Where does the preponderance of evidence point?
  7. Is the claimant playing by the rules of science?
  8. Is the claimant providing positive evidence?
  9. Does the new theory account for as many phenomena as the old theory?
  10. Are personal beliefs driving the claim?

The last one, in particular, is a good reminder for all of us. Everyone, including scientists, have inherent biases which might color interpretation of data and impact decisions. To avoid these biases showing up in academic papers, scientists follow a peer review process which requires an (often anonymous) community of experts to provide an impartial review.

Maybe those of us in business should try something analogous. The next time you’re about to start a new project, ask someone with a completely different perspective to do a detailed peer review.

Just remember to keep an open mind to a contrary point of view.

This blog was originally posted on Manage by Walking Around on January 10, 2016.

Please follow me on Twitter, LinkedIn, and Google+.

Assigned Tags

      Be the first to leave a comment
      You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.