Once again, I have recently seen a thread in which the poster details something they have done which flies in the face of accepted practice...and it was done because they "read somewhere" or "saw something" that indicated it was the correct course of action. Doesn't matter who they are or what silly thing they were doing; the question is...why?
If an inexperienced...or, for that matter, an experienced...person actually does some research into a topic they will, naturally, encounter some conflicting opinions and advice. But, by and large, the majority of the info they find will be more or less in agreement as to what's happening, why it's happening, how to react, etc. The weird answers that make no sense whatsoever tend to be flukes and one-offs...so, if you want to gain knowledge, why on earth would you listen to the weirdos? When ten people say "Do this!" and one oddball says "Do that!"...who in his right mind will immediately jump to do that?
I'm sure that in many cases, the person is hoping that something they have in mind will work, and so they cast about until they find a source...any source...that reassures them that it will. That's just dumb...but I'm not really talking about that particular oddity of human behaviour. I'm talking about simple choices...left or right, black or white, up or down...where neither one nor the other is particularly more attractive or easier or less expensive than the other...and yet they still go with the outlier, the oddball, the dissenter. In the case in question here, the poster found something, somewhere, that indicated that newborn fish should be fed once every two days...took that advice to heart...and now wonders why their fish are not growing.
A dissenting opinion should not be automatically dismissed out of hand, especially if the dissenter presents sounds arguments in favour of his position. The majority is not always correct, certainly...but the odds are that they are closer to the truth than the one guy who says something completely opposite.
If an inexperienced...or, for that matter, an experienced...person actually does some research into a topic they will, naturally, encounter some conflicting opinions and advice. But, by and large, the majority of the info they find will be more or less in agreement as to what's happening, why it's happening, how to react, etc. The weird answers that make no sense whatsoever tend to be flukes and one-offs...so, if you want to gain knowledge, why on earth would you listen to the weirdos? When ten people say "Do this!" and one oddball says "Do that!"...who in his right mind will immediately jump to do that?
I'm sure that in many cases, the person is hoping that something they have in mind will work, and so they cast about until they find a source...any source...that reassures them that it will. That's just dumb...but I'm not really talking about that particular oddity of human behaviour. I'm talking about simple choices...left or right, black or white, up or down...where neither one nor the other is particularly more attractive or easier or less expensive than the other...and yet they still go with the outlier, the oddball, the dissenter. In the case in question here, the poster found something, somewhere, that indicated that newborn fish should be fed once every two days...took that advice to heart...and now wonders why their fish are not growing.
A dissenting opinion should not be automatically dismissed out of hand, especially if the dissenter presents sounds arguments in favour of his position. The majority is not always correct, certainly...but the odds are that they are closer to the truth than the one guy who says something completely opposite.
