Scott Alexander examines the impact of media coverage on fringe beliefs like creationism, suggesting that reduced coverage doesn't necessarily lead to their spread. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the dilemma faced by news organizations in reporting on 'stupid things', using creationism as a case study. He notes that while media coverage of creationism has declined significantly since the 2000s, the percentage of Americans believing in creationism has remained relatively stable. Organizations promoting creationism are still active, but receive far less attention. Scott suggests that this experience with creationism might indicate that aggressive media coverage and extreme measures to combat fringe beliefs (like Pizzagate or QAnon) may be unnecessary or even counterproductive. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander investigates claims linking Pharaoh Djoser to Osiris and Joseph, finding little evidence for the Osiris connection but a small possibility of a link to the Joseph story. Longer summary

Scott Alexander investigates claims that Pharaoh Djoser was the inspiration for the god Osiris and the Biblical Joseph. He concludes that the connection between Djoser and Osiris is likely meaningless, but there might be a very small chance of a connection to Joseph. The post discusses Djoser's reign, the origins of Osiris worship, and the similarities between the Famine Stele legend about Djoser and Imhotep and the biblical story of Joseph. Scott examines various theories, including creationist interpretations and scholarly suggestions that the Joseph story may have been inspired by Egyptian legends. He ultimately cautions against too readily accepting such connections, noting the prevalence of similar motifs across ancient Near Eastern cultures. Shorter summary

Scott argues that focusing on easily debunked fringe beliefs when discussing rationality can be counterproductive, potentially hampering people's ability to doubt their own beliefs and engage in critical thinking. Longer summary

Scott Alexander criticizes the tendency to focus on easily debunked fringe beliefs like moon-hoaxing and homeopathy when discussing rationality. He argues that this approach is counterproductive, as it trains people to dismiss opposing views too quickly and lose the ability to doubt their own beliefs. The post suggests that constantly debunking obvious falsehoods can 'inoculate' people against questioning more complex issues, potentially hampering their ability to engage in genuine critical thinking and self-doubt. Scott emphasizes that true rationality involves recognizing one's own potential for error, even in strongly held beliefs. Shorter summary