3 ms·

>>this is a framing device meant to set your opinion on a guided track This is all too common with the NY Times.

oldmanjay 11y ago
It is common with all media. The key is to be aware of the framing and question what the author wants you to believe is true.
tokenadult 11y ago
People here on Hacker News set submission titles to provide framing to discussion threads all the time. It's definitely a contribution to the discussion here to read the entire fine article, whether it is published in the New York Times or in some other publication. Thorough examination of an argument based on more than just the source or the title of the submission is helpful to other participants here. As for the argument in the article, which I see online with a title "America’s Best Days May Be Behind It" and a still image from the The Dick Van Dyke Show, I think the best part of the article's argument is the yeah-but part, where optimism is expressed. "What Professor Gordon fails to account for, Professor Mokyr argues, is that the information technology revolution and other recent developments produced mind-blowing tools and techniques, from gene-sequencing machines to computers that analyze mountains of data at blistering speed. This is creating vast new opportunities for innovation, from health care to materials technology and beyond. 'The tools available to science have been improving at a dazzling rate,' he told me. 'I’m not sure how, but the world of technology in 30 to 40 years’ time will be vastly different than it is today.'" I am older than most participants on Hacker News. My family is plainly better off than my parents' family, even though we have fewer total hours of labor force participation per year than my parents jointly had, with the same number of children (four). I can remember a LOT of predictions from my youth that the world would go to hell by the time I was a young adult. It hasn't happened. Prosperity and healthy lifespan and levels of education are rising all over the world. Yeah, the world is still full of problems, but our supply of problem-solving tools and our scope of choice about what problems to solve when is better than ever.

It is common with all media. The key is to be aware of the framing and question what the author wants you to believe is true.

tokenadult 11y ago

People here on Hacker News set submission titles to provide framing to discussion threads all the time. It's definitely a contribution to the discussion here to read the entire fine article, whether it is published in the New York Times or in some other publication. Thorough examination of an argument based on more than just the source or the title of the submission is helpful to other participants here. As for the argument in the article, which I see online with a title "America’s Best Days May Be Behind It" and a still image from the The Dick Van Dyke Show, I think the best part of the article's argument is the yeah-but part, where optimism is expressed. "What Professor Gordon fails to account for, Professor Mokyr argues, is that the information technology revolution and other recent developments produced mind-blowing tools and techniques, from gene-sequencing machines to computers that analyze mountains of data at blistering speed. This is creating vast new opportunities for innovation, from health care to materials technology and beyond. 'The tools available to science have been improving at a dazzling rate,' he told me. 'I’m not sure how, but the world of technology in 30 to 40 years’ time will be vastly different than it is today.'" I am older than most participants on Hacker News. My family is plainly better off than my parents' family, even though we have fewer total hours of labor force participation per year than my parents jointly had, with the same number of children (four). I can remember a LOT of predictions from my youth that the world would go to hell by the time I was a young adult. It hasn't happened. Prosperity and healthy lifespan and levels of education are rising all over the world. Yeah, the world is still full of problems, but our supply of problem-solving tools and our scope of choice about what problems to solve when is better than ever.