'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrity

This is a forum for discussing philosophical theories of government and social structure. It is not a venue for partisan rants or plugging favored candidates.

Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Paul Anthony on February 12th, 2017, 4:18 am 

Mossling » Sun Feb 12, 2017 1:09 am wrote:

Now you are saying that health care plan choices were made more limited by ACA. Are you saying that there is a link between the cancelled 'drunk driver' policies and the reduction in choices? Please provide some evidence. Otherwise, it seems that you have conceded your point regarding Obama's alleged lie, with your silence on the unregulated 'toxic' policies speaking for itself.


This is getting ridiculous.

Before the ACA, people could choose how much and what type of coverage they wanted to purchase. The ACA standardized medical insurance, requiring all policies to provide the same coverage. Yes, that's a reduction in choices.

I have not conceded any point, but if believing i have will get you to stop, believe it. :)
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Mossling on February 12th, 2017, 4:23 am 

Paul Anthony » February 12th, 2017, 5:04 pm wrote:I happened across a right-wing news source on-line that referred to the nations involved in the ban as "Seven war-torn countries". That caught my attention because every other news source (even FOX) seemed to refer to them as "Seven mostly-Muslim countries".

Both statements are true.

Why don't most media mention that these are "war-torn" countries? Well, saying that might be biased toward Trump's argument that the ban is about terrorists.

But isn't saying "mostly-Muslim" countries biased toward the argument that it is a ban on Muslims?

If journalism means reporting the news without bias, isn't it sufficient to just name the seven countries? Adding additional - although true - information leads us to think about the news differently.

Maybe because of this factor:

Trump's order is a balm for Christians, not a ban on Muslims
CNN, January 30, 2017
President Trump has also been condemned for signaling he will give priority to persecuted religious minorities in the Middle East, which means admitting higher numbers of Christian and Yazidi refugees fleeing beheadings, drownings, and other forms of mass torture. Some critics have mistakenly argued that religion should not be a factor in refugee admissions. However, as attorney David French points out, "Religious considerations are by law part of refugee policy. And it is entirely reasonable to give preference... to members of minority religions."
User avatar
Mossling
Active Member
 
Posts: 1138
Joined: 02 Jul 2009
Blog: View Blog (54)


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Mossling on February 12th, 2017, 4:33 am 

Paul Anthony » February 12th, 2017, 5:18 pm wrote:This is getting ridiculous.

I agree, but you continue to seem to think that these points are relevant to Obama allegedly falsely promising that people could keep their legal plans - an alleged post-truth manipulation of the masses.
Before the ACA, people could choose how much and what type of coverage they wanted to purchase. The ACA standardized medical insurance, requiring all policies to provide the same coverage. Yes, that's a reduction in choices.

And this reduction in choices caused existing legal plans to be cancelled upon ACA coming into effect? If so, do you have supporting evidence?
I hate to come across as a "gadfly" here, but the topic is all about the truth.
User avatar
Mossling
Active Member
 
Posts: 1138
Joined: 02 Jul 2009
Blog: View Blog (54)


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby wolfhnd on February 12th, 2017, 5:31 am 

https://www.americanactionforum.org/res ... e-numbers/

Nice overview of ACA. The bottom line is even the experts don't know what effect the law has had. The only thing we can agree on is that it was very expensive. That is not an argument against it but it seems clear that to get those that remain uninsured insured it will cost a lot more. If I have to choose between avoiding financial ruin and universal health care I will vote against universal health care.

As I have pointed out in other posts taxing the rich will not solve the problem because the markets are grotesquely inflated. It isn't that I'm against higher taxes for the rich. The problem is on the other side however in the creation of real wealth. The rich just as in 1929 and 2007 are hiding the inflationary pressure of massive public debt because they can't consume enough to expose it.

If the rich respond to high taxes by selling paper assets the ponzi scheme will be exposed because their value will plummet.

We are stuck between a rock and hard place. The answer I see is to increase productivity to pay for welfare and the system is primed to resist it. Workers will revolt if they think that their increased effort goes to others and the rich will take a big slice of productivity increases to offset higher taxes. At some point everyone bails from the system and we have another depression.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4256
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)
Paul Anthony liked this post


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Mossling on February 12th, 2017, 7:32 am 

So it seems that weve done the ACA debacle 'to death'. Some people had toxic plans that needed upgrading, and Obama did his best to give companies time to catch up. Thus, people were able to keep their healthy insurance plans when ACA took effect, but over time the old plans were eventually phased out by the insurance companies themselves who saw that they could actually earn more money from Obama's changes. This does not appear to mean that Obama set out to deceive the public, and thus 'post-truth politics' is not apparently something that has been around since Obama's time. This is the new administration's agenda.

Moving on to this now:

Fake news is 'killing people's minds', says Apple boss Tim Cook
The Guardian, 11 February 2017
Fake news is “killing people’s minds”, Tim Cook, the head of Apple, has said. The technology boss said firms such as his own needed to create tools that would help stem the spread of falsehoods, without impinging on freedom of speech.

Cook also called for governments to lead information campaigns to crack down on fake news in an interview with a British national newspaper. The scourge of falsehoods in mainstream political discourse came to the fore during recent campaigns, during which supporters of each side were accused of promoting misinformation for political gain.

“We are going through this period of time right here where unfortunately some of the people that are winning are the people that spend their time trying to get the most clicks, not tell the most truth,” Cook told the Daily Telegraph. “It’s killing people’s minds, in a way.”

[...]

He said that a crackdown would mean that “truthful, reliable, non-sensational, deep news outlets will win”, adding: “The [rise of fake news] is a short-term thing. I don’t believe that people want that.”

While instances were seen among supporters of both sides of the recent US election battle, Donald Trump’s campaign was seen by many as a particular beneficiary of fake news reports.

And the US president’s team has been caught sending aides out to insist that a huge crowd had attended his inauguration, when the evidence showed a relatively modest audience was there.

[...]

A study by economists at Stanford University and New York University published two months after November’s US presidential election found that in the run-up to the vote, fake anti-Clinton stories had been shared 30 million times on Facebook, while those favouring her were shared eight million times.

It said: “The average American saw and remembered 0.92 pro-Trump fake news stories and 0.23 pro-Clinton fake news stories, with just over half of those who recalled seeing fake news stories believing them.”

[...]

...Cook demanded action to decrease the reach of fake news. “We need the modern version of a public service announcement campaign. It can be done quickly, if there is a will.”

He added: “It has to be ingrained in the schools, it has to be ingrained in the public. There has to be a massive campaign. We have to think through every demographic... It’s almost as if a new course is required for the modern kid, for the digital kid.
User avatar
Mossling
Active Member
 
Posts: 1138
Joined: 02 Jul 2009
Blog: View Blog (54)


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Braininvat on February 12th, 2017, 1:19 pm 

Wow, this thread has been all over the place since I stopped by yesterday. The "morality" of various insurance plans. The wealth of nations with natural resources. (hint: it's "value added" economies that do best, rather than raw resource shippers)

One of the things that hurts truth is when people are conditioned not to talk about the root issues of how their society is run. Like we can't talk about national health care because no one can bring up the S word. But that's where a real conversation would be useful. Is choice the greater good, in health? Or is just having everyone get the same complete womb-to-tomb care better? Should we do it like France? Or should the feds and state just get out of it entirely? We also don't have that conversation about tap water, where the situation is reversed. No one gets any choice on that, we all just get the same exact water. Your water company doesn't offer "premium" plans for what comes out your faucet. No one offers a "low chlorine option" (which for people prone to arrhythmia is actually a good idea). (the people in Flint, Michigan might have been interested in a system with choices, too) No one worries too much about socialized water. Or socialized buses. Or socialized garbage pickup. The buses come and go, the water splurts out when you turn on the tap, the trash bin gets emptied, life goes on.

I'd guess the difference lies partly in how media and politicians and businesses direct our attention and anxiety. And partly the sheer mindnumbing expense of keeping people alive in a country where people, let's face it, take horrible care of themselves. One reason healthcare in France is HALF per capita what it is here is that the French do things like (a) walk places, and (b) eat real food that's both delicious and wholesome, and (c) stress less about shit that doesn't matter. When you pay your tax share for health, in France, you are less likely to be contributing to the million dollars it's going to take to keep someone alive who lives on Cheetohs and weighs 300 pounds. To me, as an American who walks and hikes all the time and eats a Mediterranean diet, it's not a big priority to help out the Cheetoh chubs sitting on their little electric scooters as they whirr around the Mall. Frankly, I feel like they have made THEIR choice long ago when they decided to treat their bodies like crap.

Hey, look, I veered offtopic, too. It's so easy to do here. :-)
User avatar
Braininvat
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5659
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills
MosslingPaul Anthony liked this post


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby d30 on February 12th, 2017, 6:07 pm 

THINKING FLAWS LIST:
A PROPOSAL TO BEAR FRUIT 
FROM THIS ALL-IMPORTANT THREAD.
(Thanks again, Mossling.)

Our world desperately needs us to identify the basic, truth-blocking flaws in thinking contaminating our zeitgeist, internationally, as evidenced by the term “post-truth era” gone “viral” now in wake of Brexit and the election of Trump.

Then, knowing the thinking-flaws list, concisely, we can teach them to anyone ongoingly, saying, e.g., “nationalreview.com” is a confirmation-bias site, and they pass them on to others, and so on, until we have a growingly more science-minded, objective, truth-dedicated populace, possibly rescuing Earth.

Request you add your own flawed-thinking candidate using a concise term easy to remember, if there are any others, to these initial two I’m proposing.

1. CONFIRMATION BIAS.
To me this is the salient, most significant thinking flaw, basic to all or nearly all religious and poli-socio-economic conflict. Thanks to Lomax, I’m finally aware this flaw has this nice, concise name (even an article at wikipedia). The way I’d long described it is: Never confuse for the truth your preferences; i.e., there is a difference between the truth and what you WANT to be the truth.

NOTE: This major thinking flaw is manifest in the polarization of media thus populace into, e.g., FOX “News” vs. MSNBC on TV, Limbaugh vs. Thom Hartmann on radio, and Internet sites catering to one’s bias instead of giving the whole, big picture for ALL to see: e.g., Breitbart vs. Politico.

2. SPECIOUS REASONING (SOPHISTRY).
Assuming something true in one context/situation is true in all. E.g., throwing water on a grease fire (spreading it), because water generally works in other fire situations. Dictionary definitions I’ve seen put it this way: specious - an assumption that makes superficial sense but proves false upon further study.

Again, if you know of others, and can name it with an easy-to-recall term, then define it simply and briefly, please help formulate this THINKING FLAWS LIST. Might just be the way to save the world we’ve been looking for.
d30
Member
 
Posts: 245
Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Location: San Diego area


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Paul Anthony on February 12th, 2017, 6:42 pm 

Confirmation bias is but one of many cognitive biases. Rather than type them here, refer to this list:

http://io9.gizmodo.com/5974468/the-most-common-cognitive-biases-that-prevent-you-from-being-rational
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby d30 on February 12th, 2017, 10:37 pm 

Paul Anthony » February 12th, 2017, 2:42 pm wrote:Confirmation bias is but one of many cognitive biases. Rather than type them here, refer to this list:

http://io9.gizmodo.com/5974468/the-most-common-cognitive-biases-that-prevent-you-from-being-rational

That was helpful in what it led to, as follows. Of the 12 thinking flaws explained there, all, even including the one at the top of the list, confirmation bias, are just examples of the second of the two flaws I proposed for our list of thinking flaws - specious reasoning, which should have been #1 as I will now propose at the end here.

It's grossly inefficient, a severe violation of Occam's Razor, to list 12 thinking flaws when understanding and staying mindful of just that one - specious reasoning - will, if assimilated and practiced, prevent all twelve of the manifestations of specious reasoning they listed.

With this I also see now that my #1 candidate for the thinking-flaws list, confirmation bias, is also just an example of specious reasoning, but in our era should be strongly noted under specious reasoning due to the greatly amplified exacerbation of it by some strictly partisan TV channels (FOX and MSNBC, e.g.), 91% right-wing talk radio, plus severely one-sided Internet sites. All are presented in ways to make them seem like journalistic operations when what they are is extremely dangerous population polarizers, heavily contributing to this ominous "post-truth era."

So then, our list now looks like this:

1. Specious Reasoning (paralogism):
Including confirmation bias and many other examples of speciousness such as bandwagoning ("herd mentality") and probability neglect (as of the fact flying is safer than driving), specious reasoning is assuming something is true because it makes superficial sense but which proves false upon further examination; an example is throwing water on a grease fire (spreading it), because we've seen water generally works in other fire situations. One way to detect specious reasoning is asking, "Is my assumption valid in most or all other contexts?" (e.g., grease fires).

If anyone has another item for this thinking-flaws list that is distinct from Specious Reasoning, please suggest it in a nice concise term with as brief as possible explanation. The purpose is to have such an organized list in mind so we can always be ready to try and alert others, and ourselves, to our need to avoid such bad thinking processes that are seriously endangering our world.
d30
Member
 
Posts: 245
Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Location: San Diego area


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Paul Anthony on February 13th, 2017, 12:09 am 

Now that your "list" only contains one item, perhaps you should stop calling it a list. :)
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Braininvat liked this post


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby wolfhnd on February 13th, 2017, 12:32 am 

Braininvat » Sun Feb 12, 2017 5:19 pm wrote:Wow, this thread has been all over the place since I stopped by yesterday. The "morality" of various insurance plans. The wealth of nations with natural resources. (hint: it's "value added" economies that do best, rather than raw resource shippers)


Hint I said that I was tired and just beginning a discussion. Stop being snarky.

Do you think that Saudi Arabia is rich because it adds value to it's oil exports? Exports alone do not explain the difference between Canada's debt and the U.S. debt but it is a factor.

The U.S. trade deficit for 2016 was -$469 billion and GDP was $18,561 trillion or 2.5 percent of GDP. Canada's trade deficit was -$56 billion and GDP was $1.532 trillion or 3.7 percent of GDP. The U.S. cumulative account balance 1980 till 2008 is -7.335 trillion or -24,098 per capita. Canada's cumulative account balance 1980 till 2008 is -56.757 billion and per capita is -1,706. Norway's cumulative account balance 1980 till 2008 is +444.011 billion or +92,522 per capita.

The U.S. as the richest nation on earth is something of a myth. It may have the largest economy but it does not have a per capita advantage over many other countries especially when debt is taken into account.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4256
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby d30 on February 13th, 2017, 12:46 am 

Paul Anthony » February 12th, 2017, 8:09 pm wrote:Now that your "list" only contains one item, perhaps you should stop calling it a list. :)

I'm waiting to see if others like Lomax might know other thinking flaws fundamentally different from specious reasoning. If not, then it indeed becomes not a list but just a general rule - that speciousness is something to always watch out for in our thinking and that of others.

I don't recall seeing a post by you indicating that you think sometimes in terms of solutions, advance, progress. Seems you participate to challenge and debate.
d30
Member
 
Posts: 245
Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Location: San Diego area


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby wolfhnd on February 13th, 2017, 1:07 am 

Braininvat » Sun Feb 12, 2017 5:19 pm wrote:One of the things that hurts truth is when people are conditioned not to talk about the root issues of how their society is run. Like we can't talk about national health care because no one can bring up the S word. But that's where a real conversation would be useful. Is choice the greater good, in health? Or is just having everyone get the same complete womb-to-tomb care better? Should we do it like France? Or should the feds and state just get out of it entirely? We also don't have that conversation about tap water, where the situation is reversed. No one gets any choice on that, we all just get the same exact water. Your water company doesn't offer "premium" plans for what comes out your faucet. No one offers a "low chlorine option" (which for people prone to arrhythmia is actually a good idea). (the people in Flint, Michigan might have been interested in a system with choices, too) No one worries too much about socialized water. Or socialized buses. Or socialized garbage pickup. The buses come and go, the water splurts out when you turn on the tap, the trash bin gets emptied, life goes on.

I'd guess the difference lies partly in how media and politicians and businesses direct our attention and anxiety. And partly the sheer mindnumbing expense of keeping people alive in a country where people, let's face it, take horrible care of themselves. One reason healthcare in France is HALF per capita what it is here is that the French do things like (a) walk places, and (b) eat real food that's both delicious and wholesome, and (c) stress less about shit that doesn't matter. When you pay your tax share for health, in France, you are less likely to be contributing to the million dollars it's going to take to keep someone alive who lives on Cheetohs and weighs 300 pounds. To me, as an American who walks and hikes all the time and eats a Mediterranean diet, it's not a big priority to help out the Cheetoh chubs sitting on their little electric scooters as they whirr around the Mall. Frankly, I feel like they have made THEIR choice long ago when they decided to treat their bodies like crap.



This thread is about Truth in Politics but it has mostly focused on what is true and what is not. Most of the time it is what is not being discussed that is the most important consideration. There are truths little T and truths big T and sorting them out is where we can get a handle on what to prioritize.

What I see in this thread is a lot of categorization of basic points of logic but like truth logic only answers question within the framework the information is presented. There is also an issue with moralizing that has more to do with what should be than what is.

The ACA is just a nice topic to discuss Truth in Politics around. It may not address the issue in a broader sense but focusing on the broader sense makes the discussion a debate and debates in general are not about practical truths but more about defeating an opponent. Discussions should be more flexible than debates and I feel are more productive in general.

Bringing up lifestyles is a good way to be more holistic. Comparing countries and simply saying what worked in one will work in another is short sighted. We should of course backup our assertion that U.S. life styles are increasing the cost of medical care with some data. I may do that later but I think we can safely assume it is true. Part of lifestyle has to do with relative poverty so we will need to compare that factor when trying to assess what contributes to unhealthy life styles and how it compares in various nations. The bottom line however is that there will simply be too many factors to come to any hard conclusions.

One of the problems I have always had with philosophy is that a well made argument and perfect logic does not guarantee that a position reflects reality in a meaningful way. We see the same problem in physics today where the elegance of the equations are mistaken for good science. The question here I believe has much to do with verification of theories by using facts on the ground so to speak. We accumulate a lot of data and present are theories but we really don't have a science of sociology sufficiently rigorous to tell us what should be prioritized. This is a general problem in the study of all complex chaotic systems. In such systems we are very poor at predicting the consequences of any particular action. Intuition and sweeping generalizations may be unavoidable and lead to unnecessary conflicts in the absence of humility.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4256
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)
ronjanecBraininvat liked this post


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Paul Anthony on February 13th, 2017, 1:11 am 

d30 » Sun Feb 12, 2017 9:46 pm wrote:
Paul Anthony » February 12th, 2017, 8:09 pm wrote:Now that your "list" only contains one item, perhaps you should stop calling it a list. :)

I'm waiting to see if others like Lomax might know other thinking flaws fundamentally different from specious reasoning. If not, then it indeed becomes not a list but just a general rule - that speciousness is something to always watch out for in our thinking and that of others.

I don't recall seeing a post by you indicating that you think sometimes in terms of solutions, advance, progress. Seems you participate to challenge and debate.


My, My, how quickly they forget. I provided a real list of 12 commonly known biases. Apparently you'd never heard of them even though they have been known for many years. You're welcome anyway.
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Braininvat on February 13th, 2017, 10:41 am 

Do you think that Saudi Arabia is rich because it adds value to it's oil exports? Exports alone do not explain the difference between Canada's debt and the U.S. debt but it is a factor.
- Wolfhound


Yes. Sorry that sounded snarky earlier. Because I mostly agree. All I meant about "value added" is that countries like Saud lack longterm sustainable wealth because they export a raw material that's quite finite (and the last 30% is very expensive to extract), so they are "bubble economies." Whereas nations like Germany and Japan and Norway tend to take a raw material and turn it into a consumer product, e.g. logs into furniture, metal ores into luxury cars, etc. The difference between US and Japan was never more stark than when we were shipping raw logs to them from Oregon and they were selling them back to us at orders of magnitude greater value as furniture, tool handles, shoji screens, etc.
User avatar
Braininvat
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5659
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Braininvat on February 13th, 2017, 10:52 am 

I'm waiting to see if others like Lomax might know other thinking flaws fundamentally different from specious reasoning. If not, then it indeed becomes not a list but just a general rule - that speciousness is something to always watch out for in our thinking and that of others.





D30, your request for thinking flaws other than specious reasoning....I'm not sure but what these aren't nearly synonymous. It's like asking for frozen forms of water other than ice. Specious reasoning is what results from a thinking flaw, isn't it? Paul's list was just breaking it down for us, giving many of the forms of specious reasoning.

Maybe if we define thinking more broadly, e.g. all forms of cognition, then we could add things like hallucination, phantom limb syndrome, all the stuff Oliver Sacks writes about, psychosis, etc. But I'm not sure that basic perceptual distortions are that relevant to the domain we're talking about here.
User avatar
Braininvat
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5659
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby d30 on February 13th, 2017, 7:15 pm 

Braininvat » February 13th, 2017, 6:52 am wrote:
I'm waiting to see if others like Lomax might know other thinking flaws fundamentally different from specious reasoning. If not, then it indeed becomes not a list but just a general rule - that speciousness is something to always watch out for in our thinking and that of others.


D30, your request for thinking flaws other than specious reasoning....I'm not sure but what these aren't nearly synonymous. It's like asking for frozen forms of water other than ice. Specious reasoning is what results from a thinking flaw, isn't it? Paul's list was just breaking it down for us, giving many of the forms of specious reasoning.

Maybe if we define thinking more broadly, e.g. all forms of cognition, then we could add things like hallucination, phantom limb syndrome, all the stuff Oliver Sacks writes about, psychosis, etc. But I'm not sure that basic perceptual distortions are that relevant to the domain we're talking about here.


Yeah, I was thinking it might turn out that way - that the term specious reasoning covers all thinking flaws. But I wanted to check with all of you to be sure there aren't any other causes of bad conclusions (specious reasoning) by otherwise healthy, non-hallucinating people. Also, yeah, Paul made a good contribution.
d30
Member
 
Posts: 245
Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Location: San Diego area


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby d30 on February 13th, 2017, 7:26 pm 

Paul Anthony » February 12th, 2017, 9:11 pm wrote:
d30 » Sun Feb 12, 2017 9:46 pm wrote:
Paul Anthony » February 12th, 2017, 8:09 pm wrote:Now that your "list" only contains one item, perhaps you should stop calling it a list. :)

I'm waiting to see if others like Lomax might know other thinking flaws fundamentally different from specious reasoning. If not, then it indeed becomes not a list but just a general rule - that speciousness is something to always watch out for in our thinking and that of others.

I don't recall seeing a post by you indicating that you think sometimes in terms of solutions, advance, progress. Seems you participate to challenge and debate.


My, My, how quickly they forget. I provided a real list of 12 commonly known biases. Apparently you'd never heard of them even though they have been known for many years. You're welcome anyway.


Yeah, you did make a positive contribution. Thanks for it, and sorry for the oversight, though please note that in my initial response I did say it was helpful (the link to the article listing 12 forms of specious reasoning).
d30
Member
 
Posts: 245
Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Location: San Diego area


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Paul Anthony on February 13th, 2017, 7:50 pm 

d30 » Mon Feb 13, 2017 4:26 pm wrote:

Yeah, you did make a positive contribution. Thanks for it, and sorry for the oversight, though please note that in my initial response I did say it was helpful (the link to the article listing 12 forms of specious reasoning).


Thank you. Now, I have a suggestion. Specious thinking may encompass all 12 on the list and more, but consider the value of the list. Of course we want to avoid specious thinking, but to do so we must recognize it in all its varied forms. Listing them separately gives us specific things to avoid.

Just stating that specious thinking must be avoided is a little like abolishing all laws and replacing them with one: "Don't do bad things".
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ
d30 liked this post


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby wolfhnd on February 13th, 2017, 9:01 pm 

I knew a paleontologist that didn't believe in evolution and several geologist of a similar mindset that did pretty good work.

I have seen brilliant theoretical scientist make some pretty absurd political choices. Some brilliant scientist have been outright bigots when it came to social issues. Being brilliant in one area does not give you licence to not dig into other topics you may want to pontificate on.

If you think eliminating specious thinking is the answer to restoring truth justice and social order I have my doubts.

I think you can just keep it simple and focus on work ethic. Work ethic does not solve personal relationship problems but in the public domain it would go along way toward restoring Truth in Politics. The evil genius is really kind of a mythological figure. When I was watching documentaries on the 2008 financial collapse what struck me was how stupid the top banksters seem to be. When I watch news outlets trying to take down Trump what strikes me is how often they dug a whole for themselves by not vetting their sources. Clinton didn't lose the election because of some vast Russian conspiracy she lost because she had incompetent and lazy security. When I looked at Bernie Sanders what struck me was here is a guy that couldn't even see his wife was destroying the university she ran. Talk after all is cheap but it takes dedication and hard work to research.

We are lazy, our reporters are lazy, our politicians are lazy, everyone is looking for the quick fix, the free, the easy solution, the obvious. Work ethic however is not just about digging deep it is also about providing the best service that you can. Work ethic is not just about you working hard but it is about holding the people around you to the same standard. Work ethic requires you to not only provide the best product but to do so with the least social cost. Work ethic requires you to not beat your kids into submission but to spend the time to develop their personalities. Work ethic means if you want to get a social justice degree you may need to get additional degrees in history, economics, sociology, biology and another to support yourself. If you work on Wall Street work ethic means you should do your research and make money the old fashion way.

The problem with Bush junior and his neo con buddies wasn't that they were stupid or Nazi degenerates it was they took the easy way out. Instead of saving the petrodollar by making it a valuable exchange currency they invaded Iraq. Clinton and Obama did the same thing with Gadhafi. When the CIA decided to arm the anti Russian forces in Afghanistan they didn't vet the people they were giving weapons to beyond they hated Russians.

I'm not suggesting that all the evils in the world are a result of laziness but a good portion of them are. People become addicted to drugs because it is easier than fixing their personality defects. People become addicted to ideologies because it is easier than dealing with the world the way it really is.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4256
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)
Paul Anthony liked this post


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby d30 on February 13th, 2017, 10:55 pm 

Paul Anthony » February 13th, 2017, 3:50 pm wrote:I have a suggestion. Specious thinking may encompass all 12 on the list and more, but consider the value of the list. Of course we want to avoid specious thinking, but to do so we must recognize it in all its varied forms. Listing them separately gives us specific things to avoid. Just stating that specious thinking must be avoided is a little like abolishing all laws and replacing them with one: "Don't do bad things".


wolfhnd » February 13th, 2017, 5:01 pm wrote:If you think eliminating specious thinking is the answer to restoring truth justice and social order I have my doubts.


Wlfhnd, and PA, can't we assume it would be a boon to truth thus political and social harmony thus great progress if, per Paul's prescription, our educators note the fundamental importance of disciplined scientific thinking, especially including avoidance of specious reasoning in all its forms, and made that an indispensable and mandatory course for all high school seniors - at least one semester - given its crucial importance in all aspects of living life?
d30
Member
 
Posts: 245
Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Location: San Diego area


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Paul Anthony on February 13th, 2017, 11:35 pm 

d30 » Mon Feb 13, 2017 7:55 pm wrote: can't we assume it would be a boon to truth thus political and social harmony thus great progress if, per Paul's prescription, our educators note the fundamental importance of disciplined scientific thinking, especially including avoidance of specious reasoning in all its forms, and made that an indispensable and mandatory course for all high school seniors - at least one semester - given its crucial importance in all aspects of living life?



Education is the key to most progress. Teaching critical thinking, which by its very nature would included teaching how not to think, would be a good idea.
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby wolfhnd on February 13th, 2017, 11:38 pm 

d30 » Tue Feb 14, 2017 2:55 am wrote:
Paul Anthony » February 13th, 2017, 3:50 pm wrote:I have a suggestion. Specious thinking may encompass all 12 on the list and more, but consider the value of the list. Of course we want to avoid specious thinking, but to do so we must recognize it in all its varied forms. Listing them separately gives us specific things to avoid. Just stating that specious thinking must be avoided is a little like abolishing all laws and replacing them with one: "Don't do bad things".


wolfhnd » February 13th, 2017, 5:01 pm wrote:If you think eliminating specious thinking is the answer to restoring truth justice and social order I have my doubts.


Wlfhnd, and PA, can't we assume it would be a boon to truth thus political and social harmony thus great progress if, per Paul's prescription, our educators note the fundamental importance of disciplined scientific thinking, especially including avoidance of specious reasoning in all its forms, and made that an indispensable and mandatory course for all high school seniors - at least one semester - given its crucial importance in all aspects of living life?


I'm leaning more toward good old fashion values myself. Two parent families, work ethics, respect for law and order, a little medication practice to find internal peace, economics so they understand nothing is free, civic duty, team sports for cooperation, return to bell curve grading so they understand not everyone is equal, real sex education not pandering to social norms, real history not multiculturalism, elimination of political theory and substitution of political reality, thinking tools not philosophy, real math not new math, competition not norming, etc.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4256
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Paul Anthony on February 14th, 2017, 12:12 am 

wolfhnd » Mon Feb 13, 2017 8:38 pm wrote:

I'm leaning more toward good old fashion values myself. Two parent families, work ethics, respect for law and order, a little medication practice to find internal peace, economics so they understand nothing is free, civic duty, team sports for cooperation, return to bell curve grading so they understand not everyone is equal, real sex education not pandering to social norms, real history not multiculturalism, elimination of political theory and substitution of political reality, thinking tools not philosophy, real math not new math, competition not norming, etc.


Well, of course. Critical thinking is a valuable thing to learn but it's not the only valuable thing worth learning.

While I agree with most of what you have proposed, I don't see how we can force people to adhere to all of it, especially the two-parent families.:)
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Forest_Dump on February 14th, 2017, 9:52 am 

wolfhnd wrote:I'm leaning more toward good old fashion values myself. Two parent families, work ethics, respect for law and order, a little medication practice to find internal peace, economics so they understand nothing is free, civic duty, team sports for cooperation, return to bell curve grading so they understand not everyone is equal, real sex education not pandering to social norms, real history not multiculturalism, elimination of political theory and substitution of political reality, thinking tools not philosophy, real math not new math, competition not norming, etc.


Looks to me like you might even be guilty of what you are complaining about - in this case uncritically lumping a whole bunch of things together as though if one is bad then they all must be. What is "real history" vs. "multiculturalism"? Why are you suggesting we not teach "political theory"? What's wrong with that? And are you suggesting that we should just blindly (?) accept political reality and give up trying to make the world a better place? Since when are thinking tools not philosophy?
User avatar
Forest_Dump
Resident Member
 
Posts: 8708
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Location: Great Lakes Region


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Paul Anthony on February 14th, 2017, 12:20 pm 

Another case of fake news:

A series of fake tweets using an unverified Twitter account purporting to be Gen. Michael Flynn's was picked up by major news outlets, including The New York Times, early Tuesday. In one tweet, the supposed Flynn, who resigned Monday night as President Donald Trump's national security adviser, suggested he was angry about becoming a "scapegoat."

The New York Times and other outlets revised their reports after realizing the account was unverified and recently established.

Good for them. They did some fact-checking. Too bad they didn't do that before they ran with the story.
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5718
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Mossling on February 15th, 2017, 4:15 am 

Well, with regards to solutions and the situation regarding truth and democratic governance of a nation, it is not as if these topics have never been discussed by philosophers in the past.

Socrates, for example, disagreed with democracy as a foundation for a healthy society because it could quite easily allow a 'sheep to command an army of lions' if the sheep's rhetoric was sophisticated enough. Instead, Socrates believed the philosophical understanding of Truth - our assumptions and how we so easily elevate them to factual status - is the ultimate foundation to a healthy society.

How does one get a grasp on truth? By never elevating assumptions to facts - as we see in science - there are theories, but not unshakeable laws. The truth is that all truths are relative.

How does this affect news reporting and the 'truths' being put across in the media? By the media qualifying their information in accordance with this truth of relative truths - giving accurate sources of raw, physical evidence so that readers can gain their own perspective beyond the filter of other human minds, should they wish to. Donald Trump's word against photos of an inauguration crowd is just that - a human memory against photos. It speaks for itself. Similarly - General Flynn's memory against wiretap recordings. Flynn "can't remember" so he said that he didn't discuss the recent sanctions against Russia with the Russians. The wiretaps say otherwise.

So as long as good enough quality physical evidence exists, is made available, and is referenced by the media, then truth can prevail. But maybe this starts with academia and then trickles down?

From doing my own research, I often find that authors rarely give comprehensive references and sources to 'facts'. Page numbers are often missing, or authors are just assuming that their academic standing means that they are to be believed because they are capable of referencing, even though no one checks up on them.

I hate the way, for example, that in academically produced books, often the referencing is so far away from the 'fact' - one has to go to some appendix and then decipher the shorthand used, and then find the original title that was printed only once near the beginning of the references section, and so on and so forth. Often I just give up.

Just stick the reference in the footnotes on the very page that it relates to and with full title, year, page number, and so forth, and even maybe a few words from the main sentence so that we can search for it in electronic versions of documents that much faster.

We're not living in medieval times anymore, with leatherbound books on a study shelf. We have better technology, and alleged facts can be referenced more intelligently. I think this would be a good start!
User avatar
Mossling
Active Member
 
Posts: 1138
Joined: 02 Jul 2009
Blog: View Blog (54)
d30Paul Anthony liked this post


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby wolfhnd on February 16th, 2017, 10:10 pm 

Forest_Dump » Tue Feb 14, 2017 1:52 pm wrote:
wolfhnd wrote:I'm leaning more toward good old fashion values myself. Two parent families, work ethics, respect for law and order, a little medication practice to find internal peace, economics so they understand nothing is free, civic duty, team sports for cooperation, return to bell curve grading so they understand not everyone is equal, real sex education not pandering to social norms, real history not multiculturalism, elimination of political theory and substitution of political reality, thinking tools not philosophy, real math not new math, competition not norming, etc.


Looks to me like you might even be guilty of what you are complaining about - in this case uncritically lumping a whole bunch of things together as though if one is bad then they all must be. What is "real history" vs. "multiculturalism"? Why are you suggesting we not teach "political theory"? What's wrong with that? And are you suggesting that we should just blindly (?) accept political reality and give up trying to make the world a better place? Since when are thinking tools not philosophy?


I'm going to assume that these questions are statements and move on.

We can discuss them at a later date if you like.

If nothing else I think that we can agree that we prioritize truths.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4256
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby Forest_Dump on February 16th, 2017, 11:20 pm 

wolfhnd wrote:I'm going to assume that these questions are statements and move on.

We can discuss them at a later date if you like.


For my part, those are serious questions. I think I believe in fairly old-fashioned values myself but I suppose that means a belief in progress, education, etc.
User avatar
Forest_Dump
Resident Member
 
Posts: 8708
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Location: Great Lakes Region


Re: 'Post-Truth Politics' - Collapse in Information Integrit

Postby wolfhnd on February 17th, 2017, 7:21 am 

Forest_Dump » Fri Feb 17, 2017 3:20 am wrote:
wolfhnd wrote:I'm going to assume that these questions are statements and move on.

We can discuss them at a later date if you like.


For my part, those are serious questions. I think I believe in fairly old-fashioned values myself but I suppose that means a belief in progress, education, etc.


I don't want to be offensive but I will reiterate my position. It's not that I'm opposed to an education in philosophy but to the idea that it can be meaningful without being vetted by experience. What allowed us to move forward past the ancient philosophers was not so much better logic but the realization that internal consistency was no substitute for verifiable experience.

A brain without external stimulation cannot develop all biological processes are environmental responses it is the nature of reality. Reality is experience in the external objective sense and subjective internally. Ideas like freewill are real and essential they just are not what most people think they are.

The internal world is the reordering of experience. Dreaming has it's function it may even play a role in insight but introducing logic to dreams does not alter the fact that there evolved function is not reasoning. Logic may help develop reasoning by habitation but reasoning if entirely internal is dreaming. It is just the reordering of experience and is unrestricted by external reality.

When we say science has superseded philosophy it is not saying that philosophy is dead only that it's traditional practice has been restrained by the realization that verifiable external experience must be a check on the philosopher's dreams. Here we should consider something like mathematics which has no apparent external verifiable experience but I would argue against that position. Something for another day perhaps.

If education is simply the transmission of dreams then it's value in solving the practical problem of truth in politics is questionable. It may have very real value in creating environmental conditions for favorable cohesion within social groups and for emotional development but that is not what we generally mean by truth.

As always these discussions devolve down to definitions. What is truth for example but I have tried to point out that clarifying what truth is may not get you any closer to "the truth". In this case it is the the that is important. We may all have our own legitimate truths but in politics it is their prioritization that is critical.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4256
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


PreviousNext

Return to Political Theory

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests