Why do even intelligent and educated people often believe nonsense? For example, Arthur Conan Doyle, the writer who invented Sherlock Holmes, the detective who solved his cases with scientific precision.
Therefore, Conan Doyle knew very well what empirical evidence and rationality is, and yet he was a follower of spiritualism. His friend, the famous magician Houdini, tried unsuccessfully to convince Conan Doyle away from this humbug, probably arguing in a similar way as Sherlock Holmes solved his cases: by referring to evidence and rationality.
The reason why Conan Doyle believed in spiritualism: His wife was a well-known spiritualist who also organized séances. So if her husband had been convinced by Houdini, he would have admitted that his wife was a fraud who took advantage of people's credulity.
Conan Doyle, however, apparently loved his wife more than the scientific method, and that is why he remained a follower of spiritualism throughout his life, although by using his intelligence and education he would have been able to debunk this as humbug.
And so it is in many cases: We believe in things because we have a vital interest in these things being true. And reason then serves only to justify this belief.
Bertrand Russell said that thinking is the most difficult thing a human being can do. That being the case even the most diamond hard rationalist will occasionally entertain some belief, even if only momentarily or for a brief period.
Ah, love … the great rationality attenuator!
That was my conclusion, as well, but you said it nicer. My reply had an anatomy part in it. LOL. Sherlock was an ideal which Doyle killed off because it was extreme.
You shouldn't have such an open mind that your brains fall out. Ha, ha.
Doyle let himself be convinced of fairies by a couple of children playing with a borrowed camera and cardboard cutouts. Ha, ha again.[bbc.com]
Cottingley Fairies, Wikipedia -- [en.m.wikipedia.org]
I try in general to follow a maxim written by George Polya many years ago:"Do not believe anything, but question only what is worth questioning".
A question to always ask is -- how much effort am I willing to spend agreeing with claim?
Or should I just assume it's false until evidence supports it?
Effort wins for me.