The overall point seems to be true, but that may just be because of previously held beliefs which I would like to confirm (much like the author suggests with fireplaces).
I think people have a hard time accepting scientific fact because the reality of the situation is much more convincing. Many people live with fireplaces, so their reality is that they are not harmful, regardless of the science behind the hazard they pose. It's much like American football: so many people have either played it or know people that play it that the possibility of damage due to injuries seems unreal or at least acceptable to them, because they haven't seen the harm in their experience.
Speaking from a personal viewpoint, I find that many rationalists put little value in peoples' opinions because they are "unsupported", ignoring the mountain of personal, anecdoctal evidence that the person has gained over their life, which is much more likely to be believed than the foreign research of far-off scientists.
"Many people live with fireplaces, so their reality is that they are not harmful"
That's not reality though is it? And it could be compared to smoking - the reality is that it's very harmful, but for a very long time nobody really believed that.
"I find that many rationalists put little value in peoples' opinions because they are "unsupported", ignoring the mountain of personal, anecdoctal evidence that the person has gained over their life, which is much more likely to be believed than the foreign research of far-off scientists."
That's because in the modern world we know that there is actually little value to these things compared to a dispassionate analysis. I understand that this is why many people are slow to 'believe' research when it confronts their ideas though.
I think people have a hard time accepting scientific fact because the reality of the situation is much more convincing. Many people live with fireplaces, so their reality is that they are not harmful, regardless of the science behind the hazard they pose. It's much like American football: so many people have either played it or know people that play it that the possibility of damage due to injuries seems unreal or at least acceptable to them, because they haven't seen the harm in their experience.
Speaking from a personal viewpoint, I find that many rationalists put little value in peoples' opinions because they are "unsupported", ignoring the mountain of personal, anecdoctal evidence that the person has gained over their life, which is much more likely to be believed than the foreign research of far-off scientists.