WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:01.940 align:middle line:90% [SQUEAKING] 00:00:01.940 --> 00:00:03.380 align:middle line:90% [RUSTLING] 00:00:03.380 --> 00:00:05.300 align:middle line:90% [CLICKING] 00:00:05.300 --> 00:00:11.660 align:middle line:90% 00:00:11.660 --> 00:00:13.840 align:middle line:84% R. SCOTT KEMP: All right, good morning. 00:00:13.840 --> 00:00:19.240 align:middle line:84% So when you all started this class, 00:00:19.240 --> 00:00:22.020 align:middle line:84% you probably had one image of nuclear power. 00:00:22.020 --> 00:00:24.680 align:middle line:84% And maybe you had some questions, maybe not. 00:00:24.680 --> 00:00:26.400 align:middle line:84% If you were a nuclear engineer, I 00:00:26.400 --> 00:00:29.040 align:middle line:84% hope you still have some of that excitement that brought you 00:00:29.040 --> 00:00:30.400 align:middle line:90% to nuclear engineering. 00:00:30.400 --> 00:00:34.360 align:middle line:84% But I also hope that you feel you have a little bit more 00:00:34.360 --> 00:00:39.400 align:middle line:84% of an even-handed view of the issues facing nuclear. 00:00:39.400 --> 00:00:41.560 align:middle line:84% More important, however, than the details 00:00:41.560 --> 00:00:44.440 align:middle line:84% that we discussed over the course of this semester 00:00:44.440 --> 00:00:46.000 align:middle line:84% is simply to make the observation 00:00:46.000 --> 00:00:49.200 align:middle line:84% that many of these issues are still 00:00:49.200 --> 00:00:52.440 align:middle line:84% largely ignored in the nuclear engineering 00:00:52.440 --> 00:00:53.580 align:middle line:90% community writ large. 00:00:53.580 --> 00:00:55.720 align:middle line:84% Now, this department is actually getting 00:00:55.720 --> 00:00:58.600 align:middle line:84% a lot better about talking about and designing for things 00:00:58.600 --> 00:01:00.263 align:middle line:90% like economics and so on. 00:01:00.263 --> 00:01:02.680 align:middle line:84% But that's not necessarily true of the nuclear engineering 00:01:02.680 --> 00:01:04.560 align:middle line:90% community in general. 00:01:04.560 --> 00:01:07.280 align:middle line:84% The challenges that we covered, I would argue, 00:01:07.280 --> 00:01:09.600 align:middle line:84% obviously, are real, and you may not 00:01:09.600 --> 00:01:12.100 align:middle line:84% agree with my characterization of them. 00:01:12.100 --> 00:01:13.440 align:middle line:90% And that's OK. 00:01:13.440 --> 00:01:17.740 align:middle line:84% But I hope you will appreciate that, whatever the problems are, 00:01:17.740 --> 00:01:19.900 align:middle line:84% we can't just ignore them out of existence. 00:01:19.900 --> 00:01:21.140 align:middle line:90% They will not fix themselves. 00:01:21.140 --> 00:01:24.520 align:middle line:84% We really have to address them head on. 00:01:24.520 --> 00:01:27.080 align:middle line:84% And one of the reasons the nuclear community doesn't 00:01:27.080 --> 00:01:30.080 align:middle line:84% seem to want to do this is that, frankly, it's 00:01:30.080 --> 00:01:32.720 align:middle line:84% hard and unpleasant work, as you've 00:01:32.720 --> 00:01:35.800 align:middle line:84% experienced over the course of this semester. 00:01:35.800 --> 00:01:37.720 align:middle line:84% But if you think about it, that actually 00:01:37.720 --> 00:01:40.320 align:middle line:84% tells us something else about ourselves. 00:01:40.320 --> 00:01:45.080 align:middle line:84% It tells us that our community, in our expert judgment, 00:01:45.080 --> 00:01:48.720 align:middle line:90% is not free of emotional bias. 00:01:48.720 --> 00:01:53.360 align:middle line:84% We've come to this issue with certain beliefs and hopes, 00:01:53.360 --> 00:01:56.320 align:middle line:84% and it colors our thinking on the matter. 00:01:56.320 --> 00:02:00.470 align:middle line:84% If it were not so, it would not have been unpleasant, which 00:02:00.470 --> 00:02:02.670 align:middle line:90% gives rise to a question-- 00:02:02.670 --> 00:02:06.710 align:middle line:84% how should we make public policy around nuclear energy? 00:02:06.710 --> 00:02:11.430 align:middle line:84% Who should decide what actually happens in terms of new build? 00:02:11.430 --> 00:02:15.810 align:middle line:84% Now, in a democracy, generally, the public has a large voice. 00:02:15.810 --> 00:02:17.310 align:middle line:84% And traditionally, the view has been 00:02:17.310 --> 00:02:19.630 align:middle line:84% that the public hasn't always been 00:02:19.630 --> 00:02:21.750 align:middle line:90% ultra supportive of nuclear. 00:02:21.750 --> 00:02:24.430 align:middle line:84% Maybe they don't really know what they're talking about. 00:02:24.430 --> 00:02:28.910 align:middle line:84% Experts, while not informed of all of the facts, 00:02:28.910 --> 00:02:31.910 align:middle line:84% generally know more about the issue at hand 00:02:31.910 --> 00:02:36.790 align:middle line:84% and are well placed to make a policy recommendation. 00:02:36.790 --> 00:02:40.030 align:middle line:84% So that's a vote in favor of putting policy making 00:02:40.030 --> 00:02:42.430 align:middle line:90% in the hands of the experts. 00:02:42.430 --> 00:02:45.290 align:middle line:84% On the other hand, the expert community, 00:02:45.290 --> 00:02:48.870 align:middle line:84% as we've just talked about, is self-interested, right? 00:02:48.870 --> 00:02:52.310 align:middle line:84% It wants to promote whatever it is that leads 00:02:52.310 --> 00:02:55.470 align:middle line:90% to their professional success. 00:02:55.470 --> 00:03:01.790 align:middle line:90% So if we look at the world-- 00:03:01.790 --> 00:03:04.270 align:middle line:84% oh, I'm getting ahead of myself-- 00:03:04.270 --> 00:03:06.750 align:middle line:84% if we look out in the world, what 00:03:06.750 --> 00:03:10.230 align:middle line:84% do we see as an example of what works? 00:03:10.230 --> 00:03:13.250 align:middle line:84% Generally, the expert-led approach does work. 00:03:13.250 --> 00:03:17.670 align:middle line:84% So we trust experts to help us regulate pharmaceuticals, 00:03:17.670 --> 00:03:20.750 align:middle line:84% to fly airplanes, to do all these things. 00:03:20.750 --> 00:03:23.170 align:middle line:84% But when it comes to matters like nuclear power, 00:03:23.170 --> 00:03:25.990 align:middle line:84% it seems like the public isn't necessarily 00:03:25.990 --> 00:03:31.670 align:middle line:84% on board with taking the expert recommendation. 00:03:31.670 --> 00:03:35.830 align:middle line:84% What is it that causes this divergence between these two 00:03:35.830 --> 00:03:38.110 align:middle line:90% types of issues? 00:03:38.110 --> 00:03:40.630 align:middle line:90% That is the question for today. 00:03:40.630 --> 00:03:44.553 align:middle line:84% This is our last and final lecture in this course. 00:03:44.553 --> 00:03:46.470 align:middle line:84% And most of what I'm going to talk about today 00:03:46.470 --> 00:03:48.570 align:middle line:84% comes from work done by Howard Margolis, 00:03:48.570 --> 00:03:50.710 align:middle line:90% just to give him credit. 00:03:50.710 --> 00:03:57.460 align:middle line:84% So let's begin by looking into this expert lay-opinion divide. 00:03:57.460 --> 00:04:03.740 align:middle line:84% So the first observation is that it's not normal for the public 00:04:03.740 --> 00:04:06.060 align:middle line:84% to say-- all experts are self-interested 00:04:06.060 --> 00:04:07.160 align:middle line:90% and I can't trust them. 00:04:07.160 --> 00:04:12.460 align:middle line:84% The public goes to doctors and has experts perform surgeries 00:04:12.460 --> 00:04:13.620 align:middle line:90% on their body. 00:04:13.620 --> 00:04:16.019 align:middle line:84% They go to lawyers and have experts advise them 00:04:16.019 --> 00:04:20.779 align:middle line:84% in matters of law that determine their success in life. 00:04:20.779 --> 00:04:25.740 align:middle line:84% We willingly put our lives in the hands of experts 00:04:25.740 --> 00:04:27.360 align:middle line:90% on a daily basis. 00:04:27.360 --> 00:04:29.740 align:middle line:84% So we can observe that it's not a problem 00:04:29.740 --> 00:04:33.620 align:middle line:90% of trusting experts in general. 00:04:33.620 --> 00:04:35.440 align:middle line:84% There's a class of social problems, 00:04:35.440 --> 00:04:40.300 align:middle line:84% though, where the community doesn't trust experts. 00:04:40.300 --> 00:04:43.340 align:middle line:84% So many experts would advise you-- 00:04:43.340 --> 00:04:47.100 align:middle line:84% don't drink any alcohol, any actually. 00:04:47.100 --> 00:04:50.740 align:middle line:84% It used to be thought that a glass a day or something of wine 00:04:50.740 --> 00:04:51.600 align:middle line:90% was actually good. 00:04:51.600 --> 00:04:54.180 align:middle line:84% But now the recent research says any amount of alcohol 00:04:54.180 --> 00:04:56.740 align:middle line:90% is terrible for you. 00:04:56.740 --> 00:04:59.240 align:middle line:84% Experts, would advise us not to eat fast food. 00:04:59.240 --> 00:05:00.980 align:middle line:90% Don't eat McDonald's. 00:05:00.980 --> 00:05:03.580 align:middle line:90% And yet, people don't listen. 00:05:03.580 --> 00:05:06.980 align:middle line:84% They're happy to drink alcohol and put 00:05:06.980 --> 00:05:10.020 align:middle line:90% processed food in their bodies. 00:05:10.020 --> 00:05:13.460 align:middle line:84% Now, it's important to note here that in these cases, 00:05:13.460 --> 00:05:17.940 align:middle line:84% perhaps the public is not always the most fearsome group. 00:05:17.940 --> 00:05:20.200 align:middle line:84% It's not just a case that the public is always scared, 00:05:20.200 --> 00:05:21.740 align:middle line:90% and experts are not scared. 00:05:21.740 --> 00:05:24.560 align:middle line:84% In these cases that I just gave examples for, 00:05:24.560 --> 00:05:27.220 align:middle line:84% the public is willingly taking on risks 00:05:27.220 --> 00:05:30.620 align:middle line:84% that experts advise them not to do. 00:05:30.620 --> 00:05:33.900 align:middle line:84% So it's not just that the public is fearful. 00:05:33.900 --> 00:05:37.460 align:middle line:84% It may be that in some cases, people 00:05:37.460 --> 00:05:41.020 align:middle line:84% are willing to disregard expert advice 00:05:41.020 --> 00:05:44.640 align:middle line:84% because their personal preferences are elsewhere. 00:05:44.640 --> 00:05:48.080 align:middle line:84% I know that drinking alcohol is bad for me, 00:05:48.080 --> 00:05:50.180 align:middle line:84% but I really enjoy having a beer. 00:05:50.180 --> 00:05:54.690 align:middle line:84% And I'm just going to decide that my short-term gains 00:05:54.690 --> 00:05:56.810 align:middle line:90% outweigh the long-term risks. 00:05:56.810 --> 00:06:01.150 align:middle line:84% So it's not actually an issue of not believing the experts, 00:06:01.150 --> 00:06:04.750 align:middle line:84% it's just my priorities are different. 00:06:04.750 --> 00:06:08.850 align:middle line:84% I need that nicotine hit if I'm a cigarette smoker. 00:06:08.850 --> 00:06:15.130 align:middle line:84% But then there are these cases where the public really 00:06:15.130 --> 00:06:17.970 align:middle line:84% doesn't actually believe the experts are right. 00:06:17.970 --> 00:06:21.350 align:middle line:84% So these, we tend to think of them as more fringe, 00:06:21.350 --> 00:06:23.570 align:middle line:84% but they exist, like the people who 00:06:23.570 --> 00:06:30.030 align:middle line:84% deny evolution or climate change or are skeptical of vaccines. 00:06:30.030 --> 00:06:33.850 align:middle line:84% So in these cases, there's actually no acceptance 00:06:33.850 --> 00:06:35.970 align:middle line:90% of expert legitimacy. 00:06:35.970 --> 00:06:42.290 align:middle line:84% But if you think about these cases, when people disagree, 00:06:42.290 --> 00:06:46.730 align:middle line:84% they don't disagree on the basis of facts or logic. 00:06:46.730 --> 00:06:50.170 align:middle line:84% The people who are vaccine skeptics 00:06:50.170 --> 00:06:51.890 align:middle line:90% aren't going around and saying-- 00:06:51.890 --> 00:06:53.930 align:middle line:84% I'm concerned about mRNA vaccines 00:06:53.930 --> 00:06:56.450 align:middle line:84% because the carrier lipid might not 00:06:56.450 --> 00:06:58.330 align:middle line:84% be fully metabolized and decomposed 00:06:58.330 --> 00:07:01.570 align:middle line:90% by the P450 cytochrome. 00:07:01.570 --> 00:07:04.590 align:middle line:84% This could cause some issues with my liver down the road. 00:07:04.590 --> 00:07:06.610 align:middle line:90% I don't ever hear that argument. 00:07:06.610 --> 00:07:10.090 align:middle line:84% It's usually some kind of fringe idea 00:07:10.090 --> 00:07:13.330 align:middle line:84% that is not rooted in logic or evidence. 00:07:13.330 --> 00:07:20.570 align:middle line:84% So let's take these two as axiomatic aspects of the debate. 00:07:20.570 --> 00:07:22.670 align:middle line:84% It's not trusting experts in general, 00:07:22.670 --> 00:07:26.250 align:middle line:84% and it's not a dispute based in logic or facts. 00:07:26.250 --> 00:07:29.810 align:middle line:84% So, what, then, explains what's going on? 00:07:29.810 --> 00:07:31.910 align:middle line:84% So if you ask around, if you look around, 00:07:31.910 --> 00:07:35.530 align:middle line:84% you tend to come up with three basic theories that 00:07:35.530 --> 00:07:37.210 align:middle line:90% are in the literature. 00:07:37.210 --> 00:07:39.747 align:middle line:84% So the first theory goes something like this. 00:07:39.747 --> 00:07:41.330 align:middle line:84% This often happens, this is the theory 00:07:41.330 --> 00:07:45.090 align:middle line:84% that you'll most often get if you ask subject matter experts 00:07:45.090 --> 00:07:47.090 align:middle line:90% like your other professors. 00:07:47.090 --> 00:07:50.760 align:middle line:84% They say, well, the problem is really a trust deficit. 00:07:50.760 --> 00:07:52.840 align:middle line:84% The public, for some reason, has lost 00:07:52.840 --> 00:07:56.920 align:middle line:84% faith in nuclear experts' ability, 00:07:56.920 --> 00:07:59.700 align:middle line:84% and so they are no longer able to evaluate the real risk. 00:07:59.700 --> 00:08:04.640 align:middle line:84% For example, perhaps because of TMI and Chernobyl and Fukushima 00:08:04.640 --> 00:08:07.283 align:middle line:84% combined with sensationalist media attention, 00:08:07.283 --> 00:08:09.200 align:middle line:84% the public now believes that nuclear engineers 00:08:09.200 --> 00:08:15.480 align:middle line:84% are just incompetent, and so therefore they've lost trust. 00:08:15.480 --> 00:08:18.320 align:middle line:84% If we could only find a way to get that trust back, 00:08:18.320 --> 00:08:20.800 align:middle line:84% then we could explain the virtues of nuclear 00:08:20.800 --> 00:08:23.000 align:middle line:90% and all would be well. 00:08:23.000 --> 00:08:27.400 align:middle line:84% That is often an explanation for what's going on. 00:08:27.400 --> 00:08:28.800 align:middle line:84% There's another theory, which you 00:08:28.800 --> 00:08:31.820 align:middle line:84% will find not among the subject matter experts, 00:08:31.820 --> 00:08:34.179 align:middle line:84% but typically more among social scientists. 00:08:34.179 --> 00:08:38.799 align:middle line:84% And they'll say, actually, it's not about trust. 00:08:38.799 --> 00:08:40.020 align:middle line:90% It's not about experts. 00:08:40.020 --> 00:08:41.720 align:middle line:90% It's not about risk. 00:08:41.720 --> 00:08:44.120 align:middle line:90% These are actually distractions. 00:08:44.120 --> 00:08:47.560 align:middle line:84% The facts being debated are just rhetorical devices 00:08:47.560 --> 00:08:50.480 align:middle line:90% being lobbed at each other. 00:08:50.480 --> 00:08:52.320 align:middle line:84% The proponents of this theory say 00:08:52.320 --> 00:08:56.600 align:middle line:84% it's really about ideology, about your identity, 00:08:56.600 --> 00:08:59.840 align:middle line:84% and who is being served by these policies. 00:08:59.840 --> 00:09:03.040 align:middle line:84% So the public looks at nuclear energy and they say, 00:09:03.040 --> 00:09:04.880 align:middle line:90% is this thing really helping me? 00:09:04.880 --> 00:09:08.560 align:middle line:84% Am I benefiting from this scheme of corporate billionaires 00:09:08.560 --> 00:09:11.360 align:middle line:84% who are aggregating all this money and building this plant 00:09:11.360 --> 00:09:12.700 align:middle line:90% and upping my electricity bill? 00:09:12.700 --> 00:09:16.200 align:middle line:90% Is this really in my interest? 00:09:16.200 --> 00:09:17.580 align:middle line:90% They make safety claims. 00:09:17.580 --> 00:09:19.240 align:middle line:90% Should I trust them? 00:09:19.240 --> 00:09:21.920 align:middle line:84% Maybe they're just advocating for their own financial 00:09:21.920 --> 00:09:24.600 align:middle line:84% interests and they're not really telling me the truth. 00:09:24.600 --> 00:09:32.520 align:middle line:84% So this is a theory that is based on this question of who 00:09:32.520 --> 00:09:35.540 align:middle line:84% is being served, not what is being done, 00:09:35.540 --> 00:09:38.100 align:middle line:90% but who is benefiting. 00:09:38.100 --> 00:09:41.840 align:middle line:84% The third explanation that we can find in the literature 00:09:41.840 --> 00:09:43.440 align:middle line:90% is a bit more subtle. 00:09:43.440 --> 00:09:46.190 align:middle line:90% We call it rival rationality. 00:09:46.190 --> 00:09:49.470 align:middle line:84% And it takes the view that experts in the public 00:09:49.470 --> 00:09:52.070 align:middle line:84% are both well-intending, they're both 00:09:52.070 --> 00:09:54.990 align:middle line:84% doing their best with the information that they have, 00:09:54.990 --> 00:09:58.510 align:middle line:84% it's just that they have actually different ways 00:09:58.510 --> 00:10:00.350 align:middle line:90% of understanding the world. 00:10:00.350 --> 00:10:05.150 align:middle line:84% So for example, experts want to have safe reactors. 00:10:05.150 --> 00:10:07.670 align:middle line:84% And when they evaluate safety, they're 00:10:07.670 --> 00:10:11.010 align:middle line:84% going to look at safety in a way that they can understand, 00:10:11.010 --> 00:10:12.910 align:middle line:84% that they can measure and quantify it. 00:10:12.910 --> 00:10:16.270 align:middle line:84% So they'll say, well, what is the statistical risk of a cancer 00:10:16.270 --> 00:10:19.670 align:middle line:84% death per terawatt hour of electricity produced? 00:10:19.670 --> 00:10:23.390 align:middle line:84% That, to them, seems like a good way of thinking about safety. 00:10:23.390 --> 00:10:26.350 align:middle line:84% The public is also interested in safety, 00:10:26.350 --> 00:10:28.310 align:middle line:84% but they have a different way of understanding 00:10:28.310 --> 00:10:30.110 align:middle line:90% what it means to be safe. 00:10:30.110 --> 00:10:32.790 align:middle line:84% For them, a safe reactor is a reactor 00:10:32.790 --> 00:10:34.470 align:middle line:84% that they don't have to worry about, 00:10:34.470 --> 00:10:38.150 align:middle line:84% a reactor that provides a sense of well-being, 00:10:38.150 --> 00:10:41.510 align:middle line:84% perhaps doesn't have the risk of a catastrophic event 00:10:41.510 --> 00:10:43.830 align:middle line:84% that they don't understand, perhaps 00:10:43.830 --> 00:10:45.950 align:middle line:84% something that seems not to disturb 00:10:45.950 --> 00:10:48.910 align:middle line:84% their pristine environment or to create liabilities that 00:10:48.910 --> 00:10:51.710 align:middle line:84% extend beyond their lifetime into their children's lifetime 00:10:51.710 --> 00:10:54.630 align:middle line:84% that they don't want to leave behind. 00:10:54.630 --> 00:10:56.810 align:middle line:84% They're not necessarily opposed to the technology, 00:10:56.810 --> 00:11:00.190 align:middle line:84% but their idea of safety is not statistical cancer deaths 00:11:00.190 --> 00:11:03.270 align:middle line:84% per terawatt hour of electricity produced. 00:11:03.270 --> 00:11:05.590 align:middle line:90% Neither side is wrong here. 00:11:05.590 --> 00:11:09.470 align:middle line:84% It's just that they value different things 00:11:09.470 --> 00:11:11.950 align:middle line:84% and therefore they disagree on the bottom line. 00:11:11.950 --> 00:11:16.070 align:middle line:84% So we have these three theories to try 00:11:16.070 --> 00:11:20.630 align:middle line:84% to understand this divide between the experts 00:11:20.630 --> 00:11:21.450 align:middle line:90% and the public. 00:11:21.450 --> 00:11:23.150 align:middle line:90% So let's just-- yeah? 00:11:23.150 --> 00:11:25.150 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: I would also add a fourth thing. 00:11:25.150 --> 00:11:28.190 align:middle line:84% I don't know if it's [INAUDIBLE]. 00:11:28.190 --> 00:11:30.350 align:middle line:84% But the people who work on nuclear policy 00:11:30.350 --> 00:11:31.990 align:middle line:90% are not [INAUDIBLE]. 00:11:31.990 --> 00:11:37.570 align:middle line:84% The people that are [INAUDIBLE] some lawyers and scientists. 00:11:37.570 --> 00:11:39.110 align:middle line:90% R. SCOTT KEMP: Yeah. 00:11:39.110 --> 00:11:40.650 align:middle line:90% This is true. 00:11:40.650 --> 00:11:44.660 align:middle line:84% But is this a theory for why the public 00:11:44.660 --> 00:11:47.380 align:middle line:90% doesn't agree with the experts? 00:11:47.380 --> 00:11:49.980 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: In my own hypothesis, based 00:11:49.980 --> 00:11:52.640 align:middle line:84% on a [INAUDIBLE] of the European Commission Nuclear Policy, 00:11:52.640 --> 00:11:53.600 align:middle line:90% I think it is. 00:11:53.600 --> 00:11:56.980 align:middle line:84% And it ties to the fact that policymakers don't really 00:11:56.980 --> 00:12:00.730 align:middle line:84% do a concerted effort to educate the public on nuclear. 00:12:00.730 --> 00:12:02.980 align:middle line:84% R. SCOTT KEMP: OK, we'll get back to this in a moment, 00:12:02.980 --> 00:12:05.980 align:middle line:84% about educating the public in nuclear. 00:12:05.980 --> 00:12:11.740 align:middle line:84% For the moment, let's proceed with these three theories 00:12:11.740 --> 00:12:16.460 align:middle line:90% and see which one is right. 00:12:16.460 --> 00:12:20.520 align:middle line:84% So all of these models seem to have explanatory power. 00:12:20.520 --> 00:12:23.300 align:middle line:84% They seem to characterize the debate. 00:12:23.300 --> 00:12:25.940 align:middle line:84% None of them seem obviously wrong. 00:12:25.940 --> 00:12:28.940 align:middle line:84% But if these theories are going to be useful, 00:12:28.940 --> 00:12:33.020 align:middle line:84% they have to do more than just characterize the debate. 00:12:33.020 --> 00:12:37.060 align:middle line:84% They have to be able to predict when a technology is going 00:12:37.060 --> 00:12:40.620 align:middle line:84% to enjoy expert lay-public consensus, like flying 00:12:40.620 --> 00:12:43.980 align:middle line:84% airplanes, and when a technology is not going 00:12:43.980 --> 00:12:46.500 align:middle line:90% to enjoy lay-public consensus. 00:12:46.500 --> 00:12:48.540 align:middle line:84% Without that predictive power, they're 00:12:48.540 --> 00:12:51.180 align:middle line:90% not necessarily true models. 00:12:51.180 --> 00:12:53.860 align:middle line:84% So let's investigate which of these models 00:12:53.860 --> 00:12:56.620 align:middle line:84% actually can predict the outcome. 00:12:56.620 --> 00:13:00.060 align:middle line:84% So let's pull number one apart a little bit more. 00:13:00.060 --> 00:13:03.380 align:middle line:84% Is it that we don't trust the experts themselves or we don't 00:13:03.380 --> 00:13:05.940 align:middle line:90% trust their conclusions? 00:13:05.940 --> 00:13:09.420 align:middle line:84% Now perhaps we worry about the DOE or NRC 00:13:09.420 --> 00:13:13.220 align:middle line:84% because we think these bodies are just populated by industry 00:13:13.220 --> 00:13:15.740 align:middle line:84% cronies and bloated technocrats who only want to support 00:13:15.740 --> 00:13:17.380 align:middle line:90% their private interests. 00:13:17.380 --> 00:13:20.580 align:middle line:84% In short, they're just self-interested liars. 00:13:20.580 --> 00:13:25.000 align:middle line:84% But if that's the problem, then it's not about trust. 00:13:25.000 --> 00:13:29.440 align:middle line:84% It's really more Theorem II, ideological opposition, 00:13:29.440 --> 00:13:31.840 align:middle line:90% who is being served. 00:13:31.840 --> 00:13:35.860 align:middle line:84% So maybe that's not the nature of the trust deficit. 00:13:35.860 --> 00:13:39.700 align:middle line:84% Perhaps the issue is that the public 00:13:39.700 --> 00:13:43.650 align:middle line:84% feels that the engineers have their facts mixed up. 00:13:43.650 --> 00:13:46.370 align:middle line:84% But remember from our previous slide, 00:13:46.370 --> 00:13:48.250 align:middle line:84% the disagreements are almost never rooted 00:13:48.250 --> 00:13:51.970 align:middle line:84% in actually discussions of facts or logic. 00:13:51.970 --> 00:13:54.610 align:middle line:84% So that doesn't really hold either. 00:13:54.610 --> 00:13:57.770 align:middle line:84% So if they don't disagree on the facts, 00:13:57.770 --> 00:14:00.690 align:middle line:84% perhaps they feel that the experts 00:14:00.690 --> 00:14:03.863 align:middle line:90% haven't captured all the facts. 00:14:03.863 --> 00:14:06.030 align:middle line:84% They agree on some facts, but there are other facts. 00:14:06.030 --> 00:14:09.650 align:middle line:84% Well, actually that's rival rationality. 00:14:09.650 --> 00:14:13.410 align:middle line:84% So every time you try to pull apart number one, what winds up 00:14:13.410 --> 00:14:16.330 align:middle line:84% happening is you wind up in one of these two or three, 00:14:16.330 --> 00:14:17.970 align:middle line:90% these other theories. 00:14:17.970 --> 00:14:24.510 align:middle line:84% So number one is really just a way of saying-- 00:14:24.510 --> 00:14:27.850 align:middle line:90% 00:14:27.850 --> 00:14:29.030 align:middle line:90% there is mistrust. 00:14:29.030 --> 00:14:32.170 align:middle line:90% 00:14:32.170 --> 00:14:35.710 align:middle line:84% For some reason, the public doesn't agree with us, 00:14:35.710 --> 00:14:37.690 align:middle line:90% but it doesn't predict anything. 00:14:37.690 --> 00:14:40.870 align:middle line:84% So this is not a theory with predictive power. 00:14:40.870 --> 00:14:45.130 align:middle line:84% Let's try theorem number two, ideological opposition. 00:14:45.130 --> 00:14:50.570 align:middle line:84% So to understand ideology, it's useful to decompose 00:14:50.570 --> 00:14:52.210 align:middle line:90% this a little bit further. 00:14:52.210 --> 00:14:54.570 align:middle line:84% And there's a lot of ways to do this. 00:14:54.570 --> 00:14:56.450 align:middle line:84% But I'm going to suggest we adopt 00:14:56.450 --> 00:15:00.970 align:middle line:84% an approach that was offered by Mary Douglas and Aaron 00:15:00.970 --> 00:15:02.610 align:middle line:90% Wildavsky. 00:15:02.610 --> 00:15:05.010 align:middle line:84% They were an anthropologist and political scientist 00:15:05.010 --> 00:15:08.250 align:middle line:84% who joined forces and tried to create a typology of ideology 00:15:08.250 --> 00:15:12.490 align:middle line:90% to describe how people think. 00:15:12.490 --> 00:15:16.590 align:middle line:84% And it's not the only model out there, 00:15:16.590 --> 00:15:19.330 align:middle line:84% but I don't want to pick winners, but we need a model. 00:15:19.330 --> 00:15:21.410 align:middle line:90% So here's what they suggest. 00:15:21.410 --> 00:15:24.610 align:middle line:84% We can think about ideology as being 00:15:24.610 --> 00:15:26.170 align:middle line:90% broken into several groups. 00:15:26.170 --> 00:15:30.210 align:middle line:84% So the first ideological way of thinking 00:15:30.210 --> 00:15:32.410 align:middle line:90% are the hierarchicalists. 00:15:32.410 --> 00:15:34.450 align:middle line:84% So the hierarchicalists are people 00:15:34.450 --> 00:15:37.050 align:middle line:90% who prefer rule by the elite. 00:15:37.050 --> 00:15:39.620 align:middle line:84% Now that elite can be a priest class. 00:15:39.620 --> 00:15:40.740 align:middle line:90% It can be nobility. 00:15:40.740 --> 00:15:42.603 align:middle line:90% It can be an intellectual elite. 00:15:42.603 --> 00:15:44.020 align:middle line:84% It can be blue ribbon commissions. 00:15:44.020 --> 00:15:46.040 align:middle line:84% It can be the plutocracy of Wall Street. 00:15:46.040 --> 00:15:47.480 align:middle line:84% Whatever it means is that there's 00:15:47.480 --> 00:15:50.960 align:middle line:84% some group of people who, for some reason, 00:15:50.960 --> 00:15:55.640 align:middle line:84% are imbued with a special ability 00:15:55.640 --> 00:15:59.240 align:middle line:84% to make decisions on behalf of the public. 00:15:59.240 --> 00:16:05.080 align:middle line:84% These are people who think along these lines of hierarchicalists. 00:16:05.080 --> 00:16:07.980 align:middle line:84% So we can have extreme examples from history. 00:16:07.980 --> 00:16:10.940 align:middle line:84% Fascism and theocracy are hierarchical rule. 00:16:10.940 --> 00:16:12.960 align:middle line:84% Conservatives tend to be hierarchicalists. 00:16:12.960 --> 00:16:15.280 align:middle line:84% The Judeo-Christian ethic and Confucianism 00:16:15.280 --> 00:16:18.280 align:middle line:84% are hierarchical epic structures. 00:16:18.280 --> 00:16:21.560 align:middle line:84% You can see all these throughout all of history. 00:16:21.560 --> 00:16:23.040 align:middle line:84% Another way of looking at the world 00:16:23.040 --> 00:16:25.840 align:middle line:90% is the egalitarian approach. 00:16:25.840 --> 00:16:28.740 align:middle line:84% Now, egalitarians are notionally democratic. 00:16:28.740 --> 00:16:30.760 align:middle line:84% They are the revolutionaries concerned 00:16:30.760 --> 00:16:34.220 align:middle line:84% with fairness and justice and equality for all and due process 00:16:34.220 --> 00:16:35.200 align:middle line:90% and so on. 00:16:35.200 --> 00:16:40.640 align:middle line:84% And we see the examples of this throughout history in communism, 00:16:40.640 --> 00:16:45.720 align:middle line:84% in liberals, modern liberalism, polytheistic epics 00:16:45.720 --> 00:16:49.320 align:middle line:84% like Hinduism, Gilgamesh, Greek mythology all 00:16:49.320 --> 00:16:55.160 align:middle line:84% tend to have this egalitarian quality in those epics 00:16:55.160 --> 00:16:57.800 align:middle line:84% by virtue of human frailty as being assigned to gods 00:16:57.800 --> 00:16:58.800 align:middle line:90% and so on. 00:16:58.800 --> 00:17:06.960 align:middle line:84% So the idea here is it's really about uniform benefit and risk. 00:17:06.960 --> 00:17:10.839 align:middle line:84% Then we have the entrepreneur class. 00:17:10.839 --> 00:17:15.560 align:middle line:84% The entrepreneurs are not concerned with identity groups 00:17:15.560 --> 00:17:16.859 align:middle line:90% or relations among people. 00:17:16.859 --> 00:17:21.839 align:middle line:84% So the first two are inherently concerned with how 00:17:21.839 --> 00:17:24.800 align:middle line:84% the power between people is arranged. 00:17:24.800 --> 00:17:28.280 align:middle line:84% And the third category, the entrepreneurs, they're 00:17:28.280 --> 00:17:31.960 align:middle line:84% actually concerned with maximizing some exterior 00:17:31.960 --> 00:17:33.120 align:middle line:90% variable. 00:17:33.120 --> 00:17:35.830 align:middle line:84% That variable could be wealth generation, 00:17:35.830 --> 00:17:42.190 align:middle line:84% it could be technology, progress of some kind. 00:17:42.190 --> 00:17:44.910 align:middle line:84% And they, therefore, prefer whatever 00:17:44.910 --> 00:17:47.970 align:middle line:84% it is that allows that variable to be maximized. 00:17:47.970 --> 00:17:50.670 align:middle line:84% Usually that's loose correlations with minimal rules 00:17:50.670 --> 00:17:52.970 align:middle line:84% and norms to allow freedom of action. 00:17:52.970 --> 00:17:57.190 align:middle line:84% These are the Elon Musks of the world. 00:17:57.190 --> 00:18:00.130 align:middle line:84% Historically, we see this in anarchism, libertarians, 00:18:00.130 --> 00:18:04.070 align:middle line:84% postmodernist, nihilist, so on and so forth. 00:18:04.070 --> 00:18:06.790 align:middle line:84% So if we accept this as a kind of topology 00:18:06.790 --> 00:18:12.870 align:middle line:84% for describing ideological orientations in the world, 00:18:12.870 --> 00:18:17.510 align:middle line:84% do they tell us anything about what technologies will and will 00:18:17.510 --> 00:18:22.230 align:middle line:84% not enjoy lay-public expert support? 00:18:22.230 --> 00:18:29.270 align:middle line:84% So if you think about it, nuclear power has qualities 00:18:29.270 --> 00:18:35.390 align:middle line:84% where it cannot succeed without a highly hierarchical structure. 00:18:35.390 --> 00:18:39.150 align:middle line:84% It requires the aggregation of enormous resources 00:18:39.150 --> 00:18:41.190 align:middle line:90% among a small number of people. 00:18:41.190 --> 00:18:43.170 align:middle line:84% It requires an engineering elite. 00:18:43.170 --> 00:18:49.070 align:middle line:84% It requires strong centralized government for safety and rules. 00:18:49.070 --> 00:18:52.510 align:middle line:84% So you would think that people who were hierarchically inclined 00:18:52.510 --> 00:18:55.470 align:middle line:84% might find nuclear power to be quite acceptable, 00:18:55.470 --> 00:18:58.070 align:middle line:84% and therefore the people who are egalitarians 00:18:58.070 --> 00:19:01.270 align:middle line:84% might find it to be morally wrong. 00:19:01.270 --> 00:19:03.830 align:middle line:84% The entrepreneur might find the underlying physics 00:19:03.830 --> 00:19:05.550 align:middle line:84% cool, but at the same time, might 00:19:05.550 --> 00:19:09.230 align:middle line:84% see that fission is outdated, and maybe the future 00:19:09.230 --> 00:19:12.030 align:middle line:84% is all fusion, which is all cool and about new technology 00:19:12.030 --> 00:19:14.430 align:middle line:84% maximization or something like this. 00:19:14.430 --> 00:19:17.710 align:middle line:84% So that would be the way you would predict 00:19:17.710 --> 00:19:20.390 align:middle line:90% nuclear would break down. 00:19:20.390 --> 00:19:22.950 align:middle line:90% But here's the problem. 00:19:22.950 --> 00:19:26.870 align:middle line:84% If you go and survey experts in the nuclear community, 00:19:26.870 --> 00:19:31.620 align:middle line:84% they don't all fall into the hierarchicalist class. 00:19:31.620 --> 00:19:33.740 align:middle line:84% Generally, the people in this classroom 00:19:33.740 --> 00:19:36.580 align:middle line:84% will fall among all three of these categories. 00:19:36.580 --> 00:19:40.820 align:middle line:84% There are plenty of liberal-minded individuals, 00:19:40.820 --> 00:19:45.020 align:middle line:84% egalitarians, who are in favor of nuclear energy. 00:19:45.020 --> 00:19:48.820 align:middle line:84% There are plenty of hierarchicalists who are not. 00:19:48.820 --> 00:19:57.980 align:middle line:84% For example, there tends to be a lot of Christian religious types 00:19:57.980 --> 00:20:00.940 align:middle line:84% in the United States who are both very hierarchicalist 00:20:00.940 --> 00:20:04.540 align:middle line:84% and also opposed to nuclear energy. 00:20:04.540 --> 00:20:09.300 align:middle line:84% There are a lot of tree-hugging, green people 00:20:09.300 --> 00:20:11.180 align:middle line:84% who want to address climate change, who 00:20:11.180 --> 00:20:15.780 align:middle line:84% consider themselves egalitarians and also support nuclear energy. 00:20:15.780 --> 00:20:19.660 align:middle line:84% Obama, who is arguably egalitarian 00:20:19.660 --> 00:20:22.500 align:middle line:84% as they come in the American political system, 00:20:22.500 --> 00:20:26.260 align:middle line:84% gave a lot of billions of dollars to nuclear energy. 00:20:26.260 --> 00:20:33.460 align:middle line:84% So while these ideologies may explain aspects of the divided 00:20:33.460 --> 00:20:37.420 align:middle line:84% opinion in our expert community, they 00:20:37.420 --> 00:20:40.740 align:middle line:84% don't do a very good job of actually predicting 00:20:40.740 --> 00:20:45.900 align:middle line:84% which technologies will enjoy this expert lay-public agreement 00:20:45.900 --> 00:20:47.900 align:middle line:90% or disagreement. 00:20:47.900 --> 00:20:53.780 align:middle line:84% So this also doesn't seem to be really aligned and therefore 00:20:53.780 --> 00:20:56.040 align:middle line:84% also not a very good predictive theory. 00:20:56.040 --> 00:20:59.630 align:middle line:90% 00:20:59.630 --> 00:21:02.860 align:middle line:84% So let's look at this third one, rival rationality. 00:21:02.860 --> 00:21:07.433 align:middle line:84% So it's clear that if you talk to the experts and lay public, 00:21:07.433 --> 00:21:10.100 align:middle line:84% the issues that they're going to raise, the metrics that they're 00:21:10.100 --> 00:21:12.580 align:middle line:84% going to discuss are, in fact, not the same. 00:21:12.580 --> 00:21:14.420 align:middle line:90% That's pretty clear. 00:21:14.420 --> 00:21:17.280 align:middle line:84% And I mentioned, experts having these well-defined risks, 00:21:17.280 --> 00:21:21.280 align:middle line:84% like cancer deaths per terawatt hour, person-rem, and so on. 00:21:21.280 --> 00:21:22.700 align:middle line:90% They like this precision. 00:21:22.700 --> 00:21:25.640 align:middle line:84% And that often misses societal concerns. 00:21:25.640 --> 00:21:30.050 align:middle line:84% And not all effects are radiation. 00:21:30.050 --> 00:21:37.490 align:middle line:84% But our reductions can sometimes be a little absurd 00:21:37.490 --> 00:21:41.650 align:middle line:84% when we're trying to come up with our measurable ways 00:21:41.650 --> 00:21:42.550 align:middle line:90% of understanding. 00:21:42.550 --> 00:21:45.090 align:middle line:90% So that's a given. 00:21:45.090 --> 00:21:49.130 align:middle line:84% For the public, risk perception is a much more complicated 00:21:49.130 --> 00:21:55.810 align:middle line:84% process than the process that we tend to measure in this class 00:21:55.810 --> 00:21:58.170 align:middle line:90% or in our classrooms. 00:21:58.170 --> 00:22:03.090 align:middle line:84% So how do we understand this public understanding of risk? 00:22:03.090 --> 00:22:06.210 align:middle line:84% So there's a psychologist who investigated this question named 00:22:06.210 --> 00:22:07.770 align:middle line:90% Vincent Covello. 00:22:07.770 --> 00:22:13.250 align:middle line:84% And he produced this list of risk correlates. 00:22:13.250 --> 00:22:15.730 align:middle line:90% So what are these things? 00:22:15.730 --> 00:22:21.090 align:middle line:84% These are heuristics, basically, experience-based rules 00:22:21.090 --> 00:22:26.250 align:middle line:84% for how humans might evaluate the risk of a situation 00:22:26.250 --> 00:22:27.570 align:middle line:90% as it arises. 00:22:27.570 --> 00:22:30.050 align:middle line:84% And when we go through this list, 00:22:30.050 --> 00:22:32.330 align:middle line:84% we'll find that there is actually 00:22:32.330 --> 00:22:37.610 align:middle line:84% a relatively strong correlation between what things we hear 00:22:37.610 --> 00:22:41.650 align:middle line:84% nuclear skeptics saying and the things that are in the column 00:22:41.650 --> 00:22:43.370 align:middle line:90% Increased Public Concern. 00:22:43.370 --> 00:22:45.730 align:middle line:84% So you can go through this list yourself 00:22:45.730 --> 00:22:49.210 align:middle line:84% and decide how you think nuclear power shakes out. 00:22:49.210 --> 00:22:54.610 align:middle line:84% But I will color it as I think nuclear power shakes out. 00:22:54.610 --> 00:23:00.730 align:middle line:84% And you can see that there are a lot of heuristic measures 00:23:00.730 --> 00:23:04.770 align:middle line:84% that would predict nuclear power, which would tell people 00:23:04.770 --> 00:23:06.470 align:middle line:90% nuclear power might be risky. 00:23:06.470 --> 00:23:08.210 align:middle line:84% So let's just look at a couple of these. 00:23:08.210 --> 00:23:10.887 align:middle line:84% Does it have catastrophic potential, 00:23:10.887 --> 00:23:12.970 align:middle line:84% where the fatalities are grouped in time and space 00:23:12.970 --> 00:23:14.410 align:middle line:90% or are they scattered? 00:23:14.410 --> 00:23:15.510 align:middle line:90% Absolutely. 00:23:15.510 --> 00:23:18.430 align:middle line:84% Nuclear's issues are catastrophic when they happen. 00:23:18.430 --> 00:23:21.170 align:middle line:84% They're rare, but when they happen, they're catastrophic. 00:23:21.170 --> 00:23:26.360 align:middle line:84% Is the mechanism of harm unfamiliar or familiar? 00:23:26.360 --> 00:23:27.480 align:middle line:90% It's pretty esoteric. 00:23:27.480 --> 00:23:30.400 align:middle line:90% Radiation, you can't see it. 00:23:30.400 --> 00:23:33.400 align:middle line:84% If this were a car crash, we would 00:23:33.400 --> 00:23:37.200 align:middle line:84% be talking about catastrophic potential, fatality scattered. 00:23:37.200 --> 00:23:40.200 align:middle line:84% Familiarity of mechanism is very obvious-- body 00:23:40.200 --> 00:23:42.800 align:middle line:90% will slam into hard object. 00:23:42.800 --> 00:23:45.600 align:middle line:90% Very easy. 00:23:45.600 --> 00:23:47.240 align:middle line:90% The mechanisms are esoteric. 00:23:47.240 --> 00:23:53.520 align:middle line:84% Is there scientifically certain or low certainty in the risk? 00:23:53.520 --> 00:23:56.100 align:middle line:84% Is exposure voluntary or involuntary? 00:23:56.100 --> 00:23:57.500 align:middle line:90% You can go on. 00:23:57.500 --> 00:23:59.780 align:middle line:84% I drive my own car, I take risk into my own hands. 00:23:59.780 --> 00:24:02.160 align:middle line:84% Not true with some nuclear power plant being operated. 00:24:02.160 --> 00:24:06.680 align:middle line:84% Just go through this list and you'll see that, yeah, 00:24:06.680 --> 00:24:14.380 align:middle line:84% nuclear just doesn't come off on the right side of the equation. 00:24:14.380 --> 00:24:19.520 align:middle line:90% 00:24:19.520 --> 00:24:22.960 align:middle line:84% So at the end of the day, we all know that actually driving cars 00:24:22.960 --> 00:24:25.440 align:middle line:84% are a lot worse than nuclear power. 00:24:25.440 --> 00:24:32.680 align:middle line:84% The odds of an American dying in an auto accident is 1 in 107. 00:24:32.680 --> 00:24:35.240 align:middle line:84% So 50% chance that one of you in this classroom 00:24:35.240 --> 00:24:36.540 align:middle line:90% will die in a car crash. 00:24:36.540 --> 00:24:39.600 align:middle line:90% 00:24:39.600 --> 00:24:42.320 align:middle line:90% That's brutal. 00:24:42.320 --> 00:24:44.960 align:middle line:90% But people are fine with that. 00:24:44.960 --> 00:24:46.880 align:middle line:90% And how? 00:24:46.880 --> 00:24:51.340 align:middle line:84% So it seems on the surface, actually, 00:24:51.340 --> 00:24:53.640 align:middle line:90% we have struck paydirt. 00:24:53.640 --> 00:24:59.560 align:middle line:84% This really does seem to be a description of decision making 00:24:59.560 --> 00:25:04.320 align:middle line:84% that is entrenched in the human psyche that explains how it is 00:25:04.320 --> 00:25:08.000 align:middle line:90% people come to see the world. 00:25:08.000 --> 00:25:11.760 align:middle line:84% But if this were the final answer, 00:25:11.760 --> 00:25:14.120 align:middle line:84% it would mean that the public cares about many factors 00:25:14.120 --> 00:25:16.400 align:middle line:90% beyond what we care about. 00:25:16.400 --> 00:25:20.560 align:middle line:84% And that conclusion should give you 00:25:20.560 --> 00:25:24.570 align:middle line:84% some pause because you were once people, too. 00:25:24.570 --> 00:25:26.070 align:middle line:90% [LAUGHTER] 00:25:26.070 --> 00:25:29.350 align:middle line:84% You should have all of these same inborn 00:25:29.350 --> 00:25:34.910 align:middle line:84% traits, you pro-nuclear people, as the rest of the public. 00:25:34.910 --> 00:25:38.950 align:middle line:90% So what is going on? 00:25:38.950 --> 00:25:46.370 align:middle line:84% And number two, if this were also always the case, 00:25:46.370 --> 00:25:48.670 align:middle line:84% as it were, it would mean that the only way 00:25:48.670 --> 00:25:51.750 align:middle line:84% to win broad popular support for nuclear power 00:25:51.750 --> 00:25:55.510 align:middle line:84% would be to somehow assimilate all 00:25:55.510 --> 00:25:59.550 align:middle line:84% these weak-minded, emotional people 00:25:59.550 --> 00:26:04.470 align:middle line:84% into our superior technocratic empire. 00:26:04.470 --> 00:26:07.750 align:middle line:84% We would have to become the Borg. 00:26:07.750 --> 00:26:10.470 align:middle line:84% And thankfully, we are not the Borg. 00:26:10.470 --> 00:26:13.590 align:middle line:84% So while Covello's list does, in fact, 00:26:13.590 --> 00:26:16.750 align:middle line:84% have predictive power finally, it 00:26:16.750 --> 00:26:19.870 align:middle line:84% doesn't have much explanatory power. 00:26:19.870 --> 00:26:27.190 align:middle line:84% Why does it not describe how it is that nuclear engineers don't 00:26:27.190 --> 00:26:32.350 align:middle line:84% suffer the same preferences as the rest of the public? 00:26:32.350 --> 00:26:35.650 align:middle line:84% So to understand why this divide emerges, 00:26:35.650 --> 00:26:38.750 align:middle line:84% we need to look not at the superficial debate, 00:26:38.750 --> 00:26:40.610 align:middle line:84% but at a more fundamental process. 00:26:40.610 --> 00:26:44.310 align:middle line:84% And that process is the process of human cognition. 00:26:44.310 --> 00:26:49.150 align:middle line:84% So how do humans interact with the world? 00:26:49.150 --> 00:26:53.830 align:middle line:84% How does any animal interact with the world? 00:26:53.830 --> 00:26:57.790 align:middle line:84% The answer, as we now know from all our work in AI, 00:26:57.790 --> 00:27:00.350 align:middle line:90% is through pattern recognition. 00:27:00.350 --> 00:27:03.670 align:middle line:84% The brain is a massive pattern-recognizing device. 00:27:03.670 --> 00:27:07.830 align:middle line:84% And patterns cue responses, and those cue actions 00:27:07.830 --> 00:27:11.710 align:middle line:84% and cue thoughts to help us understand what is going on. 00:27:11.710 --> 00:27:15.750 align:middle line:84% So where do these responses come from? 00:27:15.750 --> 00:27:18.550 align:middle line:84% Some of them do indeed come from genetics. 00:27:18.550 --> 00:27:22.260 align:middle line:84% So almost all animals, I think all animals 00:27:22.260 --> 00:27:25.920 align:middle line:84% know how to eat from the moment they are born. 00:27:25.920 --> 00:27:29.580 align:middle line:84% They don't have to be taught how to eat. 00:27:29.580 --> 00:27:33.340 align:middle line:84% But other patterns arise through a process 00:27:33.340 --> 00:27:36.480 align:middle line:84% of learning, which is basically building on your experience. 00:27:36.480 --> 00:27:50.980 align:middle line:84% So when you see this arrangement of squiggles, 00:27:50.980 --> 00:27:54.340 align:middle line:84% you immediately know, because you've been taught, 00:27:54.340 --> 00:27:58.620 align:middle line:90% that this is a differential. 00:27:58.620 --> 00:28:01.980 align:middle line:84% So something has created this pattern-matching process 00:28:01.980 --> 00:28:03.780 align:middle line:90% for you. 00:28:03.780 --> 00:28:07.300 align:middle line:84% So it's fair to say that patterns elicited in experts 00:28:07.300 --> 00:28:10.020 align:middle line:84% might be different than patterns elicited in the public 00:28:10.020 --> 00:28:12.160 align:middle line:84% because they have had different education. 00:28:12.160 --> 00:28:15.380 align:middle line:90% We get that. 00:28:15.380 --> 00:28:19.380 align:middle line:84% Now this pattern-cued process of judgment 00:28:19.380 --> 00:28:22.380 align:middle line:84% is generally highly effective when 00:28:22.380 --> 00:28:24.900 align:middle line:84% it is applied to stimuli that are 00:28:24.900 --> 00:28:29.660 align:middle line:84% inside our realm of normal experience. 00:28:29.660 --> 00:28:31.900 align:middle line:84% We need to cross the street safely, 00:28:31.900 --> 00:28:33.720 align:middle line:90% we learn to look at the light. 00:28:33.720 --> 00:28:37.620 align:middle line:84% It turns green, or the little white walking guy turns on 00:28:37.620 --> 00:28:39.520 align:middle line:84% and we walk and it works over and over. 00:28:39.520 --> 00:28:41.160 align:middle line:84% And it works at all the intersections, 00:28:41.160 --> 00:28:42.960 align:middle line:84% even if the sign is turned this way 00:28:42.960 --> 00:28:45.420 align:middle line:84% or if the intersection is two roads or four roads or five 00:28:45.420 --> 00:28:47.140 align:middle line:90% roads or whatever. 00:28:47.140 --> 00:28:49.340 align:middle line:90% We're pretty good with that. 00:28:49.340 --> 00:28:53.500 align:middle line:84% But sometimes pattern recognition can foul up. 00:28:53.500 --> 00:28:55.880 align:middle line:84% So let's just explore that a little bit more. 00:28:55.880 --> 00:29:00.580 align:middle line:84% So you've probably all seen this optical illusion before. 00:29:00.580 --> 00:29:02.460 align:middle line:84% And if I asked you to study carefully 00:29:02.460 --> 00:29:07.580 align:middle line:84% the length of the horizontal line in both images, 00:29:07.580 --> 00:29:09.260 align:middle line:84% I suspect for most of you it will 00:29:09.260 --> 00:29:12.340 align:middle line:84% appear that the line on the bottom 00:29:12.340 --> 00:29:14.740 align:middle line:84% is a little bit wider than the line on the top. 00:29:14.740 --> 00:29:17.370 align:middle line:90% 00:29:17.370 --> 00:29:20.173 align:middle line:84% And then you know that, in fact, that's not true. 00:29:20.173 --> 00:29:22.090 align:middle line:84% So there's some kind of weird optical illusion 00:29:22.090 --> 00:29:22.798 align:middle line:90% that's happening. 00:29:22.798 --> 00:29:25.970 align:middle line:84% Why does your brain tell you this? 00:29:25.970 --> 00:29:29.970 align:middle line:84% The argument goes that you live in a 3D world, 00:29:29.970 --> 00:29:37.250 align:middle line:84% and it sees these diagonal lines as the edges of a box, 00:29:37.250 --> 00:29:38.590 align:middle line:90% of a three-dimensional surface. 00:29:38.590 --> 00:29:41.850 align:middle line:84% And it is adjusting the perceived length of the line 00:29:41.850 --> 00:29:46.210 align:middle line:84% based on the fact that you interpret the world in 3D. 00:29:46.210 --> 00:29:47.970 align:middle line:90% This is a 2D puzzle. 00:29:47.970 --> 00:29:53.290 align:middle line:84% It's a mismatch for your interpretive engine. 00:29:53.290 --> 00:29:56.090 align:middle line:84% So we can generalize this and say-- 00:29:56.090 --> 00:30:00.130 align:middle line:84% there are these distribution of problems in the world 00:30:00.130 --> 00:30:04.250 align:middle line:84% and many of them fall within our normal experience. 00:30:04.250 --> 00:30:06.250 align:middle line:84% But then we get into these types of puzzles 00:30:06.250 --> 00:30:08.890 align:middle line:84% that fall on the tail end, either because they're 00:30:08.890 --> 00:30:12.170 align:middle line:84% at some scale below where we exist as humans, 00:30:12.170 --> 00:30:15.730 align:middle line:84% or some scale above where we exist as humans. 00:30:15.730 --> 00:30:18.750 align:middle line:84% So for example, quantum mechanics-- 00:30:18.750 --> 00:30:22.350 align:middle line:84% not exactly within the range of normal human experience. 00:30:22.350 --> 00:30:26.490 align:middle line:84% Very difficult for people to understand why quantum things do 00:30:26.490 --> 00:30:29.850 align:middle line:84% the things that they do because it just disagrees 00:30:29.850 --> 00:30:31.470 align:middle line:90% with our everyday experience. 00:30:31.470 --> 00:30:34.290 align:middle line:84% And these are puzzles of the laboratory. 00:30:34.290 --> 00:30:36.890 align:middle line:84% The same is true for phenomenon that 00:30:36.890 --> 00:30:41.930 align:middle line:84% exist at much larger scales that transcend human existence. 00:30:41.930 --> 00:30:47.010 align:middle line:84% So I like to give the example of macroeconomics. 00:30:47.010 --> 00:30:52.650 align:middle line:84% What do you do when the economy is running into a recession? 00:30:52.650 --> 00:30:55.770 align:middle line:90% You spend more money. 00:30:55.770 --> 00:30:58.090 align:middle line:84% That does not make sense to a lot of people. 00:30:58.090 --> 00:31:01.850 align:middle line:84% And you have a lot of political officials, 00:31:01.850 --> 00:31:03.830 align:middle line:84% for example, in Great Britain and Europe, 00:31:03.830 --> 00:31:08.050 align:middle line:84% advocating for austerity policies of not spending, 00:31:08.050 --> 00:31:10.810 align:middle line:84% which only makes the recession worse. 00:31:10.810 --> 00:31:13.840 align:middle line:84% This is this counterintuitive thing 00:31:13.840 --> 00:31:16.660 align:middle line:84% where for an individual, when you don't have money, 00:31:16.660 --> 00:31:18.600 align:middle line:90% you want to save the money. 00:31:18.600 --> 00:31:21.420 align:middle line:84% But when you're talking about national policy, in fact, 00:31:21.420 --> 00:31:23.160 align:middle line:90% the opposite is true. 00:31:23.160 --> 00:31:25.400 align:middle line:84% And so people really struggle with that. 00:31:25.400 --> 00:31:30.200 align:middle line:84% So nuclear power has a lot of qualities 00:31:30.200 --> 00:31:34.920 align:middle line:84% that fall both over here and even some that fall over here, 00:31:34.920 --> 00:31:36.760 align:middle line:90% e.g. radiation damage. 00:31:36.760 --> 00:31:41.400 align:middle line:84% And so it's really quite difficult for people 00:31:41.400 --> 00:31:46.000 align:middle line:84% to use their normal heuristics to evaluate the risks associated 00:31:46.000 --> 00:31:48.720 align:middle line:90% with nuclear power. 00:31:48.720 --> 00:31:56.600 align:middle line:84% So let's do a little experiment to see if this actually 00:31:56.600 --> 00:32:01.280 align:middle line:84% has any merit and maybe learn something about how 00:32:01.280 --> 00:32:03.800 align:middle line:90% to change people's opinion. 00:32:03.800 --> 00:32:07.320 align:middle line:84% So we're going to experiment on you. 00:32:07.320 --> 00:32:09.680 align:middle line:84% I'm going to challenge your conclusions. 00:32:09.680 --> 00:32:12.000 align:middle line:84% I'm going to give you a question, a little test, 00:32:12.000 --> 00:32:14.000 align:middle line:84% and challenge your conclusions, and we'll 00:32:14.000 --> 00:32:16.280 align:middle line:84% see what your ability is to reason 00:32:16.280 --> 00:32:18.080 align:middle line:90% and what effect it has on you. 00:32:18.080 --> 00:32:23.400 align:middle line:84% So you need a pencil, paper, or something like a computer 00:32:23.400 --> 00:32:26.760 align:middle line:84% to write your answers down, just some way 00:32:26.760 --> 00:32:27.860 align:middle line:90% to write down an answer. 00:32:27.860 --> 00:32:29.197 align:middle line:90% You don't need to turn it in. 00:32:29.197 --> 00:32:30.780 align:middle line:84% You just need to write down an answer. 00:32:30.780 --> 00:32:35.520 align:middle line:90% 00:32:35.520 --> 00:32:39.960 align:middle line:90% All right, here's how it goes. 00:32:39.960 --> 00:32:45.640 align:middle line:84% I have a cup, and in this cup I have three poker chips. 00:32:45.640 --> 00:32:48.320 align:middle line:90% All right? 00:32:48.320 --> 00:32:50.240 align:middle line:84% I will wait for people to get their paper. 00:32:50.240 --> 00:32:56.480 align:middle line:84% Because you need to hear the problem. 00:32:56.480 --> 00:32:57.800 align:middle line:90% You ready? 00:32:57.800 --> 00:32:58.400 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:32:58.400 --> 00:33:01.480 align:middle line:84% I have a cup with three poker chips in it. 00:33:01.480 --> 00:33:04.920 align:middle line:84% The poker chips are as follows-- one is blue on both sides, 00:33:04.920 --> 00:33:08.000 align:middle line:84% one is red on both sides, and one is red on one side 00:33:08.000 --> 00:33:11.230 align:middle line:90% and blue on the third side. 00:33:11.230 --> 00:33:16.470 align:middle line:84% I remove one poker chip from the cup, and I put it on the table. 00:33:16.470 --> 00:33:21.630 align:middle line:84% And without lifting my hand, I ask you, 00:33:21.630 --> 00:33:25.910 align:middle line:84% suppose the top of the poker chip happens to be blue? 00:33:25.910 --> 00:33:32.150 align:middle line:84% What is the probability that the bottom is also blue? 00:33:32.150 --> 00:33:33.170 align:middle line:90% Write down your answer. 00:33:33.170 --> 00:33:42.742 align:middle line:90% 00:33:42.742 --> 00:33:46.150 align:middle line:84% Same question starting with replacement from the beginning. 00:33:46.150 --> 00:33:47.170 align:middle line:90% I pull out a poker chip. 00:33:47.170 --> 00:33:49.170 align:middle line:84% I put it on the table, put my hand on top of it, 00:33:49.170 --> 00:33:52.575 align:middle line:84% and I say, suppose the top of the poker chip is red. 00:33:52.575 --> 00:33:54.950 align:middle line:84% What is the probability that the bottom of the poker chip 00:33:54.950 --> 00:33:57.630 align:middle line:90% is also red? 00:33:57.630 --> 00:33:58.650 align:middle line:90% Write down your answer. 00:33:58.650 --> 00:34:05.510 align:middle line:90% 00:34:05.510 --> 00:34:09.310 align:middle line:84% Third question-- poker chips will go back in the cup. 00:34:09.310 --> 00:34:10.790 align:middle line:90% Pull out a poker chip. 00:34:10.790 --> 00:34:12.750 align:middle line:90% Put it on the table. 00:34:12.750 --> 00:34:17.870 align:middle line:84% And I say, what is the chance that the chip has 00:34:17.870 --> 00:34:19.730 align:middle line:90% the same color on both sides? 00:34:19.730 --> 00:34:22.870 align:middle line:90% 00:34:22.870 --> 00:34:23.929 align:middle line:90% Write down your answer. 00:34:23.929 --> 00:34:27.230 align:middle line:90% 00:34:27.230 --> 00:34:29.650 align:middle line:90% OK, let's check your answers. 00:34:29.650 --> 00:34:33.150 align:middle line:84% Hands up if you got 1/2 for questions 1 and 2 and 2/3 00:34:33.150 --> 00:34:34.250 align:middle line:90% for questions 3. 00:34:34.250 --> 00:34:36.790 align:middle line:90% 00:34:36.790 --> 00:34:38.298 align:middle line:90% Higher. 00:34:38.298 --> 00:34:39.090 align:middle line:90% Keep your hands up. 00:34:39.090 --> 00:34:40.989 align:middle line:84% Sorry your arm's going to get tired. 00:34:40.989 --> 00:34:44.790 align:middle line:84% Now, what if your neighbor suggests 00:34:44.790 --> 00:34:47.070 align:middle line:84% that all the people with raised hands 00:34:47.070 --> 00:34:49.030 align:middle line:90% are contradicting themselves? 00:34:49.030 --> 00:34:49.969 align:middle line:90% Keep your hands up. 00:34:49.969 --> 00:34:53.110 align:middle line:90% 00:34:53.110 --> 00:34:54.230 align:middle line:90% Think for a second. 00:34:54.230 --> 00:34:56.130 align:middle line:84% If you believe your neighbor tells you 00:34:56.130 --> 00:35:00.350 align:middle line:84% you're contradicting yourself, put your hand down. 00:35:00.350 --> 00:35:04.570 align:middle line:84% Now, Professor Kemp walks into the classroom. 00:35:04.570 --> 00:35:07.150 align:middle line:84% He's wearing a sports coat, so he must 00:35:07.150 --> 00:35:10.220 align:middle line:90% know what he's talking about. 00:35:10.220 --> 00:35:15.680 align:middle line:84% Here I am, and I say earnestly, that, in fact, 00:35:15.680 --> 00:35:18.500 align:middle line:84% the answer to all three questions is, in fact, 2/3. 00:35:18.500 --> 00:35:22.040 align:middle line:84% Those who answered 1/2 for the first and second question, 00:35:22.040 --> 00:35:22.880 align:middle line:90% you're mistaken. 00:35:22.880 --> 00:35:26.780 align:middle line:90% 00:35:26.780 --> 00:35:30.220 align:middle line:84% Wow, a lot of people trust authority here. 00:35:30.220 --> 00:35:32.760 align:middle line:84% OK, a couple people still have their hands up. 00:35:32.760 --> 00:35:39.100 align:middle line:90% 00:35:39.100 --> 00:35:42.920 align:middle line:84% Everyone who has their hands up isn't quite ready to trust. 00:35:42.920 --> 00:35:44.120 align:middle line:90% They trust themselves first. 00:35:44.120 --> 00:35:48.340 align:middle line:90% OK, everyone relax. 00:35:48.340 --> 00:35:53.260 align:middle line:84% Let me rephrase question 1 and question 2. 00:35:53.260 --> 00:35:56.180 align:middle line:84% What is the probability that the color on the top 00:35:56.180 --> 00:36:00.220 align:middle line:90% matches the color on the bottom? 00:36:00.220 --> 00:36:02.760 align:middle line:84% Is that the same question as question 3? 00:36:02.760 --> 00:36:05.940 align:middle line:90% 00:36:05.940 --> 00:36:08.340 align:middle line:90% Do you change your mind? 00:36:08.340 --> 00:36:11.560 align:middle line:84% Who has changed their mind based on that? 00:36:11.560 --> 00:36:14.920 align:middle line:84% And if you have changed your mind, stand up. 00:36:14.920 --> 00:36:19.900 align:middle line:90% 00:36:19.900 --> 00:36:22.600 align:middle line:90% 1 and 1/2 people. 00:36:22.600 --> 00:36:23.100 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:36:23.100 --> 00:36:25.780 align:middle line:90% 00:36:25.780 --> 00:36:28.580 align:middle line:90% Let's do the experiment. 00:36:28.580 --> 00:36:36.600 align:middle line:90% So we have three coins. 00:36:36.600 --> 00:36:37.640 align:middle line:90% Here's the truth table. 00:36:37.640 --> 00:36:44.660 align:middle line:90% 00:36:44.660 --> 00:36:50.980 align:middle line:84% We have-- chip number 1, heads and tails; chip number 2, heads 00:36:50.980 --> 00:36:55.417 align:middle line:90% and tails; and chip number 3. 00:36:55.417 --> 00:36:57.000 align:middle line:84% I'm going to write it tails and heads. 00:36:57.000 --> 00:36:57.720 align:middle line:90% I don't know why. 00:36:57.720 --> 00:36:58.960 align:middle line:90% That's how it is in my notes. 00:36:58.960 --> 00:37:01.900 align:middle line:90% 00:37:01.900 --> 00:37:04.850 align:middle line:84% So here's the top of the coin or the top of the poker chip 00:37:04.850 --> 00:37:07.690 align:middle line:84% and the bottom of the poker chip. 00:37:07.690 --> 00:37:15.450 align:middle line:84% And so this first one is going to be red and red, red and red. 00:37:15.450 --> 00:37:18.130 align:middle line:84% So heads means the heads comes up when you pull it out. 00:37:18.130 --> 00:37:20.390 align:middle line:84% Tails means tails comes up when you pull it out. 00:37:20.390 --> 00:37:23.150 align:middle line:90% The second one is blue and blue. 00:37:23.150 --> 00:37:27.050 align:middle line:90% 00:37:27.050 --> 00:37:30.330 align:middle line:84% And the third one is blue and red. 00:37:30.330 --> 00:37:32.550 align:middle line:84% And if it comes out the other way, it's red and blue. 00:37:32.550 --> 00:37:36.610 align:middle line:90% 00:37:36.610 --> 00:37:45.210 align:middle line:84% So what this shows is if the top is blue, 00:37:45.210 --> 00:37:49.130 align:middle line:84% there is a 2/3 chance that the bottom is also blue. 00:37:49.130 --> 00:37:53.730 align:middle line:84% If the top is red, there's a 2/3 chance that the bottom is also 00:37:53.730 --> 00:37:56.010 align:middle line:90% red. 00:37:56.010 --> 00:38:01.410 align:middle line:84% And 2/3 of the coins have the same color on both sides. 00:38:01.410 --> 00:38:04.510 align:middle line:84% The answer is always 2/3, no matter what. 00:38:04.510 --> 00:38:07.850 align:middle line:90% 00:38:07.850 --> 00:38:10.450 align:middle line:90% All right, annoying. 00:38:10.450 --> 00:38:22.354 align:middle line:90% 00:38:22.354 --> 00:38:26.370 align:middle line:84% So let's have a few moments of introspection about what 00:38:26.370 --> 00:38:28.050 align:middle line:90% just happened. 00:38:28.050 --> 00:38:32.410 align:middle line:84% I first informed you that I was going to give you a test, 00:38:32.410 --> 00:38:35.170 align:middle line:90% and I showed you a puzzle. 00:38:35.170 --> 00:38:38.410 align:middle line:84% I showed you these lines and I warned you 00:38:38.410 --> 00:38:40.130 align:middle line:84% that there are cognitive illusions 00:38:40.130 --> 00:38:41.950 align:middle line:90% to be had among experts. 00:38:41.950 --> 00:38:48.650 align:middle line:84% And still first, until I explicitly challenge 00:38:48.650 --> 00:38:51.810 align:middle line:84% your intuition, most of you were probably quite satisfied with 00:38:51.810 --> 00:38:55.030 align:middle line:84% your answers of 1/2, 1/2, and 2/3. 00:38:55.030 --> 00:38:56.510 align:middle line:84% Some people didn't answer that way. 00:38:56.510 --> 00:38:58.250 align:middle line:90% Congratulations. 00:38:58.250 --> 00:39:02.522 align:middle line:90% Hopefully you didn't answer 3/4. 00:39:02.522 --> 00:39:06.600 align:middle line:84% Then, when I said, as the expert, 00:39:06.600 --> 00:39:12.120 align:middle line:84% that the answer was actually 2/3, 00:39:12.120 --> 00:39:17.120 align:middle line:84% only a small number of people, just based on me telling you, 00:39:17.120 --> 00:39:19.880 align:middle line:84% were willing to change their opinion. 00:39:19.880 --> 00:39:22.640 align:middle line:84% Then I tried to appeal to some kind of logic. 00:39:22.640 --> 00:39:25.320 align:middle line:84% I made an argument that the questions were all actually 00:39:25.320 --> 00:39:27.800 align:middle line:90% logically equivalent questions. 00:39:27.800 --> 00:39:33.880 align:middle line:84% And people suddenly were like, ah, maybe that's right. 00:39:33.880 --> 00:39:37.060 align:middle line:90% I'm not sure. 00:39:37.060 --> 00:39:42.800 align:middle line:84% But not everyone was willing to change their mind right away. 00:39:42.800 --> 00:39:45.260 align:middle line:84% And then I showed you the puzzle, 00:39:45.260 --> 00:39:46.860 align:middle line:84% and I think you all now believe me, 00:39:46.860 --> 00:39:50.600 align:middle line:90% I hope, given the truth table. 00:39:50.600 --> 00:39:52.160 align:middle line:90% But you probably have-- 00:39:52.160 --> 00:39:54.240 align:middle line:90% oh, that's still wrong? 00:39:54.240 --> 00:39:59.960 align:middle line:84% [LAUGHS] You're like, no, it can't be right. 00:39:59.960 --> 00:40:01.560 align:middle line:90% Something's going on. 00:40:01.560 --> 00:40:03.520 align:middle line:90% Does everyone understand this? 00:40:03.520 --> 00:40:06.820 align:middle line:84% If you don't understand it, then I'll explain it to you. 00:40:06.820 --> 00:40:11.320 align:middle line:90% 00:40:11.320 --> 00:40:15.240 align:middle line:84% I guess the lining up of my lines is not very good. 00:40:15.240 --> 00:40:16.220 align:middle line:90% That doesn't help. 00:40:16.220 --> 00:40:20.460 align:middle line:90% 00:40:20.460 --> 00:40:23.040 align:middle line:84% The fourth insight is that we have 00:40:23.040 --> 00:40:28.560 align:middle line:84% remarkably little understanding of why we got it wrong. 00:40:28.560 --> 00:40:31.560 align:middle line:90% Why did we make that decision? 00:40:31.560 --> 00:40:35.440 align:middle line:84% Why did we hesitate to change our minds? 00:40:35.440 --> 00:40:37.560 align:middle line:84% These things are not exactly totally 00:40:37.560 --> 00:40:41.840 align:middle line:90% clear to us in retrospect. 00:40:41.840 --> 00:40:46.000 align:middle line:84% So there are decision-making processes 00:40:46.000 --> 00:40:50.480 align:middle line:84% that are actually hidden from your conscious mind. 00:40:50.480 --> 00:40:52.500 align:middle line:84% They're happening at the subconscious level. 00:40:52.500 --> 00:40:57.640 align:middle line:84% And about 30 milliseconds later, your conscious mind 00:40:57.640 --> 00:41:01.590 align:middle line:84% absorbs the answer and provides a rationale 00:41:01.590 --> 00:41:04.750 align:middle line:90% for why it is the way it is. 00:41:04.750 --> 00:41:11.310 align:middle line:84% The pattern machine operates behind the curtain, as it were, 00:41:11.310 --> 00:41:13.950 align:middle line:84% and so it's really, really difficult 00:41:13.950 --> 00:41:20.870 align:middle line:84% to recognize when we are making these cognitive mistakes. 00:41:20.870 --> 00:41:22.630 align:middle line:84% And don't get caught up with the idea 00:41:22.630 --> 00:41:25.470 align:middle line:84% that only the public is susceptible to making 00:41:25.470 --> 00:41:29.130 align:middle line:84% these kinds of cognitive mistakes around nuclear power. 00:41:29.130 --> 00:41:31.350 align:middle line:84% You are all MIT students, and you 00:41:31.350 --> 00:41:34.350 align:middle line:84% should know how to do combinatorics of the simplest 00:41:34.350 --> 00:41:36.430 align:middle line:90% kind. 00:41:36.430 --> 00:41:40.470 align:middle line:84% You are experts, and still mistakes are made. 00:41:40.470 --> 00:41:44.270 align:middle line:84% So unfortunately, when these sort of counterintuitive puzzles 00:41:44.270 --> 00:41:49.070 align:middle line:84% show up at a social scale, we get stubbornness 00:41:49.070 --> 00:41:53.230 align:middle line:84% in political debates and harmful policies 00:41:53.230 --> 00:41:56.910 align:middle line:84% where people are certain of their views 00:41:56.910 --> 00:42:01.630 align:middle line:84% but haven't actually based those views on careful analysis 00:42:01.630 --> 00:42:05.010 align:middle line:90% of the facts. 00:42:05.010 --> 00:42:07.470 align:middle line:84% And this happens whenever we have something 00:42:07.470 --> 00:42:10.230 align:middle line:84% that doesn't line up, where the truth doesn't line up 00:42:10.230 --> 00:42:13.330 align:middle line:84% with those columns in Vincent Covello's list. 00:42:13.330 --> 00:42:18.490 align:middle line:84% So by understanding this pattern matching in human responses, 00:42:18.490 --> 00:42:22.550 align:middle line:84% we've explained-- one, how people arrive at their judgments 00:42:22.550 --> 00:42:24.550 align:middle line:84% and, two, why they can't see the errors 00:42:24.550 --> 00:42:28.430 align:middle line:84% in their thinking for public and the scientists both 00:42:28.430 --> 00:42:33.150 align:middle line:84% and, three, why expert opinion and the appeal to logic 00:42:33.150 --> 00:42:34.990 align:middle line:90% isn't very effectual. 00:42:34.990 --> 00:42:37.450 align:middle line:84% This is why we can't, as was earlier suggested, 00:42:37.450 --> 00:42:42.030 align:middle line:84% just go explain nuclear power to the public. 00:42:42.030 --> 00:42:45.350 align:middle line:84% Because this is not how they make their decisions. 00:42:45.350 --> 00:42:47.730 align:middle line:84% It's not based on your logical arguments. 00:42:47.730 --> 00:42:52.410 align:middle line:84% It's based on these other inborn qualities of evaluating risk. 00:42:52.410 --> 00:42:57.100 align:middle line:90% 00:42:57.100 --> 00:42:59.940 align:middle line:84% Don't feel bad that as MIT students 00:42:59.940 --> 00:43:03.060 align:middle line:84% you got it wrong because the scientific community gets 00:43:03.060 --> 00:43:04.660 align:middle line:90% it wrong all the time. 00:43:04.660 --> 00:43:07.340 align:middle line:84% So for example, the Copernican revolution 00:43:07.340 --> 00:43:10.220 align:middle line:84% in the second century, Ptolemy explained 00:43:10.220 --> 00:43:14.680 align:middle line:84% that the Earth was at the center of the solar system. 00:43:14.680 --> 00:43:17.300 align:middle line:84% The sun went around the Earth, and the planets also 00:43:17.300 --> 00:43:20.260 align:middle line:84% went around the Earth in epicycles. 00:43:20.260 --> 00:43:26.700 align:middle line:84% And this was accepted as the explanation for 1,400 years 00:43:26.700 --> 00:43:28.700 align:middle line:90% of science. 00:43:28.700 --> 00:43:33.540 align:middle line:84% Now, the idea that the Earth could go around the sun 00:43:33.540 --> 00:43:35.700 align:middle line:84% was mathematically available to them. 00:43:35.700 --> 00:43:38.060 align:middle line:84% They could understand that transformation, 00:43:38.060 --> 00:43:40.860 align:middle line:84% but people just didn't believe it 00:43:40.860 --> 00:43:43.620 align:middle line:84% because it didn't agree with their everyday understanding 00:43:43.620 --> 00:43:44.460 align:middle line:90% of the world. 00:43:44.460 --> 00:43:48.740 align:middle line:84% It wasn't until the 15th century where Copernicus comes along 00:43:48.740 --> 00:43:52.820 align:middle line:84% and says perhaps the solar system looks like this. 00:43:52.820 --> 00:43:57.420 align:middle line:84% And even then, it took 200 more years 00:43:57.420 --> 00:44:01.540 align:middle line:84% for the scientific consensus to change. 00:44:01.540 --> 00:44:04.820 align:middle line:84% People are really stubborn when it 00:44:04.820 --> 00:44:12.260 align:middle line:84% doesn't appear to resonate with their everyday experience. 00:44:12.260 --> 00:44:15.033 align:middle line:84% So the philosopher of science, Thomas Kuhn, 00:44:15.033 --> 00:44:16.200 align:middle line:90% made a whole career on this. 00:44:16.200 --> 00:44:18.283 align:middle line:84% He wrote a book called The Structure of Scientific 00:44:18.283 --> 00:44:20.460 align:middle line:84% Revolutions, and he quite elegantly shows 00:44:20.460 --> 00:44:23.300 align:middle line:84% that scientists don't do science. 00:44:23.300 --> 00:44:27.540 align:middle line:84% Scientists kind of approximate science 00:44:27.540 --> 00:44:31.860 align:middle line:84% through a process that is inherently socially constructed. 00:44:31.860 --> 00:44:35.380 align:middle line:84% Our views on what is a good experiment 00:44:35.380 --> 00:44:37.860 align:middle line:84% and how we should measure that and what 00:44:37.860 --> 00:44:41.580 align:middle line:84% level of statistical analysis is adequate, 00:44:41.580 --> 00:44:45.540 align:middle line:84% these are all socially constructed ideas 00:44:45.540 --> 00:44:49.380 align:middle line:84% and they heavily color how we look 00:44:49.380 --> 00:44:51.820 align:middle line:84% at a problem and the answers that we 00:44:51.820 --> 00:44:55.650 align:middle line:84% are willing to accept as valid and the questions that we're 00:44:55.650 --> 00:44:57.930 align:middle line:90% willing to ask. 00:44:57.930 --> 00:45:01.090 align:middle line:84% So scientists and experts get it wrong. 00:45:01.090 --> 00:45:04.690 align:middle line:84% The existence of the disagreement between the expert 00:45:04.690 --> 00:45:07.690 align:middle line:84% community and the lay public does not mean always 00:45:07.690 --> 00:45:10.170 align:middle line:90% that the lay public is wrong. 00:45:10.170 --> 00:45:13.450 align:middle line:90% It just means someone is wrong. 00:45:13.450 --> 00:45:18.770 align:middle line:84% And this can be extra difficult when getting it wrong 00:45:18.770 --> 00:45:21.730 align:middle line:90% is essential to your survival. 00:45:21.730 --> 00:45:26.370 align:middle line:84% So there's a author by the name of Upton Sinclair who famously 00:45:26.370 --> 00:45:29.730 align:middle line:84% wrote, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when 00:45:29.730 --> 00:45:33.010 align:middle line:84% his salary depends on him not understanding it." 00:45:33.010 --> 00:45:38.210 align:middle line:84% So what we do know is that there is 00:45:38.210 --> 00:45:44.090 align:middle line:84% a process of learning that goes on among experts, 00:45:44.090 --> 00:45:47.970 align:middle line:84% one way or another, and it is powerful enough 00:45:47.970 --> 00:45:50.670 align:middle line:90% to overcome these. 00:45:50.670 --> 00:45:57.170 align:middle line:84% That's how you guys became pro-nuclear in the first place, 00:45:57.170 --> 00:45:59.990 align:middle line:90% if you are pro-nuclear. 00:45:59.990 --> 00:46:04.170 align:middle line:84% So let's look a little bit more at how that actually 00:46:04.170 --> 00:46:05.650 align:middle line:90% does come about. 00:46:05.650 --> 00:46:09.450 align:middle line:84% So political scientists love this. 00:46:09.450 --> 00:46:12.370 align:middle line:90% This is a 2-by-2 matrix. 00:46:12.370 --> 00:46:16.770 align:middle line:84% We have, across the x-axis, the idea of technologies 00:46:16.770 --> 00:46:19.290 align:middle line:84% with low opportunity versus technologies 00:46:19.290 --> 00:46:22.170 align:middle line:84% with high opportunity, technologies with low risk 00:46:22.170 --> 00:46:23.910 align:middle line:84% versus technologies with high risk. 00:46:23.910 --> 00:46:26.890 align:middle line:84% And if you're in this category, you 00:46:26.890 --> 00:46:30.090 align:middle line:84% don't care anything about that technology 00:46:30.090 --> 00:46:34.170 align:middle line:84% because it's of low benefit and it's of low risk, and who cares? 00:46:34.170 --> 00:46:38.870 align:middle line:84% And if you're up here, you're thinking, hmm, OK, 00:46:38.870 --> 00:46:41.450 align:middle line:84% lots of potential benefits but lots of potential risks. 00:46:41.450 --> 00:46:42.970 align:middle line:90% How do they trade off? 00:46:42.970 --> 00:46:45.650 align:middle line:84% And so you're having to do this hard mental calculation 00:46:45.650 --> 00:46:47.450 align:middle line:90% of adjudication. 00:46:47.450 --> 00:46:51.520 align:middle line:84% So the idea is that whenever we are introduced to a technology, 00:46:51.520 --> 00:46:53.840 align:middle line:84% we start out down here because we don't really 00:46:53.840 --> 00:46:57.160 align:middle line:90% know anything about it. 00:46:57.160 --> 00:46:58.740 align:middle line:90% I heard about the internet. 00:46:58.740 --> 00:47:01.720 align:middle line:90% 00:47:01.720 --> 00:47:02.920 align:middle line:90% There it is. 00:47:02.920 --> 00:47:08.000 align:middle line:84% And then what happens is we either pursue one of two paths. 00:47:08.000 --> 00:47:10.400 align:middle line:84% Perhaps you're a person who learns about the technology 00:47:10.400 --> 00:47:13.000 align:middle line:84% and how great it is and all the amazing things AI 00:47:13.000 --> 00:47:15.540 align:middle line:84% is going to be able to do, and you're like, this is awesome, 00:47:15.540 --> 00:47:17.520 align:middle line:90% we should pursue this. 00:47:17.520 --> 00:47:21.260 align:middle line:84% And then people are like, oh, but AI safety, other things. 00:47:21.260 --> 00:47:26.760 align:middle line:84% And maybe you're like, oh, OK, huge energy bills. 00:47:26.760 --> 00:47:32.080 align:middle line:84% And other people are going, I heard about this nuclear thing 00:47:32.080 --> 00:47:33.340 align:middle line:90% and it looks so dangerous. 00:47:33.340 --> 00:47:34.540 align:middle line:90% And I don't like it. 00:47:34.540 --> 00:47:35.940 align:middle line:90% And they go into this category. 00:47:35.940 --> 00:47:38.480 align:middle line:84% And then people are like yeah, but climate change. 00:47:38.480 --> 00:47:39.920 align:middle line:90% I'm like, oh, maybe. 00:47:39.920 --> 00:47:44.250 align:middle line:90% 00:47:44.250 --> 00:47:50.080 align:middle line:84% So basically, you guys are on the green trajectory. 00:47:50.080 --> 00:47:52.720 align:middle line:84% Something happened in your history 00:47:52.720 --> 00:47:57.400 align:middle line:84% where you were more readily exposed to arguments 00:47:57.400 --> 00:48:00.280 align:middle line:84% that nuclear power was beneficial 00:48:00.280 --> 00:48:03.580 align:middle line:84% before you started thinking about all those other things. 00:48:03.580 --> 00:48:09.600 align:middle line:84% Whereas other people just went and relied on those inborn 00:48:09.600 --> 00:48:13.020 align:middle line:84% heuristics and they're like, oh, Three Mile Island and radiation 00:48:13.020 --> 00:48:15.800 align:middle line:84% and this is difficult. But you were systematically 00:48:15.800 --> 00:48:19.180 align:middle line:84% educated about the nature of science and all of these things, 00:48:19.180 --> 00:48:21.060 align:middle line:84% and so you took a different path. 00:48:21.060 --> 00:48:26.064 align:middle line:90% 00:48:26.064 --> 00:48:30.120 align:middle line:84% So how do we change people's minds? 00:48:30.120 --> 00:48:32.880 align:middle line:84% Well, the fact is, most people are, in fact, 00:48:32.880 --> 00:48:37.960 align:middle line:84% lost forever in one of these boxes, either here or here, 00:48:37.960 --> 00:48:41.480 align:middle line:90% but not everyone. 00:48:41.480 --> 00:48:45.480 align:middle line:84% Some people are able to change their minds. 00:48:45.480 --> 00:48:48.630 align:middle line:84% And let's look a little bit about how that works. 00:48:48.630 --> 00:48:52.990 align:middle line:84% So in much the same way that we have 00:48:52.990 --> 00:48:57.430 align:middle line:84% this list of predictive heuristics for risk, Vincent 00:48:57.430 --> 00:49:02.790 align:middle line:84% Covello's list, there's also a hierarchy 00:49:02.790 --> 00:49:05.870 align:middle line:90% of who do people trust. 00:49:05.870 --> 00:49:12.030 align:middle line:84% And they tend to trust entities that are just closer to them. 00:49:12.030 --> 00:49:13.950 align:middle line:84% So their own personal experience will always 00:49:13.950 --> 00:49:17.150 align:middle line:84% be the most, then their friends and family, then their identity 00:49:17.150 --> 00:49:20.510 align:middle line:84% group, the things that are common knowledge, 00:49:20.510 --> 00:49:23.750 align:middle line:84% and then some strangers standing on the street corner telling 00:49:23.750 --> 00:49:26.910 align:middle line:90% them about the aliens. 00:49:26.910 --> 00:49:31.310 align:middle line:84% And so you can see why the Copernican revolution took 1,400 00:49:31.310 --> 00:49:32.870 align:middle line:90% years. 00:49:32.870 --> 00:49:37.190 align:middle line:84% They look at the sky and says, I see the planet's 00:49:37.190 --> 00:49:38.710 align:middle line:90% doing loop-de-loops. 00:49:38.710 --> 00:49:42.030 align:middle line:84% And they talk to their friends and family 00:49:42.030 --> 00:49:45.070 align:middle line:84% in the scientific community, and they say the same thing. 00:49:45.070 --> 00:49:47.130 align:middle line:84% And there's nothing to change them. 00:49:47.130 --> 00:49:50.050 align:middle line:84% And then this guy comes along and he's like, no, no, 00:49:50.050 --> 00:49:51.010 align:middle line:90% you've got it wrong. 00:49:51.010 --> 00:49:56.190 align:middle line:84% And they're like, [LAUGHS] please go away. 00:49:56.190 --> 00:50:04.350 align:middle line:84% Poker chips puzzle-- you were in disbelief when I suggested 00:50:04.350 --> 00:50:11.290 align:middle line:84% that if your neighbor told you that you were wrong, 00:50:11.290 --> 00:50:12.430 align:middle line:90% would you change your mind? 00:50:12.430 --> 00:50:14.670 align:middle line:84% More people were willing to change their mind when 00:50:14.670 --> 00:50:21.630 align:middle line:84% I told them the answer because I'm a little bit higher up 00:50:21.630 --> 00:50:25.990 align:middle line:90% on this chain, arguably. 00:50:25.990 --> 00:50:28.670 align:middle line:84% The challenge for us is to figure out 00:50:28.670 --> 00:50:33.190 align:middle line:84% who can help bring the other side through this sort of risk 00:50:33.190 --> 00:50:37.550 align:middle line:90% matrix to help understand. 00:50:37.550 --> 00:50:43.110 align:middle line:84% And it explains why people who are nuclear engineers and not 00:50:43.110 --> 00:50:46.060 align:middle line:84% known to the general public are not 00:50:46.060 --> 00:50:49.560 align:middle line:84% very effective in changing people's minds. 00:50:49.560 --> 00:50:53.200 align:middle line:90% 00:50:53.200 --> 00:50:56.340 align:middle line:90% So let's just quickly recap. 00:50:56.340 --> 00:50:59.380 align:middle line:84% Appeals to authority in our capacity as experts 00:50:59.380 --> 00:51:00.700 align:middle line:90% don't seem to work. 00:51:00.700 --> 00:51:03.860 align:middle line:84% Appeals to logic and facts will work, 00:51:03.860 --> 00:51:08.240 align:middle line:84% but primarily with other experts and also very slowly, 00:51:08.240 --> 00:51:11.060 align:middle line:90% as we observed. 00:51:11.060 --> 00:51:15.660 align:middle line:84% Poker chips, I asked you, is this all logically 00:51:15.660 --> 00:51:16.640 align:middle line:90% the same question? 00:51:16.640 --> 00:51:19.020 align:middle line:90% And there was this, uh-- 00:51:19.020 --> 00:51:24.680 align:middle line:84% you have to refactor the weights on your neural network. 00:51:24.680 --> 00:51:26.720 align:middle line:90% And it takes time to do that. 00:51:26.720 --> 00:51:31.620 align:middle line:84% But ultimately this does work with other experts 00:51:31.620 --> 00:51:35.940 align:middle line:84% because we share a common epistemological basis. 00:51:35.940 --> 00:51:38.700 align:middle line:84% This is the whole point of this class, 00:51:38.700 --> 00:51:41.060 align:middle line:84% is to try to use science and engineering 00:51:41.060 --> 00:51:47.780 align:middle line:84% calculations to address some of these social debates in a way 00:51:47.780 --> 00:51:51.540 align:middle line:84% that you get a little more insight into what's 00:51:51.540 --> 00:51:58.820 align:middle line:84% going on as engineers, because you believe the math. 00:51:58.820 --> 00:52:01.880 align:middle line:84% That's the one thing I have going for me in this class. 00:52:01.880 --> 00:52:07.100 align:middle line:84% Most of you will believe the math. 00:52:07.100 --> 00:52:10.740 align:middle line:84% And then finally framing issues in a way that 00:52:10.740 --> 00:52:15.300 align:middle line:84% appeals to existing patterns of cognition 00:52:15.300 --> 00:52:18.060 align:middle line:90% does, in fact, work very well. 00:52:18.060 --> 00:52:22.800 align:middle line:84% This can be the inborn patterns in Covello's list. 00:52:22.800 --> 00:52:24.300 align:middle line:84% Sometimes it's hard for those things 00:52:24.300 --> 00:52:25.758 align:middle line:84% to be changed about nuclear, but we 00:52:25.758 --> 00:52:29.420 align:middle line:84% can emphasize the few that were in the right column. 00:52:29.420 --> 00:52:31.740 align:middle line:90% Remember, there were a couple. 00:52:31.740 --> 00:52:35.380 align:middle line:84% Sometimes it takes the form of a TikTok video showing 00:52:35.380 --> 00:52:41.250 align:middle line:84% someone of the same generation who's excited about something. 00:52:41.250 --> 00:52:44.975 align:middle line:84% Identity group telling you that you should like something. 00:52:44.975 --> 00:52:46.350 align:middle line:84% And so people are like, oh, yeah, 00:52:46.350 --> 00:52:49.510 align:middle line:84% I recognize this 19-year-old and I'm a 19-year-old, 00:52:49.510 --> 00:52:52.070 align:middle line:90% and therefore this is cool. 00:52:52.070 --> 00:52:54.690 align:middle line:90% And I'm on board with it. 00:52:54.690 --> 00:52:57.390 align:middle line:84% It's not a Boomer telling me something. 00:52:57.390 --> 00:53:00.530 align:middle line:90% 00:53:00.530 --> 00:53:03.810 align:middle line:84% So this idea of framing the issue within the existing 00:53:03.810 --> 00:53:09.370 align:middle line:84% patterns of cognition is an old idea that really took off 00:53:09.370 --> 00:53:13.390 align:middle line:84% in the 1950s with the advent of marketing. 00:53:13.390 --> 00:53:15.250 align:middle line:90% Who has watched Mad Men? 00:53:15.250 --> 00:53:21.330 align:middle line:84% Mad Men is the TV series about basically the realization 00:53:21.330 --> 00:53:25.570 align:middle line:84% that this is how you change people's minds in the marketing 00:53:25.570 --> 00:53:26.310 align:middle line:90% world. 00:53:26.310 --> 00:53:29.090 align:middle line:84% So when you see a shampoo ad, I don't know if they still 00:53:29.090 --> 00:53:32.570 align:middle line:90% have shampoo ads, it's not-- 00:53:32.570 --> 00:53:35.370 align:middle line:84% this sodium lauryl sulfate effectively removes sebum 00:53:35.370 --> 00:53:37.090 align:middle line:90% from your hair follicles. 00:53:37.090 --> 00:53:37.810 align:middle line:90% No. 00:53:37.810 --> 00:53:42.930 align:middle line:84% It's this will make you sexy and young. 00:53:42.930 --> 00:53:47.410 align:middle line:90% Oh, it works. 00:53:47.410 --> 00:53:49.336 align:middle line:90% So-- 00:53:49.336 --> 00:53:52.650 align:middle line:90% [LAUGHTER] 00:53:52.650 --> 00:53:55.070 align:middle line:84% --nuclear has now figured this out, too. 00:53:55.070 --> 00:53:57.410 align:middle line:90% [LAUGHTER] 00:53:57.410 --> 00:54:00.410 align:middle line:84% The most successful nuclear startups 00:54:00.410 --> 00:54:05.890 align:middle line:84% are marketing absurd notions of nuclear power 00:54:05.890 --> 00:54:09.390 align:middle line:84% that neither require fences nor roads, 00:54:09.390 --> 00:54:13.450 align:middle line:84% nor parking lots, nor employees, no cooling towers. 00:54:13.450 --> 00:54:18.130 align:middle line:84% Just beautiful architecture and green, 00:54:18.130 --> 00:54:22.276 align:middle line:90% beautiful amounts of green. 00:54:22.276 --> 00:54:26.970 align:middle line:84% They have realized that you can convince people 00:54:26.970 --> 00:54:29.290 align:middle line:90% by relying on number 3. 00:54:29.290 --> 00:54:32.030 align:middle line:84% Now, you may decide that's fine, that's good, 00:54:32.030 --> 00:54:36.610 align:middle line:84% and you want to become a PR campaign person. 00:54:36.610 --> 00:54:38.140 align:middle line:90% Lots of this stuff out there. 00:54:38.140 --> 00:54:41.720 align:middle line:84% Have you seen the film Pandora's Promise or Nuclear Now? 00:54:41.720 --> 00:54:45.960 align:middle line:84% These are films that basically try 00:54:45.960 --> 00:54:49.160 align:middle line:84% to reframe nuclear power as a solution to climate change. 00:54:49.160 --> 00:54:51.680 align:middle line:84% They feature famous environmentalists 00:54:51.680 --> 00:54:54.280 align:middle line:90% waving the nuclear power flag. 00:54:54.280 --> 00:54:58.680 align:middle line:84% They have these sympathetic, usually female commentators 00:54:58.680 --> 00:55:04.280 align:middle line:84% that are going on about how wonderful nuclear power is. 00:55:04.280 --> 00:55:07.600 align:middle line:84% They are talking passionately about how 00:55:07.600 --> 00:55:10.480 align:middle line:84% this is saving their future and their families, 00:55:10.480 --> 00:55:12.700 align:middle line:84% and they will set up these false dichotomies, 00:55:12.700 --> 00:55:15.760 align:middle line:84% saying it's nuclear or climate disaster, as 00:55:15.760 --> 00:55:18.280 align:middle line:90% if there were no alternatives. 00:55:18.280 --> 00:55:23.160 align:middle line:84% They aren't saying anything real about what we need 00:55:23.160 --> 00:55:25.680 align:middle line:90% to do about climate change. 00:55:25.680 --> 00:55:29.960 align:middle line:84% They don't have anything to say about how climate abatement 00:55:29.960 --> 00:55:32.960 align:middle line:90% policy should be structured. 00:55:32.960 --> 00:55:38.800 align:middle line:84% They certainly do not discuss the economics of nuclear power 00:55:38.800 --> 00:55:40.800 align:middle line:90% in these movies. 00:55:40.800 --> 00:55:45.440 align:middle line:84% They are not there to give an honest discussion of the issues. 00:55:45.440 --> 00:55:48.480 align:middle line:84% It's propaganda just like this, to make you feel 00:55:48.480 --> 00:55:50.960 align:middle line:90% good about what you're seeing. 00:55:50.960 --> 00:55:55.120 align:middle line:84% If you ask me, public relations is a life of crime. 00:55:55.120 --> 00:55:59.040 align:middle line:90% This is not about the truth. 00:55:59.040 --> 00:56:02.120 align:middle line:84% So, morally speaking, what we should be doing 00:56:02.120 --> 00:56:06.600 align:middle line:84% is trying to bring everyone, the green people and the red people, 00:56:06.600 --> 00:56:08.280 align:middle line:90% into this box. 00:56:08.280 --> 00:56:15.000 align:middle line:84% We want them to face the possibility, whatever 00:56:15.000 --> 00:56:18.720 align:middle line:84% they believe, that they might have been wrong 00:56:18.720 --> 00:56:23.600 align:middle line:84% about nuclear energy and to reconsider the facts carefully. 00:56:23.600 --> 00:56:26.960 align:middle line:84% And once that happens, once they enter the adjudication zone, 00:56:26.960 --> 00:56:30.080 align:middle line:84% then logic and evidence can begin 00:56:30.080 --> 00:56:35.870 align:middle line:84% to eat away at these cognitive illusions that the public holds 00:56:35.870 --> 00:56:37.990 align:middle line:90% and that scientists hold. 00:56:37.990 --> 00:56:41.470 align:middle line:84% And if that logic and evidence is legitimate, 00:56:41.470 --> 00:56:43.310 align:middle line:84% we will all come around to having 00:56:43.310 --> 00:56:48.750 align:middle line:84% the same view about nuclear power, more or less. 00:56:48.750 --> 00:56:50.970 align:middle line:84% But remember, people don't, by and large, 00:56:50.970 --> 00:56:52.550 align:middle line:84% decide to reevaluate their beliefs 00:56:52.550 --> 00:56:55.750 align:middle line:84% just because some expert goes ahead and tells them to do so. 00:56:55.750 --> 00:56:59.650 align:middle line:84% Expert heads actually tend to polarize, 00:56:59.650 --> 00:57:02.070 align:middle line:84% talking heads tend to polarize people's views 00:57:02.070 --> 00:57:05.270 align:middle line:84% because they feel how they have to defend their side. 00:57:05.270 --> 00:57:09.950 align:middle line:84% So what we need is a process to restate this 00:57:09.950 --> 00:57:16.350 align:middle line:84% as a process of discovery, not a process of instruction. 00:57:16.350 --> 00:57:18.370 align:middle line:84% That's how you change people's minds. 00:57:18.370 --> 00:57:20.810 align:middle line:84% You let them find out for themselves. 00:57:20.810 --> 00:57:24.250 align:middle line:90% 00:57:24.250 --> 00:57:26.350 align:middle line:90% So let's turn this around. 00:57:26.350 --> 00:57:30.403 align:middle line:84% Here you are, young and excited about nuclear power. 00:57:30.403 --> 00:57:32.070 align:middle line:84% You want to do your best to make sure it 00:57:32.070 --> 00:57:36.150 align:middle line:84% plays its appropriate role in the grand human experiment. 00:57:36.150 --> 00:57:38.050 align:middle line:84% You're a freshly minted nuclear engineer, 00:57:38.050 --> 00:57:42.150 align:middle line:84% and you're faced with a cranky and unscientific public and all 00:57:42.150 --> 00:57:45.310 align:middle line:84% of these anti-nuclear activists and skeptics. 00:57:45.310 --> 00:57:49.230 align:middle line:84% And the situation seems piled high with difficulty. 00:57:49.230 --> 00:57:50.310 align:middle line:90% What do you do? 00:57:50.310 --> 00:57:54.430 align:middle line:84% Well, yes, it is in fact piled high with difficulty. 00:57:54.430 --> 00:57:59.050 align:middle line:84% But now you are equipped with a more nuanced understanding, 00:57:59.050 --> 00:58:01.790 align:middle line:84% I hope, equipped with a more nuanced understanding 00:58:01.790 --> 00:58:05.070 align:middle line:84% of these contentious issues around nuclear power-- 00:58:05.070 --> 00:58:10.190 align:middle line:84% issues of safety, issues of economics, and so on. 00:58:10.190 --> 00:58:12.910 align:middle line:84% And that should help you understand 00:58:12.910 --> 00:58:14.430 align:middle line:90% where people are coming from. 00:58:14.430 --> 00:58:19.870 align:middle line:84% And you also now have this idea of how human cognition works. 00:58:19.870 --> 00:58:22.070 align:middle line:90% So can we put the two together? 00:58:22.070 --> 00:58:27.590 align:middle line:84% Let's therefore start by investigating the misperceptions 00:58:27.590 --> 00:58:32.740 align:middle line:84% that this cranky public holds about nuclear power. 00:58:32.740 --> 00:58:35.820 align:middle line:84% And then once we have a sense of where the public gets it wrong, 00:58:35.820 --> 00:58:37.740 align:middle line:84% we can then seek to identify ways 00:58:37.740 --> 00:58:41.180 align:middle line:84% that will reveal the cost of their innocent-but-incorrect 00:58:41.180 --> 00:58:44.020 align:middle line:84% views to them, and maybe help them 00:58:44.020 --> 00:58:47.780 align:middle line:84% change their mind a little bit about nuclear power. 00:58:47.780 --> 00:58:52.140 align:middle line:84% So where does the public get it wrong? 00:58:52.140 --> 00:58:54.420 align:middle line:90% Has anybody actually checked? 00:58:54.420 --> 00:58:57.613 align:middle line:84% OK, so, yes, some people have gone and checked. 00:58:57.613 --> 00:58:59.280 align:middle line:84% There are a number of studies out there, 00:58:59.280 --> 00:59:03.340 align:middle line:84% but this study from the IAEA and OECD, 00:59:03.340 --> 00:59:05.500 align:middle line:84% it continues to be, I think, one of the best 00:59:05.500 --> 00:59:09.400 align:middle line:84% studies, because they actually ask detailed questions, 00:59:09.400 --> 00:59:11.460 align:middle line:84% not just like-- do you support nuclear power? 00:59:11.460 --> 00:59:15.540 align:middle line:84% But they tried to ask, is it safe? 00:59:15.540 --> 00:59:17.220 align:middle line:90% and issues like this. 00:59:17.220 --> 00:59:20.542 align:middle line:90% So here's their first question. 00:59:20.542 --> 00:59:22.500 align:middle line:84% Is it possible to operate a nuclear power plant 00:59:22.500 --> 00:59:23.940 align:middle line:90% in a safe manner? 00:59:23.940 --> 00:59:26.920 align:middle line:84% Countries with nuclear power are in light gray. 00:59:26.920 --> 00:59:29.800 align:middle line:84% Countries without nuclear power are in dark gray. 00:59:29.800 --> 00:59:31.580 align:middle line:90% These are European countries. 00:59:31.580 --> 00:59:34.660 align:middle line:84% And so they don't tell you which country is which. 00:59:34.660 --> 00:59:38.740 align:middle line:84% But just to give you, they want to show you the distribution 00:59:38.740 --> 00:59:40.060 align:middle line:90% in different countries. 00:59:40.060 --> 00:59:44.980 align:middle line:84% And lo and behold, virtually all countries have more than half 00:59:44.980 --> 00:59:48.620 align:middle line:84% the people feel that it is possible to operate 00:59:48.620 --> 00:59:54.260 align:middle line:84% nuclear power in a safe way, which suggests that actually 00:59:54.260 --> 00:59:57.700 align:middle line:84% the public is not, by and large, worried about the safety 00:59:57.700 --> 01:00:00.460 align:middle line:90% of nuclear power plants. 01:00:00.460 --> 01:00:07.010 align:middle line:84% Here's a more recent survey from this year from Americans. 01:00:07.010 --> 01:00:09.260 align:middle line:84% And they ask, thinking about nuclear power plants that 01:00:09.260 --> 01:00:12.640 align:middle line:84% are operating now, how safe do you regard these plants 01:00:12.640 --> 01:00:15.100 align:middle line:84% on a scale of 1 to 7, where 1 means very unsafe 01:00:15.100 --> 01:00:16.540 align:middle line:90% and 7 means very safe. 01:00:16.540 --> 01:00:22.220 align:middle line:84% And the majority of people give these plants 01:00:22.220 --> 01:00:23.940 align:middle line:90% a very high safety rating. 01:00:23.940 --> 01:00:28.260 align:middle line:84% Now, I have argued in this class that nuclear power 01:00:28.260 --> 01:00:32.010 align:middle line:84% is somewhere around the threshold of what is probably 01:00:32.010 --> 01:00:34.290 align:middle line:90% acceptably safe. 01:00:34.290 --> 01:00:36.770 align:middle line:84% Thankfully, we did not get that spent fuel pool fire 01:00:36.770 --> 01:00:40.250 align:middle line:84% at Fukushima, which would have made Fukushima look much, much 01:00:40.250 --> 01:00:42.550 align:middle line:84% worse than Chernobyl, in which case, 01:00:42.550 --> 01:00:44.850 align:middle line:84% the deaths per terawatt number that we calculated 01:00:44.850 --> 01:00:48.930 align:middle line:84% would have been a much worse number. 01:00:48.930 --> 01:00:52.490 align:middle line:84% That number is not huge by any means. 01:00:52.490 --> 01:00:55.010 align:middle line:84% It's on the order of natural gas. 01:00:55.010 --> 01:00:57.690 align:middle line:90% It's reasonably safe. 01:00:57.690 --> 01:01:00.930 align:middle line:90% It's not excessively safe. 01:01:00.930 --> 01:01:03.410 align:middle line:84% I guess we would conclude that safety 01:01:03.410 --> 01:01:05.970 align:middle line:84% is an issue we're doing well at, but we 01:01:05.970 --> 01:01:09.730 align:middle line:90% need to maintain our vigilance. 01:01:09.730 --> 01:01:12.770 align:middle line:84% Yet, many people in the nuclear community 01:01:12.770 --> 01:01:17.910 align:middle line:84% are working hard to undermine existing safety institutions. 01:01:17.910 --> 01:01:19.993 align:middle line:84% So there's the new executive order 01:01:19.993 --> 01:01:21.410 align:middle line:84% from the Trump administration that 01:01:21.410 --> 01:01:25.330 align:middle line:84% is limiting the amount of time that the NRC can spend 01:01:25.330 --> 01:01:28.090 align:middle line:84% reviewing the safety of these power plants, 01:01:28.090 --> 01:01:30.170 align:middle line:84% as well as cutting the number of staff 01:01:30.170 --> 01:01:32.730 align:middle line:84% available to do those safety reviews. 01:01:32.730 --> 01:01:36.050 align:middle line:84% So arguably, this is something that we really 01:01:36.050 --> 01:01:38.850 align:middle line:84% need to continue to pay attention to. 01:01:38.850 --> 01:01:41.530 align:middle line:84% It's not something the public is concerned about. 01:01:41.530 --> 01:01:46.370 align:middle line:84% This is a problem that really experts are attuned to. 01:01:46.370 --> 01:01:48.250 align:middle line:84% So I don't think we can credibly argue 01:01:48.250 --> 01:01:50.970 align:middle line:84% that public panic about nuclear reactor safety 01:01:50.970 --> 01:01:54.010 align:middle line:84% is what's holding back nuclear power. 01:01:54.010 --> 01:01:59.068 align:middle line:84% It's an issue, but it's not what the public is worried about. 01:01:59.068 --> 01:02:00.610 align:middle line:84% And if someone tells you this is what 01:02:00.610 --> 01:02:03.390 align:middle line:84% the public is worried about, it's a straw man argument. 01:02:03.390 --> 01:02:07.250 align:middle line:90% 01:02:07.250 --> 01:02:09.552 align:middle line:84% The second question they asked is, are you 01:02:09.552 --> 01:02:11.010 align:middle line:84% concerned with nuclear power plants 01:02:11.010 --> 01:02:13.010 align:middle line:90% being targets for terrorists? 01:02:13.010 --> 01:02:16.490 align:middle line:84% And, wow, yeah, people are really concerned 01:02:16.490 --> 01:02:17.970 align:middle line:90% with this issue. 01:02:17.970 --> 01:02:21.690 align:middle line:84% Now, we didn't really get into this issue in depth. 01:02:21.690 --> 01:02:24.490 align:middle line:84% But I'll just give you a little history here. 01:02:24.490 --> 01:02:28.840 align:middle line:84% After 9/11, where terrorists flew planes into the World Trade 01:02:28.840 --> 01:02:33.860 align:middle line:84% Center, public pressure caused the NRC to admit that 01:02:33.860 --> 01:02:36.480 align:middle line:84% a terrorist attack against a nuclear power plant was 01:02:36.480 --> 01:02:39.320 align:middle line:84% something that needed to be considered. 01:02:39.320 --> 01:02:44.920 align:middle line:84% And the NRC responded by saying that existing plants were 01:02:44.920 --> 01:02:47.000 align:middle line:90% safe enough. 01:02:47.000 --> 01:02:50.020 align:middle line:84% The industry, if you were alive during the time-- 01:02:50.020 --> 01:02:52.120 align:middle line:84% I guess you were alive, but you weren't very old-- 01:02:52.120 --> 01:02:55.000 align:middle line:84% the industry actually said that there 01:02:55.000 --> 01:02:58.320 align:middle line:84% was no risk at all, that this would never happen, 01:02:58.320 --> 01:03:02.915 align:middle line:84% which is pretty gutsy considering that two planes had 01:03:02.915 --> 01:03:05.040 align:middle line:84% just been flown into the World Trade Center and one 01:03:05.040 --> 01:03:06.520 align:middle line:90% into the Pentagon. 01:03:06.520 --> 01:03:10.000 align:middle line:84% Eventually, the NRC came around and said 01:03:10.000 --> 01:03:14.600 align:middle line:84% the containment buildings are not actually strong enough 01:03:14.600 --> 01:03:18.280 align:middle line:84% to withstand a direct impact from a large jumbo jet 01:03:18.280 --> 01:03:20.040 align:middle line:90% like a Boeing 777. 01:03:20.040 --> 01:03:22.480 align:middle line:90% Small planes, they were fine. 01:03:22.480 --> 01:03:24.520 align:middle line:84% But for the biggest planes, they're 01:03:24.520 --> 01:03:26.440 align:middle line:90% actually not strong enough. 01:03:26.440 --> 01:03:33.120 align:middle line:84% It's mainly actually the shaft of the engines, which, 01:03:33.120 --> 01:03:36.680 align:middle line:84% that at high speed is basically like a penetrator 01:03:36.680 --> 01:03:41.960 align:middle line:84% and it can just plow right through the containment. 01:03:41.960 --> 01:03:46.560 align:middle line:84% So the NRC said, OK, we're talking about the AP1000. 01:03:46.560 --> 01:03:49.300 align:middle line:84% We want Westinghouse to make the containment thicker. 01:03:49.300 --> 01:03:51.560 align:middle line:90% And they did. 01:03:51.560 --> 01:03:54.920 align:middle line:84% But the NRC said-- but all the other 100 nuclear operating 01:03:54.920 --> 01:03:58.160 align:middle line:84% nuclear power plants, they don't have to do anything. 01:03:58.160 --> 01:03:59.720 align:middle line:84% Union of Concerned Scientists, which 01:03:59.720 --> 01:04:05.920 align:middle line:84% is a expert anti-nuclear group, said that's not good enough. 01:04:05.920 --> 01:04:08.220 align:middle line:84% Why don't we do something for the existing plants? 01:04:08.220 --> 01:04:10.720 align:middle line:84% Because fixing just 2 plants out of 102 01:04:10.720 --> 01:04:14.887 align:middle line:90% plants does not fix the problem. 01:04:14.887 --> 01:04:17.220 align:middle line:84% And I think I drew this on the board for you previously. 01:04:17.220 --> 01:04:20.935 align:middle line:84% But what they suggested was-- you have your reactor here 01:04:20.935 --> 01:04:22.560 align:middle line:84% and they said, why don't we just put up 01:04:22.560 --> 01:04:25.550 align:middle line:84% like large I-beams sticking out of the ground. 01:04:25.550 --> 01:04:27.370 align:middle line:84% That way, when the airplane flies in, 01:04:27.370 --> 01:04:29.030 align:middle line:84% it shreds itself on these I-beams 01:04:29.030 --> 01:04:30.870 align:middle line:90% and it loses kinetic energy. 01:04:30.870 --> 01:04:33.170 align:middle line:90% And it's cheap, right? 01:04:33.170 --> 01:04:37.390 align:middle line:84% It's just like this stack of big rods around the reactor. 01:04:37.390 --> 01:04:38.990 align:middle line:90% Not that expensive. 01:04:38.990 --> 01:04:42.710 align:middle line:84% And NRC said, no, no, no, they don't need to do anything. 01:04:42.710 --> 01:04:44.870 align:middle line:90% Not a problem. 01:04:44.870 --> 01:04:48.270 align:middle line:84% Then, China was the first country 01:04:48.270 --> 01:04:50.352 align:middle line:90% to actually buy the AP1000. 01:04:50.352 --> 01:04:52.810 align:middle line:84% And China said, we don't want to pay for all that concrete. 01:04:52.810 --> 01:04:54.790 align:middle line:84% So they thinned the containment back out 01:04:54.790 --> 01:04:56.870 align:middle line:90% to be a thin containment. 01:04:56.870 --> 01:04:59.230 align:middle line:84% So you can fly airplanes into the Chinese reactors 01:04:59.230 --> 01:05:03.190 align:middle line:84% and cause meltdowns, just not the American versions. 01:05:03.190 --> 01:05:09.630 align:middle line:84% And then, eventually the NRC said, you know what? 01:05:09.630 --> 01:05:12.110 align:middle line:84% OK, we'll do something about this concern. 01:05:12.110 --> 01:05:17.590 align:middle line:84% What we will do is we will establish regional offices 01:05:17.590 --> 01:05:20.710 align:middle line:84% or reserves of equipment to, say, backup 01:05:20.710 --> 01:05:24.510 align:middle line:84% generators and fuel for the diesel generators and pumps. 01:05:24.510 --> 01:05:28.310 align:middle line:84% So in the event that there is such a catastrophe, 01:05:28.310 --> 01:05:31.830 align:middle line:84% we can maintain emergency operations at the reactor. 01:05:31.830 --> 01:05:36.090 align:middle line:84% And they call this the B.5.b equipment after Section B, 01:05:36.090 --> 01:05:39.350 align:middle line:84% paragraph 5.b of the regulations. 01:05:39.350 --> 01:05:44.870 align:middle line:84% So NRC established these regional centers. 01:05:44.870 --> 01:05:49.430 align:middle line:84% And then after Fukushima, people began 01:05:49.430 --> 01:05:52.810 align:middle line:84% to get uncomfortable about that spent fuel pool fire thing. 01:05:52.810 --> 01:05:54.313 align:middle line:84% And they said we really can't let 01:05:54.313 --> 01:05:56.730 align:middle line:84% this happen if there's an earthquake in the United States. 01:05:56.730 --> 01:05:58.590 align:middle line:84% And the NRC said, oh, remember that B.5.b 01:05:58.590 --> 01:05:59.930 align:middle line:90% stuff we did for terrorism? 01:05:59.930 --> 01:06:01.910 align:middle line:84% That will work for that problem, too, 01:06:01.910 --> 01:06:06.910 align:middle line:90% for large natural disasters. 01:06:06.910 --> 01:06:14.610 align:middle line:84% So they decided to test run some of that stuff 01:06:14.610 --> 01:06:16.550 align:middle line:84% that had been sitting in storage for a while. 01:06:16.550 --> 01:06:18.950 align:middle line:84% And they pulled it out, and guess what? 01:06:18.950 --> 01:06:20.380 align:middle line:90% It didn't work. 01:06:20.380 --> 01:06:25.620 align:middle line:84% A lot of that equipment had never actually been operated. 01:06:25.620 --> 01:06:28.340 align:middle line:84% People had not been trained on how to use it. 01:06:28.340 --> 01:06:30.140 align:middle line:84% There were no plans in place for how 01:06:30.140 --> 01:06:31.820 align:middle line:84% to get access to it in the event there's 01:06:31.820 --> 01:06:33.540 align:middle line:84% a large earthquake or a large hurricane 01:06:33.540 --> 01:06:37.480 align:middle line:84% or something that makes driving through the roads very difficult 01:06:37.480 --> 01:06:39.340 align:middle line:90% and so on. 01:06:39.340 --> 01:06:42.300 align:middle line:84% And the reason is that that equipment was not 01:06:42.300 --> 01:06:44.460 align:middle line:90% considered safety equipment. 01:06:44.460 --> 01:06:47.080 align:middle line:84% So because it was not classified as safety equipment, 01:06:47.080 --> 01:06:50.740 align:middle line:84% it did not have to be routinely tested and checked. 01:06:50.740 --> 01:06:54.820 align:middle line:84% But they liked it that way because it was easier. 01:06:54.820 --> 01:07:01.140 align:middle line:84% So here's an example of where experts continuously, I 01:07:01.140 --> 01:07:04.340 align:middle line:90% would argue, get it wrong. 01:07:04.340 --> 01:07:08.300 align:middle line:84% And the public is quite concerned about something 01:07:08.300 --> 01:07:11.820 align:middle line:84% that, I would argue, isn't a crazy concern. 01:07:11.820 --> 01:07:14.625 align:middle line:90% 01:07:14.625 --> 01:07:19.100 align:middle line:84% So the third major concern, a question 01:07:19.100 --> 01:07:24.420 align:middle line:84% that the survey asked was, are nuclear materials sufficiently 01:07:24.420 --> 01:07:31.740 align:middle line:84% protected against misuse, dirty bombs and nuclear proliferation? 01:07:31.740 --> 01:07:35.760 align:middle line:84% And in almost all countries, much less than 50%-- 01:07:35.760 --> 01:07:38.420 align:middle line:84% here's the only country, there's only a few countries above 50% 01:07:38.420 --> 01:07:40.060 align:middle line:90% here-- 01:07:40.060 --> 01:07:45.020 align:middle line:84% felt that materials were indeed adequately protected. 01:07:45.020 --> 01:07:50.820 align:middle line:84% Now, I argued that the security of regular spent fuel, 01:07:50.820 --> 01:07:52.900 align:middle line:84% which contains plutonium, is adequate 01:07:52.900 --> 01:07:55.820 align:middle line:84% because it's highly radioactive and it would 01:07:55.820 --> 01:07:59.220 align:middle line:90% be very difficult to divert. 01:07:59.220 --> 01:08:02.140 align:middle line:84% Nevertheless, there are many nuclear engineers 01:08:02.140 --> 01:08:05.380 align:middle line:84% who want to do reprocessing and convert 01:08:05.380 --> 01:08:09.900 align:middle line:84% that self-protecting spent fuel into separated plutonium, which 01:08:09.900 --> 01:08:13.820 align:middle line:84% is what is in this can and can be carried out of the building 01:08:13.820 --> 01:08:15.020 align:middle line:90% under your armpit. 01:08:15.020 --> 01:08:19.130 align:middle line:84% Give someone a couple hundred thousand dollars, $1 million, 01:08:19.130 --> 01:08:20.390 align:middle line:90% and said, bring me a few cans. 01:08:20.390 --> 01:08:27.569 align:middle line:84% And some person who works at the factory might actually do it. 01:08:27.569 --> 01:08:29.470 align:middle line:84% We didn't discuss this in a lot of detail, 01:08:29.470 --> 01:08:31.649 align:middle line:84% but there are actually a lot of real-world examples 01:08:31.649 --> 01:08:37.770 align:middle line:84% of this stuff happening, especially in the former Soviet 01:08:37.770 --> 01:08:38.649 align:middle line:90% Union. 01:08:38.649 --> 01:08:41.970 align:middle line:84% Lots of theft of nuclear materials, 01:08:41.970 --> 01:08:46.050 align:middle line:84% even HEU being stolen from the United States. 01:08:46.050 --> 01:08:51.609 align:middle line:84% It's not exactly definitive, but there's reasonable evidence 01:08:51.609 --> 01:08:56.689 align:middle line:84% to suggest that the Israeli nuclear weapons program used 01:08:56.689 --> 01:08:59.729 align:middle line:84% highly enriched uranium stolen from a plant in the United 01:08:59.729 --> 01:09:00.890 align:middle line:90% States. 01:09:00.890 --> 01:09:04.569 align:middle line:84% If you have never heard of this, look up the NUMEC, N-U-M-E-C, 01:09:04.569 --> 01:09:06.250 align:middle line:90% the NUMEC affair. 01:09:06.250 --> 01:09:08.330 align:middle line:90% It's a very interesting story. 01:09:08.330 --> 01:09:10.210 align:middle line:84% The files were sealed by the FBI, 01:09:10.210 --> 01:09:12.710 align:middle line:84% so we don't really know what happened. 01:09:12.710 --> 01:09:15.550 align:middle line:84% No one is coming clean on the affair. 01:09:15.550 --> 01:09:18.450 align:middle line:90% 01:09:18.450 --> 01:09:22.450 align:middle line:84% The linkage between nuclear power and nuclear proliferation 01:09:22.450 --> 01:09:23.870 align:middle line:90% is indeed very subtle. 01:09:23.870 --> 01:09:27.130 align:middle line:84% It is a political decision, but it's 01:09:27.130 --> 01:09:31.689 align:middle line:84% a decision that is influenced by the access to technology. 01:09:31.689 --> 01:09:38.603 align:middle line:90% 01:09:38.603 --> 01:09:40.270 align:middle line:84% And where states want to pursue weapons, 01:09:40.270 --> 01:09:42.290 align:middle line:84% we see more often than not that they're 01:09:42.290 --> 01:09:44.890 align:middle line:84% willing to use their civil technology to do it, 01:09:44.890 --> 01:09:48.170 align:middle line:84% which is why we invented safeguards in 1950, the idea 01:09:48.170 --> 01:09:52.130 align:middle line:84% that the IAEA was going to protect civil nuclear power 01:09:52.130 --> 01:09:53.930 align:middle line:90% from this problem. 01:09:53.930 --> 01:09:56.490 align:middle line:84% Unfortunately, technological progress 01:09:56.490 --> 01:09:58.690 align:middle line:84% has made safeguards largely ineffectual 01:09:58.690 --> 01:10:00.150 align:middle line:90% for technical reasons. 01:10:00.150 --> 01:10:02.430 align:middle line:84% So I talked about how big these enrichment plants are, 01:10:02.430 --> 01:10:05.410 align:middle line:84% these commercial plants, much bigger than the plant 01:10:05.410 --> 01:10:07.730 align:middle line:90% that you need to make a bomb. 01:10:07.730 --> 01:10:12.330 align:middle line:84% They can make bomb quantities of HEU in about a day. 01:10:12.330 --> 01:10:16.160 align:middle line:84% Now we're talking about exporting reactors 01:10:16.160 --> 01:10:17.880 align:middle line:90% that contain HALEU. 01:10:17.880 --> 01:10:19.480 align:middle line:90% It depends on who you believe. 01:10:19.480 --> 01:10:23.920 align:middle line:84% But HALEU is arguably a directly weapons-usable material. 01:10:23.920 --> 01:10:27.760 align:middle line:84% And a single reactor contains more than enough HALEU, 01:10:27.760 --> 01:10:32.200 align:middle line:84% many designs contain more than enough HALEU to build a bomb. 01:10:32.200 --> 01:10:35.300 align:middle line:84% Are we going to export basically bomb kits to other countries? 01:10:35.300 --> 01:10:39.440 align:middle line:84% These are issues that I would argue we really 01:10:39.440 --> 01:10:44.803 align:middle line:84% need to take very seriously, because the simple single use 01:10:44.803 --> 01:10:46.720 align:middle line:84% of a nuclear weapon is going to make Chernobyl 01:10:46.720 --> 01:10:50.080 align:middle line:84% look like a beautiful day in the sunshine. 01:10:50.080 --> 01:10:53.300 align:middle line:84% So I think we should be taking it more seriously. 01:10:53.300 --> 01:10:56.160 align:middle line:84% The public thinks we should be taking it more seriously. 01:10:56.160 --> 01:10:58.300 align:middle line:84% Somehow the nuclear export community 01:10:58.300 --> 01:11:01.320 align:middle line:84% doesn't take this very seriously. 01:11:01.320 --> 01:11:06.320 align:middle line:84% Finally, the public is pretty much split about nuclear waste. 01:11:06.320 --> 01:11:08.400 align:middle line:84% This concern doesn't actually rank as high 01:11:08.400 --> 01:11:10.100 align:middle line:84% as terrorism or nuclear proliferation, 01:11:10.100 --> 01:11:13.200 align:middle line:90% which I think is interesting. 01:11:13.200 --> 01:11:15.880 align:middle line:84% Remember that the safety around nuclear waste 01:11:15.880 --> 01:11:18.160 align:middle line:90% is not really the concern. 01:11:18.160 --> 01:11:21.600 align:middle line:84% And I would argue that the fact that the public isn't worried 01:11:21.600 --> 01:11:26.160 align:middle line:84% about the safety of reactors means that the public is not 01:11:26.160 --> 01:11:28.270 align:middle line:90% just worried about radiation. 01:11:28.270 --> 01:11:30.020 align:middle line:84% If they were just worried about radiation, 01:11:30.020 --> 01:11:31.395 align:middle line:84% they were worried about reactors, 01:11:31.395 --> 01:11:33.640 align:middle line:84% then they would be worried about spent fuel. 01:11:33.640 --> 01:11:35.040 align:middle line:90% But we don't see that. 01:11:35.040 --> 01:11:38.220 align:middle line:84% They're basically not worried about reactors 01:11:38.220 --> 01:11:42.400 align:middle line:84% and they're kind of moderately worried about spent fuel. 01:11:42.400 --> 01:11:44.700 align:middle line:84% So I don't know what explains this, 01:11:44.700 --> 01:11:46.278 align:middle line:84% but I will offer you a conjecture. 01:11:46.278 --> 01:11:48.320 align:middle line:84% And the conjecture is that perhaps this is really 01:11:48.320 --> 01:11:49.800 align:middle line:90% the public saying-- 01:11:49.800 --> 01:11:52.120 align:middle line:84% we want evidence that the industry 01:11:52.120 --> 01:11:56.200 align:middle line:84% is going to provide complete and responsible management of all 01:11:56.200 --> 01:11:59.680 align:middle line:84% the liabilities generated by nuclear power, preferably 01:11:59.680 --> 01:12:01.480 align:middle line:90% in our lifetime. 01:12:01.480 --> 01:12:04.960 align:middle line:84% We don't want to see this just kick the can down the road 01:12:04.960 --> 01:12:07.880 align:middle line:90% to my children's generation. 01:12:07.880 --> 01:12:10.400 align:middle line:84% Who knows if that's what's really behind the public answers 01:12:10.400 --> 01:12:10.900 align:middle line:90% here? 01:12:10.900 --> 01:12:14.870 align:middle line:90% But I suspect that's what it is. 01:12:14.870 --> 01:12:19.990 align:middle line:84% So this is every single question that the IAEA and OECD 01:12:19.990 --> 01:12:21.670 align:middle line:90% survey covered. 01:12:21.670 --> 01:12:24.130 align:middle line:84% There are other surveys about nuclear energy, like I said, 01:12:24.130 --> 01:12:26.830 align:middle line:84% but they don't usually kind get into this granular kind 01:12:26.830 --> 01:12:28.790 align:middle line:90% of detail. 01:12:28.790 --> 01:12:31.430 align:middle line:90% But the bottom line is this-- 01:12:31.430 --> 01:12:35.990 align:middle line:84% surprise, 3 out of 4 people are totally on board 01:12:35.990 --> 01:12:38.590 align:middle line:84% with there being more nuclear power. 01:12:38.590 --> 01:12:43.950 align:middle line:84% The number has been over 50% of the public since the year 01:12:43.950 --> 01:12:45.910 align:middle line:90% after Chernobyl. 01:12:45.910 --> 01:12:47.350 align:middle line:90% Here's Chernobyl. 01:12:47.350 --> 01:12:49.390 align:middle line:90% We had a slight dip. 01:12:49.390 --> 01:12:50.990 align:middle line:84% And then the majority of the public 01:12:50.990 --> 01:12:54.295 align:middle line:84% has always favored nuclear power. 01:12:54.295 --> 01:12:56.670 align:middle line:84% Perhaps there are other points where the public is really 01:12:56.670 --> 01:12:58.850 align:middle line:84% off the reservation here with respect to the facts, 01:12:58.850 --> 01:13:01.430 align:middle line:90% but I can't find it. 01:13:01.430 --> 01:13:05.750 align:middle line:84% I'm trying to figure out how the public is so wrong. 01:13:05.750 --> 01:13:08.750 align:middle line:90% I don't see the evidence. 01:13:08.750 --> 01:13:13.110 align:middle line:84% You have the public mandate to do nuclear power. 01:13:13.110 --> 01:13:17.070 align:middle line:84% What nuclear needs to do is get its own house in order 01:13:17.070 --> 01:13:18.750 align:middle line:90% and make it work. 01:13:18.750 --> 01:13:21.790 align:middle line:90% This is not a public problem. 01:13:21.790 --> 01:13:23.630 align:middle line:90% So wait a second. 01:13:23.630 --> 01:13:27.550 align:middle line:84% Who exactly is the stubborn entity here? 01:13:27.550 --> 01:13:31.150 align:middle line:90% Is it the public or is it us? 01:13:31.150 --> 01:13:34.230 align:middle line:84% Is it nuclear engineers who have difficulty 01:13:34.230 --> 01:13:41.410 align:middle line:84% facing some of the challenges that nuclear power faces? 01:13:41.410 --> 01:13:44.430 align:middle line:84% Maybe it's nuclear power and maybe nuclear engineers 01:13:44.430 --> 01:13:47.470 align:middle line:84% are really on this red line with respect 01:13:47.470 --> 01:13:50.990 align:middle line:84% to tackling these hard problems that nuclear power faces-- 01:13:50.990 --> 01:13:53.790 align:middle line:84% like, oh, we don't want to think about these things. 01:13:53.790 --> 01:13:58.710 align:middle line:84% Ah, it's going to hurt my professional career. 01:13:58.710 --> 01:14:01.270 align:middle line:84% You, however, are now a select subset 01:14:01.270 --> 01:14:03.150 align:middle line:90% of these nuclear engineers. 01:14:03.150 --> 01:14:04.530 align:middle line:90% You have taken this class. 01:14:04.530 --> 01:14:08.220 align:middle line:84% I hope you are more attuned to these issues. 01:14:08.220 --> 01:14:11.260 align:middle line:84% And I hope that you will begin to evaluate 01:14:11.260 --> 01:14:13.160 align:middle line:90% these matters for yourself. 01:14:13.160 --> 01:14:15.420 align:middle line:84% You don't have to take my word for it. 01:14:15.420 --> 01:14:18.880 align:middle line:84% Use your skills and go out and do these calculations yourself. 01:14:18.880 --> 01:14:23.060 align:middle line:90% 01:14:23.060 --> 01:14:25.180 align:middle line:90% Here's my proposal. 01:14:25.180 --> 01:14:28.202 align:middle line:84% What we need is for the public to hear 01:14:28.202 --> 01:14:29.660 align:middle line:84% about the benefits of nuclear power 01:14:29.660 --> 01:14:31.500 align:middle line:84% from the people that they trust-- 01:14:31.500 --> 01:14:35.340 align:middle line:84% independent scientists, people in their communities. 01:14:35.340 --> 01:14:39.100 align:middle line:84% And we need nuclear engineers to hear 01:14:39.100 --> 01:14:44.380 align:middle line:84% about the problems from the people that they trust. 01:14:44.380 --> 01:14:48.340 align:middle line:84% I've argued that familiarity and shared patterns of cognition 01:14:48.340 --> 01:14:52.700 align:middle line:84% give us a framework for that kind of credible communication. 01:14:52.700 --> 01:14:55.940 align:middle line:90% So here it is. 01:14:55.940 --> 01:14:58.280 align:middle line:84% The final answer is-- don't shun your critics. 01:14:58.280 --> 01:15:00.220 align:middle line:90% They are, in fact, your friends. 01:15:00.220 --> 01:15:03.860 align:middle line:84% They are the people who can show you the path 01:15:03.860 --> 01:15:06.020 align:middle line:90% to salvation for nuclear power. 01:15:06.020 --> 01:15:09.580 align:middle line:84% And it's a dialogue between these two opposing groups, 01:15:09.580 --> 01:15:12.700 align:middle line:84% these expert groups, a process called dialectic, 01:15:12.700 --> 01:15:15.720 align:middle line:84% truth finding through debate, that will get us there. 01:15:15.720 --> 01:15:18.260 align:middle line:90% 01:15:18.260 --> 01:15:19.680 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: I have a question. 01:15:19.680 --> 01:15:21.620 align:middle line:84% The course is [INAUDIBLE] nuclear. 01:15:21.620 --> 01:15:27.180 align:middle line:84% But this kind of objection from the public also [INAUDIBLE]. 01:15:27.180 --> 01:15:29.300 align:middle line:84% So in your opinion, does it make sense 01:15:29.300 --> 01:15:32.120 align:middle line:84% that this kind of change in the public 01:15:32.120 --> 01:15:38.632 align:middle line:84% happens in a forum rather than a conversation or talk? 01:15:38.632 --> 01:15:39.840 align:middle line:90% R. SCOTT KEMP: In what forum? 01:15:39.840 --> 01:15:42.520 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: Like in an open conversation 01:15:42.520 --> 01:15:47.340 align:middle line:84% that is in general with peers around that [INAUDIBLE] 01:15:47.340 --> 01:15:49.340 align:middle line:84% instead of having a nuclear forum. 01:15:49.340 --> 01:15:51.900 align:middle line:90% R. SCOTT KEMP: Oh, I see. 01:15:51.900 --> 01:15:53.220 align:middle line:90% Maybe. 01:15:53.220 --> 01:16:00.860 align:middle line:84% So I think the argument here is that both advocates and skeptics 01:16:00.860 --> 01:16:05.550 align:middle line:84% are potentially wrong about certain issues, 01:16:05.550 --> 01:16:07.690 align:middle line:90% about different issues, maybe. 01:16:07.690 --> 01:16:13.050 align:middle line:84% But if you put the advocates and the skeptics in the same room, 01:16:13.050 --> 01:16:16.410 align:middle line:84% they don't necessarily speak the same language. 01:16:16.410 --> 01:16:22.050 align:middle line:84% And so you can have these fora, but they're not usually 01:16:22.050 --> 01:16:26.370 align:middle line:84% very effectual in changing people's views. 01:16:26.370 --> 01:16:28.890 align:middle line:84% The way people's views are changed 01:16:28.890 --> 01:16:33.410 align:middle line:84% is that they have discussions with people 01:16:33.410 --> 01:16:35.770 align:middle line:90% who are close to them. 01:16:35.770 --> 01:16:40.010 align:middle line:84% So the engineers need to talk to other engineers and scientists. 01:16:40.010 --> 01:16:42.110 align:middle line:84% The lawyers need to talk to other lawyers. 01:16:42.110 --> 01:16:47.130 align:middle line:84% The environmentalists need to talk to other environmentalists. 01:16:47.130 --> 01:16:51.010 align:middle line:84% The public needs to talk to other people in their friend 01:16:51.010 --> 01:16:53.330 align:middle line:90% community, and so on. 01:16:53.330 --> 01:16:59.730 align:middle line:84% It seems inefficient, but if enough of this happens, 01:16:59.730 --> 01:17:03.050 align:middle line:84% there is eventually communication that percolates 01:17:03.050 --> 01:17:05.330 align:middle line:90% up and down this chain. 01:17:05.330 --> 01:17:09.170 align:middle line:84% And that's actually how people's opinions change. 01:17:09.170 --> 01:17:13.690 align:middle line:84% They have these dialogues, this dialectic in their community. 01:17:13.690 --> 01:17:16.430 align:middle line:84% So we not only have to have these conversations, 01:17:16.430 --> 01:17:19.610 align:middle line:84% we also have to be willing to do one more thing, which 01:17:19.610 --> 01:17:23.130 align:middle line:84% is to stand up to people in our own community 01:17:23.130 --> 01:17:25.010 align:middle line:90% when we disagree with them. 01:17:25.010 --> 01:17:27.490 align:middle line:84% Instead of just going with the flow, 01:17:27.490 --> 01:17:32.130 align:middle line:84% we have to say, wait a second, perhaps 01:17:32.130 --> 01:17:33.630 align:middle line:84% we are overlooking something here. 01:17:33.630 --> 01:17:35.850 align:middle line:84% Maybe we should take this concern a little bit more 01:17:35.850 --> 01:17:37.770 align:middle line:90% seriously. 01:17:37.770 --> 01:17:40.630 align:middle line:84% And as I said, MIT is actually pretty good place for this. 01:17:40.630 --> 01:17:45.290 align:middle line:84% People in this department now do take economics seriously. 01:17:45.290 --> 01:17:48.170 align:middle line:84% It wasn't always the case or isn't always 01:17:48.170 --> 01:17:50.070 align:middle line:90% the case at other departments. 01:17:50.070 --> 01:17:54.610 align:middle line:84% Definitely not the case in a lot of industry. 01:17:54.610 --> 01:17:56.770 align:middle line:84% But if you are willing to do this, 01:17:56.770 --> 01:17:59.450 align:middle line:84% if you are willing to be that person who's just pushes back 01:17:59.450 --> 01:18:06.360 align:middle line:84% a little bit, then you will be slowly bringing together 01:18:06.360 --> 01:18:08.560 align:middle line:84% the individuals in these communities, 01:18:08.560 --> 01:18:14.000 align:middle line:84% and both sides will very slowly have their cognitive illusions 01:18:14.000 --> 01:18:15.800 align:middle line:90% minimized. 01:18:15.800 --> 01:18:19.280 align:middle line:90% You'll be doing this for people. 01:18:19.280 --> 01:18:27.120 align:middle line:84% And eventually, we will converge to having a shared view. 01:18:27.120 --> 01:18:31.360 align:middle line:84% This is the task of finding the future for nuclear power. 01:18:31.360 --> 01:18:33.400 align:middle line:90% This task falls to you. 01:18:33.400 --> 01:18:35.120 align:middle line:90% Thank you for taking the class. 01:18:35.120 --> 01:18:37.480 align:middle line:84% I hope it challenged your assumptions 01:18:37.480 --> 01:18:41.840 align:middle line:84% and will lay forth a life of asking good questions. 01:18:41.840 --> 01:18:42.880 align:middle line:90% Thanks very much. 01:18:42.880 --> 01:18:46.230 align:middle line:90% [APPLAUSE] 01:18:46.230 --> 01:19:02.000 align:middle line:90%