Skepticism

I remember reading an article one day, many years ago. It said something to the effect of "A recent study of ancient Roman sculptures by John Q. Thusandsuch has revealed that consistently, throughout history, humans have always considered moderation to be the most attractive. Neither too fat, too skinny, too tall or too short."

I then repeated this to my mother, who pointed out that it was obviously false.

At this point, I thought to myself two things. First, I immediately agreed that the article was obviously false. Second, I noticed that I had been taken in by the article. Some of the reasons that lead me to be taken in were:

1. Appearance of reputability: It was printed in a magazine, if I remember correctly.
2. Description of evidence: It mentioned some study.
3. Scientific overtones: ancient Roman sculptures examined and whatnot.
4. Pleasant/non-jarring conclusion: If it had concluded "And therefore, being under 4 feet tall is incredibly attractive", I would have noticed sooner.

The moral is, get to the facts of the matter. Hard evidence matters, and very little else does, unless no hard evidence can be found. In this case, I would have had to supply the hard evidence myself, but it still would have proven reliable.

The other moral is that it takes practice to actual judge assertions on their merits, and not on their overtones of truthiness. I'd encourage everyone to work on that sort of practice.