[cdirkx]

With flat-earthers, anti-5G, anti-vaxxers etc. I have always thought about it like the efficiency-stability tradeoff: From a "survival of the group" perspective, it is usefull risk-spreading to have a small percent of your population act different from everybody else, against the current wisdom. It is of course not the most efficient, but if some unforseen catastrophe happens (e.g. the new 6G update accidentally makes everyone sterile) not everything will collapse and at least a few contrarians might survive.

[monus21]

So nature is essentially hedging bets. I wonder if this is unique to the human species?