It is not just knowing what I know, because my personal knowledge and perspective has its limits too. But that there is something to know that goes beyond the emotional need to support what is believed and seeking any remedy to provide that support. The belief I am talking about are those concepts associated and often in opposition to concepts where there is a strong base of known information that has logical and rational explanations. Using those things closest to me, I see people making assertions that have no factual basis to counter issues that are based in facts. In addition, the logic of the thinking employed to support those assertions is often flawed and full of fallacies. The appearance is that these people feel their core belief is being challenged and out of fear, ignorance and desire, will readily accept information that is erroneous. They want to believe it, because they see it as opposing a view they consider to be dangerous. Considering how often the same erroneous information resurfaces makes it difficult to accept that it has been reviewed and compared to what is known in science. In most cases, it is also clear that proponents of that propensity do not understand the science they are in opposition to or that it really says nothing about their core beliefs.
Discussions and debates are supposed to help inform us and when one side is repeatedly suggesting to the other side that they need to seek better sources to base their arguments on, and this is so obviously rejected without review it can be frustrating.
My concern over this and the problems it causes are the perpetuation of erroneous information and that it is perpetuated by, perhaps well-intentioned, people that keep the cycle of ignorance alive by continually turning to it.
Common sense and popular knowledge have their place and are sometimes useful sources of thinking and information, but they can also be places were a lot of poor logic and false ideas thrive. Often popular knowledge about historical figures or events does not reflect information that is the result of scholarly research. Washington did not chop down a cherry tree. Billy the Kid was not a criminal mastermind that had shot 21 men before he was 21.
Perhaps much of this information has no direct impact on our daily lives and a person can live successfully without ever knowing much science or specific facts of science, but the process of replacing valid knowledge with erroneous information does not stop in one place and can take place at any level. Even levels that do impact the daily lives of people. Really, there is no way to stop it, but there are ways to manage it and minimize it. Getting people to think about the information that they believe to be true and review it for verification is one way to do that.
I think the problem is far larger than getting people to know what I think I know. I do not think that it stops with me, just because I think I know something.
I will probably have to leave it here for now and come back later to add more.