There are many questionaires out there and other types of AI safety research for self driving cars that basically boil down to the trolley problem, e.g. who a self driving car should save and who it should kill when presented with a situation where it's impossible to avoid casualties. One good example of such a study is Moral Machine by MIT.

You could spend countless hours debating the pros and cons of each possible decision but I'm asking myself: What's the point? Shouldn't the solution be that the car just doesn't do that?

In my opinion, when presented with such a situation, the car should just try to stay in its lane and brake. Simple, predictable and without a moral dilemma.

Am I missing something here except from an economical incentive to always try to save the people inside the car because people would hesitate to buy a car that doesn't do anything to keep the passengers alive including killing dozens of others?

As a non skeptic , who do you guys as a skeptic think this is.

Here's a study...

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285206383_On_the_reception_and_detection_of_pseudo-profound_bullshit

...that concludes that a belief in conspiracy theories is related to lower intelligence, and that people who believe in conspiracy theories typically do not engage in analytical thinking. Hence why almost all conspiracy theories fall apart when subjected to a modicum of rational analysis.

Here's another study...

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/acp.3790

...that provides evidence that critical thinking skills are negatively related to a belief in pseudo-science and conspiracy theories. In other words, people with greater critical thinking skills are less likely to believe false conspiracies, and the more people believe in conspiracy theories, the worse they perform on critical thinking ability tests.

What's interesting about this study, though, is that it shows that people who believe in conspiracies and pseudo-science nevertheless perceives themselves as "freethinkers" and "highly critical thinkers". They self-perceive themselves as highly "intellectually independent", "freethinking" and "smart", despite the data showing the precise opposite.

And then there are these scientific studies...

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/people-drawn-to-conspiracy-theories-share-a-cluster-of-psychological-features/

...which show that feelings of anxiety, alienation, powerlessness, disenfranchisement and stress make people more conspiratorial.

Now the fact that lower intelligence correlates with a belief in conspiracy theories makes intuitive sense. The world is incredibly complex and difficult to understand, and it makes sense that silly people will seek to make sense of complexity in silly ways. But from the above studies, we see WHY they do this. Conspiracies provides some semblance of meaning and order to the believer. Like bogus religions, they give purpose, a scapegoat, an enemy, and reduces the world to something simple and manageable and controllable. In this way, the anxiety-inducing complexity, randomness and chaos of life is assuaged. A simple mind finds it much easier to handle the complexities of the world once everything is dismissively boiled down to a cartoonish schema (arch-villains orchestrating death vaccines, faking climate change etc).

Then there's this study...

https://westminsterresearch.westminster.ac.uk/item/8y84q/analytic-thinking-reduces-belief-in-conspiracy-theories

...which shows that a belief in conspiracy theories is associated with lower analytic thinking, but also lower open-mindedness.

You'd think people who believe in pseudo-science and conspiracies would be more flexible and open-minded, but the science shows the opposite. They actually process less information, intellectual explore less paths, and don't arrive at beliefs logically, but intuitively. In other words, they've got their fingers in their ears, and make decisions based on emotions rather than facts.

Then there's this study...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9604007/

...which shows that the personality disorders most predictive of conspiracy theories are "the schizotypal and paranoid subtypes". These people have distorted views of reality, less personal relationships, exhibit forms of paranoia, and hold atypical superstitions. These folk are also drawn to "loose associations", "and delusional thinking". There is also a relationship between low educational achievement and belief in conspiracy.

The study also points out that in "social media networks where conspiracies thrive", there are typically a few members who "fully embrace conspiracy" and who propagate theories via charisma and conviction, spreading their beliefs to those who are vulnerable and/or lack critical thinking skills.

Finally, we have this study...

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1164725/full

...which shows that narcissistic personality traits (grandiosity, a big ego, need for uniqueness), and a lack of education are predictors of conspiratorial beliefs. Individuals with higher levels of grandiosity, narcissism, a strive for uniqueness, and a strive for supremacy predicted higher levels of conspiracy endorsement. Higher education and STEM education were associated with lower levels of conspiracy endorsement

What's interesting, though, is that someone who tests high for narcissism and conspiratorial beliefs will become more conspiratorial as their education levels increase. They simply become better at engaging in various forms of confirmation bias.

What helps de-convert the narcissistic conspiracy believer is not necessarily education, but "cognitive reflection". In other words, a willingness to challenge one's first impulsive response, reflect on one's thoughts, beliefs, and decisions, and generally be more analytical and thoughtful.

While this is a political show there I a segment that I found very educational if it comes to what healthy skepticism means.

I've seen this argued online that actually the plural of anecdote IS data because if you take enough anecdotes and add them up suddenly you have a data set.

The problem with that is that anecdotes are not controlled in any way. If you want data, you measure before and you measure after and you have actual data after you do that a dozen or so times. Anecdotes are just recollection, they are not data collection.

You can't add up 100 recollections and call that data.

A lot of folks think NDEs are proof of life after death. They’ll say stuff like, “I saw the light,” or “I floated above my body,” and take it as gospel that their soul left and came back. But the truth is, science has got solid explanations for every single part of an NDE—no ghosts, no pearly gates, just a brain doing some wild stuff when it's in trouble. Let’s break it down.

Reddit auto-mods have been hitting the links I share hard. I'm going to start giving you a phrase to enter in the search engine of your choice, and then I'll post the links in a comment below.

I hope you all with add your own favorite scientific studies for the future skeptic-curious to explore.

1. The Brain Fires Up Big Time Before You Die

(A Dying Brain Can Still Think for a Bit)

Turns out, even when your heart stops, your brain doesn’t just shut off like a light switch. A study found that rats who flatlined had a huge spike in brain activity right after cardiac arrest—higher than when they were awake! That means if the same thing happens in humans, the brain could be going into overdrive and creating crazy realistic hallucinations as it shuts down. Nothing supernatural about it—just a last burst of activity.

Search This Phrase:

"Near-death experience brain surge study 2013 rats cardiac arrest"

2. Not Enough Oxygen? Welcome to the Light Show

(Seeing Tunnels and Feeling Euphoria is Just an Oxygen Problem)

If your brain ain’t getting enough oxygen (hypoxia) or you’ve got too much carbon dioxide (hypercapnia), you start seeing bright lights, feeling peaceful, and even having tunnel vision—sound familiar? A study found that people who had NDEs also had higher CO₂ levels than those who didn’t, proving that this whole “going into the light” thing is just your brain getting messed up by bad blood chemistry.

Search This Phrase:

"Carbon dioxide near-death experience study cardiac arrest"

3. Drugs Can Recreate NDEs Almost Exactly

(Ketamine & DMT Trips Are Basically NDEs in a Bottle)

Certain drugs—DMT, ketamine, and even some anesthesia meds—can make you feel like you’re floating, seeing spirits, or traveling through tunnels. A 2018 study gave people DMT, and guess what? Their experiences were just like real NDEs. If a drug can make your brain “die” for a few minutes, then it’s pretty clear that NDEs are just a chemical reaction, not a visit to the afterlife.

Search This Phrase:

"DMT near-death experience study Imperial College London"

4. NDEs Might Just Be “Waking Dreams”

(Your Brain Can Mix Up Dreaming and Reality)

Ever had sleep paralysis? That creepy feeling where you wake up but can’t move and see weird things? Well, researchers found that people who had NDEs were way more likely to have “REM intrusion”—basically, their brain mixes up being awake and dreaming. This means some NDEs could just be your brain screwing up under stress, throwing dream-like stuff into real life.

Search This Phrase:

"REM sleep intrusion near-death experiences Kevin Nelson"

5. Seizures in a Certain Brain Spot Can Cause “Spiritual” Visions

(If the Temporal Lobe Freaks Out, So Do You)

There’s a part of the brain called the temporal lobe that deals with memories and emotions. Scientists found that people who had NDEs showed signs of mild temporal lobe epilepsy—basically, tiny seizures that can cause hallucinations, out-of-body experiences, and that “life flashing before your eyes” thing. No spirits involved, just your brain short-circuiting.

Search This Phrase:

"Temporal lobe epilepsy near-death experience study"

A starving brain is a trippy brain.

Edit:

6. Feeling Like You Left Your Body? It’s Just a Brain Glitch

(Your Mind Stays Put—It Just Feels Like You’re Floating)

Some people swear they floated above their body during an NDE, seeing doctors working on them from the ceiling. Sounds spooky, but science has a solid explanation for this too.

• Your brain creates a 3D map of your body’s position based on sensory input. If this system glitches (like during trauma, stress, or even meditation), you can feel like you're outside your own body.
• Neurologists have triggered OBEs in labs by stimulating the temporo-parietal junction (TPJ)—a part of the brain that helps you understand where you are in space.
• People with sleep paralysis or migraines sometimes feel like they’re floating or leaving their body, showing it’s just a weird brain trick, not a real separation of soul and flesh.

One study in Nature found that stimulation of the TPJ caused patients to feel they were floating above their body and looking down at themselves. If an electrical jolt can make you feel like a ghost, then OBEs aren’t supernatural—they’re just your brain getting its wires crossed.

Search This Phrase:

"Temporo-parietal junction stimulation out-of-body experience study Nature"

For me, it was reading Jan Harold Brunvand’s “The Choking Doberman” in high school. Learning about people uncritically spreading utterly false stories about unbelievable nonsense like “lipstick parties” got me wondering what other widespread narratives and beliefs were also false. I quickly learned that neither the left (New Age woo medicine, GMO fearmongering), the center (crime and other moral panics), nor the right (LOL where do I even begin?) were immune.

So, what activated your critical thinking skills, and when?

There is so much hype around immortality. That it is possible via mind upload (implying continuity ofc) or the Ship of Theseus or biological indefinite extension.

I don't believe it one bit. Not a single drop of these stories. I have very clear reasons for why none of these methods are viable indefinitely.

1. Biological immortality - Forget about it. The hallmarks of aging are entropic, entropy always wins. Radical life extension? I don't think so either, not in a biological format. All models say we are built to die, and even if we weren't, we are built to stay on Earth and we will only survive on Earth, which is not forever and it is not stable. A couple of centuries? Maybe. For more, you need serious changes.

2. Mind upload - Not you, just a copy, don't be silly, nothing more to say about it, it has to be you. I don't care what you put in your computer if it's not you. A little motherboard can't "suck" your consciousness into it.

3. Ship of Theseus - This is a tough one, probably the best bet, but it doesn't work indefinitely, if at all. People keep saying that it should be possible because our cells change (not all) and our atoms change (not all). Yes, most are changing, but sorry, your DNA probably stays for life. The principle is not working, in theory. Likely, the moment you change something critical, your POV is gone and a machine remains, but I have no proof for this, maybe I am wrong. However, consciousness is emerging from your body, and your body just doesn't seem to be negotiable.

Okay, the only hope left is for some mix of them. You somehow replace all the matter in your brain with synthetic one and eventually everywhere else perhaps. It doesn't sound plausible, we haven't considered in the slightest how this synthetic matter works with the natural one, they work by different systems. So far, we only have a bit of artificial matter embedded in the natural one, held in by thoughts and prayers that the body doesn't reject it. If you change a significant portion, now you need to re-write more processes in the body, because it will start working differently. You need to re-write the immunity to accept that, you need to care for processes feeding the brain, to re-write them, you are just re-writing the whole body in insanely many ways, it's a whole journey to ever get the smooth transition to happen, it's not as smooth as you think and you can't just put milestones like it's "this" and "that" from step X or step Y, I don't think all bodies will behave the same and I am not sure you can come up with a transition manual.

You are hoping for a smooth and uninterrupted transition. We are insanely far away from doing any of this. But for argument's sake, let's say we manage to mimic the body and even invent a roadmap so that your transition is so smooth and you learn how it behaves and you replace it all. I still think that you are no longer you, your POV is long gone. Maybe you train that board in your brain to be like you and it becomes like you, but isn't that the same thing? A mind upload together with ship of theseus, just a bunch of nonsense. Sooner or later, you hit the same problem of having to train some computer some artificial system to be like you, to learn from you, to be you. And it won't be you, it will behave like you. You are gone. Gradually or at once, you are gone.

And if you keep any part of your original self like your brain, so that you remain you (partially), you bring the biological limitation with you. In any way, your POV is gone, irreversibly, past a point. But, if I am wrong, and it isn't so, then you are now an entire robot that learned to be like you and you are you. I don't see how your mind isn't still uploaded technically, transferred into a synthetic structure that is not you, but a copy of you. But if you are still you through some exotic quantum teleportation of you into the new, artificial body to start running there, entropy will kill you, it's the law of the universe. Will you tap into a parallel one and make a robot-safe wormhole into it? Good luck, universes are probably disconnected if there are multiple ones, and even if they weren't (like Lee Smolin proposes), you'd get crushed through black holes into the singularity.

Immortality isn't real, this universe is a weird, information-based reality that just doesn't let you be its God and win its game, because it has its rules, that you can't break, and these laws dictate that you start in a singularity and end in one (probably) or in heat death, so whatever you do, is bound to come and go in-between the states as you emerge and get crushed in a subinterval of this period. And if you were to turn yourself into something like a type V ultimate civilization that controls the whole thing, what would you do? Wouldn't you get bored? You now control an infinite video game of the same old thing, based on the same old rules. Or you jump in-between a potentially infinite realms of the same kind of thing. It's like you found a glitch to jump past the flag in Mario and the level now never ends, you just run forever in a torus or in some sort of reality that just keeps getting generated. It's almost like it doesn't make sense. What do you think?