As the author of the article, I thought I'd add my observation about the comments here.
The point of my post was twofold.
First, an observation about what we think we know. When you say, "tiananmen square massacre" to people, most have a basic understanding of what happened, EXCEPT that the single image they have associated with it is the one of the student in front of the tank. That incident happened, of course, but it was the image selected to "teach" you about that incident, and that's what stuck. 1) This allows you to think you know something (one image), thought you don't know really anything (what was the point of the whole thing?) 2) you know only what someone else decided to tell you. If they had chosen to show you a pic of a student dropping a hand grenade in a tank, well, there you go.
Second, the most pointed criticisms on this board come from scientists (e.g. electromagnetic). This is because you're not relying on words, you're actually trying to understand the process. Some will do it better than others, fine; but my point was that most people are not taught that that process is important, they are taught only to "know" things. In college I knew a guy who could identify a lot (30?) dinosaurs. By name. Is he an expert? Everyone thought he was.
Point: when I asked him what the modern descendant of the triceratops was, he said it was a rhino. And no one disagreed with him, even after I pointed out that triceratops laid eggs and rhinos don't. He didn't know that, but even once he knew it it did not change his thinking; he was taught to think in terms of names and appearances, and he applied himself accordingly. (I write that story up, in case anyone cares.)
That he thought he was an expert is fine; that he didn't know dinos laid eggs is also fine, but it is of importance to understand the divergence between egg layers and mammals. That's where most people fail, and that's entirely the fault of the way we learn: the news.
It's not school-- we barely remember much. But watch a segment on the news, and you think you're informed, and then you extrapolate from that "information" entirely on the force of prejudices you've acquired from watching other news...
Who thinks China is mean to students? Ask around. Then ask them why they think that. I hope it obvious that had the desire of the news media been to tell you that the Chines govt. was nice to them...
I'm probably preaching to the choir here, but let me spin it around. While I'm guessing most of you are technically oriented, how many would bristle if, after a catastrophe, the government refused to send in crisis counselors and mental health support people to the site? It's not been shown to be effective, and could be counterproductive. But your intuition might suggest to you that it should be done, and so the govt. is left defending itself. Or perhaps you have a strong opinion on what Paulson should have done with AIG. Or whatever-- there is some field out of your expertise where you abandon your logical and scientific mind, in favor of prejudice and presumption in the form of empty words. And you don't know it.
The criticism that I am a poor writer is a common one. I know, I know.
I hope I made my point here (and perhaps enticed some readers?) without offending anyone, which is something I try very hard not to do.
Cheers.