Back
Forum Replies Created
-
Yes, more complex and realistic sets of stimuli, in more realistic situations, should be encouraged.
I image a group of subjects who have a situation proposed to them, with a number of possible choices to make. After making their choice, they could be offered more information. After receiving the new information, they could choose again from the original options. Any who changed their choice based on the new information would be exhibiting some degree of free choice
I would prefer the reasonable, non-alarmist approach.
It’s said that extraordinary claims, require extraordinary proof. They also likely attract extraordinary reaction. If the object of science is to understand, not to win arguments, then a reasoned, non-alarmist interpretation of the data is more likely to advance our knowledge, and encourage further study.