All that is a bit vague. A recent (minor) example was getting sick on vacation. I was blaming the crappy hotel bed, the smoke-filled clubs, the airplane ride etc. Only after thinking about it for awhile did I realize that I had been waking up with a scratchy throat for days prior to actually having uncomfortable symptoms and before the flight/bed/club. I had somehow forgotten that I was likely fighting off the illness for days. Now, I’m sure smoky clubs don’t help my immune system at all, but you get the point.

And, like I said, even after realizing that my illness most likely started days before, I would still find myself gravitating toward the flight/bed/club hypothesis and would have to remind myself that no, the illness began days earlier.

Head games make me mad.

1) When I teach lower classpeople (PC term here;-) the USMLE I tell them to weave the the facts of the system/physiology/etc into a story. I make the analogy of an opera. Learn what the opera is about – the general story arc and major themes and sub plots. Then start learning the names of the characters. Then start learning some of the minor themes and sub plots. And finally you can learn the dialogue. I find this method helps immensely when trying to learn vast amounts of knowledge in order to apply them to either board exams or patients. If you can’t remember the character’s name, or how the character relates to other parts of the story, you can at least remember that there should be a character and an interaction and you can then look it up on your smartphone (for patients… they don’t allow those in board exams).

2) When I get into an intense argument with my fiance, I am much more at ease and comfortable admitting that my memory may have been faulty, that the narrative I had may not have been entirely accurate, and that even if it were it may not reflect hers. It leads to mutually beneficial resolution without lingering resentment that I had to “admit I was wrong” or keep tally of who won more arguments. I accept that my brain is faulty and that outcomes are more important than determining if it was my brain, hers, or both that stuffed up. She is not quite as well versed on these topics as I am, but understands and accepts the fundamentals so she is also quite willing to apologize and admit her own irrationality when the need comes.

There are more benefits to skepticism and an understanding of the shortcoming of the human brain than just debunking CAM and religion.

It would also be useful to determine whether there are reasonable reasons that good quality objective evidence is lacking in those cases where it is.

This is related to what I was trying to say above. The problem is that introducing such concepts during a real senario often makes a person defensive, as if you are doubting them personally, since people’s intuitions about how the mind works are generally wrong. People often view their own memories are little movies about what happened, and that they fade or get fuzzy like a poor recording of the event, instead of more correctly viewing their memories as reconstructions based upon a narrative they have created about the event