5 ms·
From the article: "Proctor explains that ignorance can often be propagated under the guise of balanced debate. For example, the common idea that there will alw
by ACow_Adonis 11y ago
From the article:
"Proctor explains that ignorance can often be propagated under the guise of balanced debate. For example, the common idea that there will always be two opposing views does not always result in a rational conclusion."
So i'm not sure if you're serious, or being ironic...
Either way, that articles have to be "even handed" or present "both sides of the story" is a technique often used by spreaders of ignorance or partisans to deny rational points or treatments of information.
- tomp 11y agoConversely, pointing this out (as you and another commenter did) is a convenient (but falacious) way of justifiying one-sided views/articles.
- Nursie 11y agoFalse Balance. You see it on news reports all the time. Here we have a scientist talking about the latest meta-study, well reviewed, on the safety profile of a certain type of vaccine. And now we need to balance that out with a crackpot who thinks vaccines are a form of government mind control.
- gadders 11y agoWell, here's the thing. People can spread ignorance, I agree. However, if someone gives a list of examples and 2/3 or them could be described as "right wing" you begin to wonder as to his motivations. However, if you think that the spread of ignorance is purely a right-wing phenomonon and that left-wing politicians are scrupulously truthful in all they do, then I don't know what to say to you.
- tremon 11y ago2/3 or them could be described as "right wing" purely a right-wing phenomonon In your opinion then, what should we say to someone that thinks 2/3 is equal to 100%?
- dawnbreez 11y agoThe problem is that there often are multiple views, even if they're inequal in terms of logic. You could use this argument that two sides leads to bad things as an excuse to simply never take any other view into account. This too is bias.