I filmen World War Z ble de presentert en ‘regel’ som bakgrunn for hvorfor Israelerne hadde bygget en mur mot zombie invasjon, og dette ble kalt for“The Tenth Man”.
“When nine people agree on something, it’s the tenth man’s responsibility to disagree no matter how improbable the idea.”
Armie Legge har på sin nettside Evidence Mag en flott artikkel om hva vi kan lære av denne regelen i forhold til kritisk tankegang, og nettopp hvorfor dette er en så positiv side ved forskningsbaserte bevis, hvor studier går opp til fagfellevurderinger (peer-reviewing) før de blir godkjent i forskningsjournaler.
Les artikkelen her; http://evidencemag.com/world-war-z/.
“Whenever nine men agree on something, it’s the tenth man’s responsibility to present a case for an alternative view point — no matter how ridiculous the idea sounds. If his evidence is still inferior and conflicts with the consensus of the other nine men, then they go through with their original plan. If the tenth man’s ideas prove to be superior, they explore his ideas further. Luckily, this is how good researchers think and how good science is done.”
“Before accepting something as fact or getting attached to new beliefs, put yourself in the shoes of the tenth man… Try to disprove your ideas with the best evidence you can find. If you find good evidence against the idea/intervention, then it’s worth waiting before making any drastic changes.”
“There are times when you don’t have great evidence available, but that doesn’t necessarily mean something is wrong, dangerous, or ineffective. In these cases, the risk of trying the intervention should be minimal, and you should still be able to find some plausible indirect evidence that you can use to justify trying it… If you can’t find good evidence to support making a decision that involves a high risk or cost, don’t do it.”