These results seem completely consistent with a very different story, namely that people who already score higher on those cognitive metrics are more attracted to reading fiction.
But also considering how wide the classification maybe there is only one particular subset of Science Fiction you like?
Those are the dangerous ideas, the ones with more appeal than truth. Was Donald Trump mocked and belittled publicly? Of course, and some of it was even unfair. Tiny hands or funny hair are cheap shots, but he also was happy to bully others, among other truly outrageous things. He clings to the small truth that the press is mean.
What I want to believe (what I feel is true) is irrelevant to reality, even if my feelings are the most compelling and memorable aspect of my experience. Each of us is the center of our own experience, but not the center of the world, so our view is inherently warped.
I have trouble deciding how to interpret that phrasing.
Taken at face value, it suggests the author has an implausibly bad understanding of science, logic, and thinking in general.
Given the context, I wonder if it's somehow meant in jest.
In summary that has authenticity emanates from an authority.
The only problem here is people pretending not to know that language involves ambiguities, figures of speech, and so on.
To expand: in this case, two things are happening simultaneously: first, the author appreciates literature, and is genuinely happy that their intuitive belief that it is something "good" is getting a bit of empirical evidence.
Second, yes, I believe there is a hint of a smirk in the statement, that, if I were to dramatize it, is a comeback at all the STEM students in college that were dismissive of the author's enjoyment of non-non-fiction. It's all in good fun, however, because the article fundamentally rests on a believe in the scientific method, just not to the exclusion of other human endeavors.
There was nothing normative intended, and that's why I used the word feel. For brevity, I left off the bit where I regard my infinite ignorance (including sports, biology, math, religion, and fiction) as my own limitation, and one which I acknowledge limits my experience and interaction with people who cares and know more. Like my dislike of seafood. I don't blame the fish.
Since you identify specifically, let me be clear: Not less, just missing out on something I enjoy and learn from. My own ignorance and indifference limits my world, even if it is a necessary limitation I choose.
I'm sorry you feel judged. Snobbery is truly toxic, and my intent is inclusive. I apologize if my words are not.
"It's official!" Prefix don't help none either...
In reality, the physicists themselves know the models are incomplete, have painstakingly devised an cutting-edge experiment to probe that uncertainty and are ecstatic that there is more to study and that they have a new clue to follow. Imagine how sad it would be to be a physicist on the day that the Grand Unified Theory is discovered and physics is complete.
One of the initial plot points in the novel is that many top scientists in fields close to theoretical physics are misteriously committing suicide. Eventually it is revealed that they're doing it because an alien civilisation is surreptitiously using advanced technology to secretly interfere with human research at the subatomic level or something of the sort, to the point that the affected scientists are coming across such contradictory, counterfactual and inconsistent results that they finally commit suicide out of despair, shame, or loss of faith in science.
The idea that scientists, when faced with sudden nonsensical results which they cannot explain, would feel compelled not only to keep this fact to themselves but also to take their own lives is an unbelievably ignorant take on the workings of science as a field and a community.
If an evil power were to somehow alter reality to start breaking the expected rules of the Universe scientists would be absolutely excited about it, not suicidal! And even if they were to eventually despair out of the meticulously planned inconsistency caused by the evil manipulators, such that nothing could ever be predicted again, the despair would happen long after years and years of scientific conventions making the whole situation very public!
That being said the entire thing was kind of dumb.
However whenever I read now "according to science", or something similar I just baulk.