22 ms·

Calling bullshit

401 points by roye 10y ago

rchaud 10y ago
I agree with the spirit of what this is trying to promote, but its target audience likely considers themselves to be "critical thinkers" already and feel its everybody else who needs this kind of course. That said, why does it have to be set up like a college course? Not only did looking at the site bring back memories of freshman year crit analysis courses, the way in which their proposed structure is laid out is completely out of sync with the way in which people absorb information today. Fake news is shared widely because it's easy and doesn't require much mental exertion of the sharer/reader. The people most likely to share this kind of provocative "viral" content do not even have a working common-sense bullshit meter. Yet the well-meaning people behind the course think they're ready move from 200 word blog posts with a black-and-white view of the world to college-level reading? I'd suggest looking at the UX/UI of an app like Google Primer (bite sized lessons on digital marketing) and see if that model can be applied here. Probably not Primer is designed to provide on-the-go info while this is designed as an actual college course.
mhartl 10y ago
For better or for worse, the term bullshit has no exact synonym in the English language; we use the term because it precisely describes the phenomena we are studying. Interestingly enough, the claim about bullshit lacking an exact synonym is false. Not only does bull by itself mean precisely the same thing, but in fact its use predates the compound formation by three centuries. The use of shit in bullshit is an intensifier, as in shitstorm or shitfit, though presumably the rather evocative image of bovine excrement was also a factor. From the Google dictionary: bull (3) bo͝ol/ noun informal noun: bull stupid or untrue talk or writing; nonsense. "much of what he says is sheer bull" Origin early 17th century: of unknown origin. bull·shit ˈbo͝olˌSHit/ vulgar slang noun noun: bullshit 1. stupid or untrue talk or writing; nonsense. Origin early 20th century: from bull (3) + shit.
cafed00d 10y ago
This reminds me of Jon Stewart's swan song of "Bullshit is everywhere"[1] message. Sigh, I miss Jon Stewart. [1]. http://www.cc.com/video-clips/ss6u07/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-uncensored---three-different-kinds-of-bulls--t http://www.cc.com/video-clips/ss6u07/the-daily-show-with-jon...
mulmen 10y ago
There are four kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, statistics and big data.
- westmeal 10y ago
  You forgot big lies.
- fiatjaf 10y ago
  You forgot academic papers, peer-reviewed literature and consensus among scientists.
  - 0xfeba 10y ago
    Yes, what good has ever come of any of those...
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
willvarfar 10y ago
Bullshit is a numbers game, just like spam. Spam doesn't particularly try not to look like spam or avoid spam filters because the target audience isn't employing decent countermeasures. Maybe marketing can be elevated to the same standard as phishing, where effort is put into deceiving our filters? If so, this would be a very useful course for a marketeer to attend ;)
onion2k 10y ago
This seems like a similar idea to Julian Baggini's "Edge of Reason"[1]. In the book he investigates how we've become very bad at using reason (in the philosophical sense of the word) to examine things around us. I'm about 1/2 way through and I've been finding it very interesting indeed. [1] http://yalebooks.co.uk/display.asp?k=9780300208238 http://yalebooks.co.uk/display.asp?k=9780300208238 - There's a brief interview with the author that introduces the book on there.
kornakiewicz 10y ago
I wish this kind of courses were mandatory for all undergraduates in our post-truth era.
- ThomPete 10y ago
  Can we stop with the claims about a post-truth era? It's not like people suddenly decided to disregard truth and not believe in actual truths. It's that we have just realized that interpretation is not the same as truth and have now been made aware that there are other interpretations of the facts than our own. We don't live in a post-truth world, we live in a world were the truth is confused with difference of opinion.
  - placebo 10y ago
    The fact that you are right about the possibility of taking other interpretations as non truth, does not mean that no opinions are simply misguided and not based on truth. In addition, there have been many articles that are simply made up, which has nothing to do with difference of opinion.
    - ThomPete 10y ago
      Sure but that does not mean that people don't care about the truth. There have always been made up stories and lies and propaganda and conspiracy theories it's nothing new it's just become much more obvious now and thus actually allowed us to live in a more truth based world rather than the previous ignorant believe that there are only one way to look at things. Politics is about choice not about truth.
  - tomp 10y ago
    I think it's more simple than this. People have been trained over decades not to believe or trust politicians (e.g. Obama's "I will close down Guantanamo Bay"). So now they just don't bother any more. Before the media/Democrats can credibly criticise "fake news", they first need to regain the people's trust.
arethuza 10y ago
From the "patron saint of reason and common sense" I can recommend Carl Sagan's "Baloney Detection Kit" from superb The Demon-Haunted World: https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/01/03/baloney-detection-kit-carl-sagan/ https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/01/03/baloney-detection-k...
- tronje 10y ago
  In fact, that's one of Calling Bullshit's sources: http://callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html#Spotting http://callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html#Spotting
  - arethuza 10y ago
    Oh dear - I should have read that page more carefully. Anyway here is one that isn't on their list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_People_Believe_Weird_Things https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_People_Believe_Weird_Thing...
- TillE 10y ago
  The whole book is essential reading. Sagan mostly picks easy targets (supernatural claims), but the process is enlightening. For example he lays out the general uselessness of witness testimony and memory, which has extremely broad implications.
dccoolgai 10y ago
Yes. Bullshit is ruining everything. There needs to be some kind of grassroots movement to stop it.
- placebo 10y ago
  You need to want to know what is true first, to care enough to take the trouble of knowing how to detect bullshit. I think the reason why bullshit is flourishing is because those that actually give a damn are the minority. The majority is composed of the useful idiots and those that manipulate them. Of course reality is never black and white, and it is much more nuanced than I've stated here, but I think that's the general gist of things
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    A big problem is that for most people, truth has no direct or measurable value in lives. Information is mostly used as social objects - something to talk about and share with other people. It doesn't matter whether e.g. that GMO-causes-cancer paper is solid or a hoax, what matters is that as the story circulates, you can play the relative status game with your friends by showing who's more into GMO-causes-cancer belief. In the areas where "getting things right" has a direct impact on someone's life, people turn out to be surprisingly good at catering for their own interests (though not perfect, and the whole advertising industry is based around the desire to screw people in this area).
natural_capital 10y ago
I really like this idea, though struggle to understand the effectiveness. My guess is that the type of person who falls victim to 'bullshit' theory or messages is not the kind of person who is willing to dedicate time to an online course about learning to be more critical in thought. 'Bullshit' thinking has been largely successful because its an effortless pathway to establishing an opinion on something (queue System 1/System 2 thinking). Conversely, the people who would be willing to read this sort of content are likely the people who are already reasonable skeptical about what they take as face value.
- dhimes 10y ago
  This is a good point. It's like half of the course needs to be about how to talk about bullshit in a way that makes more people want to get aboard the anti-bullshit train.
- simonbarker87 10y ago
  I think everyone, engaged and skeptical or otherwise can miss falsehoods if it aligns with their values/beliefs already. Taking something like this should, in theory, give you tools to make sure that even if you really want to believe what you are reading/hearing because it aligns with your world view (or worse, comes from a source you respect and trust) then you can still determine how honest or accurate it is.
  - matwood 10y ago
    The latest SGU (Skeptics Guide to the Universe) podcast touched on your point, and how everyone is susceptible to false hoods particularly when those opinions make up a persons identity. Someone who identifies as 'liberal' or 'conservative' is more likely to fight facts that go against their beliefs. One possible solution presented, was to always attempt to self identify as a skeptic who is okay changing opinions as new facts come in. It is not an easy thing to do because 1) it's a lot of work and 2) you're outside of most of the big popular groups.
    - mapcars 10y ago
fiatjaf 10y ago
This is a course on being intelligent, it seems. If you are able to teach people how to be intelligent without making them actually intelligent (= to know a lot of things) then it is magic.
- pferde 10y ago
  Isn't "to know a lot of things" just being wise? Being intelligent, to me, is more about being able to process information, arrive at conclusions - or, in simple words: to think well. You could be wise without being intelligent (someone who learned a lot by rote learning, but doesn't understand much of it), or vice versa, although the latter is somewhat questionable - an intelligent person will likely use the intelligence to know more and more things. :) Edit: heck, even D&D had separate wisdom and intelligence stats. :)
t_g 10y ago
Reminds me of a good book I read in my ethics classes: https://www.amazon.com/Bullshit-Harry-G-Frankfurt/dp/0691122946 https://www.amazon.com/Bullshit-Harry-G-Frankfurt/dp/0691122...
- a_humean 10y ago
  Yep, its one of the best essays I read during my undergrad, and in the era of Trump's never ending bullshit generation it has never been a more relevant a topic for study. 16 page PDF of the original article: https://www.stoa.org.uk/topics/bullshit/pdf/on-bullshit.pdf https://www.stoa.org.uk/topics/bullshit/pdf/on-bullshit.pdf And Cohen's "Deeper into Bullshit": http://learning.hccs.edu/faculty/robert.tierney/phil1301-6/bullshit/g.a.-cohen-deeper-into-bullshit/view http://learning.hccs.edu/faculty/robert.tierney/phil1301-6/b... edit: now that the site is back up, I can see both are part of the week 1 syllabus!
- FabHK 10y ago
  Not surprisingly, that's also one of Calling bullshit's sources: http://callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html#Introduction http://callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html#Introduction (Funny little story, btw: The NYT reviewed that book, without being able to ever mention its title or, well, subject :-) http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/14/books/between-truth-and-lies-an-unprintable-ubiquity.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/14/books/between-truth-and-li...
curiousgal 10y ago
Isn't this just a collection of things to read rather than a course?
- Cafey 10y ago
  In the disclaimer (bottom of page) it says it is indeed not yet a real course but will eventually be offered at the university of washington.
kingkawn 10y ago
It isn't about identifying bullshit so much as coming up with a subjective preference set to carry out and seek out that leads to a better world regardless of the circumstances.
- Chris2048 10y ago
  "a better word" is theory-laden, and can't be separated form personal, selfish biases, and "circumstances".
  - kingkawn 10y ago
    yes, it is implicit in my comment that this perspective can be intellectually dismantled if you prefer, but the original point of course is that indulging this urge gets less than nothing done for my idea and makes no progress at all on yours while still consuming your time.
jankotek 10y ago
I am not sure I like this site. It uses strong language, but avoids anything controversial and provided case studies are pretty shallow. Nothing like some Youtube channels, where presenter spends one hour deconstructing some study, to its sources and sources of the sources.
- tankenmate 10y ago
  I suspect this course is teaching you how to do this type of deconstruction rather than to provide examples that are entertaining or controversial. Teach a person to fish, etc.
  - jankotek 10y ago
    Have a look at case studies. Opinions, anecdotal evidence, no sources. There is not even basic fact checking on their sources (they just took a number from Fox News and ran with it). And I am not sure what to expect from a statistical course build around TED Talks, blog posts and NY Times articles. With chapters named like "The natural ecology of bullshit"...
    - wodenokoto 10y ago
      > (they just took a number from Fox News and ran with it). I don't know what you think that case study was about, but it isn't about whether the number was true or not. It is about whether that number represents something that is in line with the point of the article. > And I am not sure what to expect from a statistical course build around TED Talks, blog posts and NY Times articles. I wouldn't either, but it isn't a statistical course and it isn't build around TED Talks. It is not about learning what they are saying in a TED Talk, but about dissecting the TED Talk and understanding why you shouldn't just accept the content of it. All the case studies are examples of bullshit.
- DonHopkins 10y ago
  How To Deconstruct Almost Anything: My Postmodern Adventure, by Chip Morningstar, June 1993. "Academics get paid for being clever, not for being right." -- Donald Norman http://www.fudco.com/chip/deconstr.html http://www.fudco.com/chip/deconstr.html
sfifs 10y ago
This is a really good effort! In analytics and data science world where I work, it's difficult to train our junior people to think through all the reasons their conclusions might be misleading. The cases are likely to be very helpful to get the thinking process started.
- battlebot 10y ago
  My biggest concern about data science is that a lot of people who lack basic skills at doing science are racing into the field. My other concern is that this happened because an article said that there would be a huge demand for data scientists in the future, a matter I am also skeptical of. Repeat after me: Correlation is not causation.
  - sfifs 10y ago
    Actually I find that commoditization of computing power and dirt cheap storage combined with the rise of digital as an advertising and sales medium are primarily responsible for the rise in demand. Some of the demand comes from beyond the tech sector in companies like mine which are in the traditional consumer goods busines. There's a lot of depth of analytics required when you're spending a billion dollar marketing budget that goes well beyond correlation causation basics.
SFJulie 10y ago
The trollometer Plumpfmeter 2.1 can actively be turned into a bullshit detector by using a post anaphylactic reaction using the original designed http://la.buvette.org/tech/reseau/prumpleffer-2.html http://la.buvette.org/tech/reseau/prumpleffer-2.html based on deep machine learning with the latest green powder AI. Don't get trolled or bullshited again, buy Plumfmeter the only and original protection that really works.* * Will make you famous, less gullible and totally smart without effort or learning Recommended by our best customers: Trump.inc, NSA, EU parliament, EvilCorp.gmbh.
TeMPOraL 10y ago
From http://callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html http://callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html: > but recently a fake news story actually provoked nuclear threats issued by twitter. Nuclear threats issued by Twitter. What a world we live in.
tomp 10y ago
> In this course we aim to teach you how to think critically about the data and models that constitute evidence in the social and natural sciences I call bullshit on the existence of "social sciences". Even the best attempts at controlled, reproducible experiments were laughable, so at most we can call them "social studies".
geodel 10y ago
> So, the aim of this course is to help students navigate the bullshit-rich modern environment by identifying bullshit, seeing through it, and combatting it with effective analysis and argument. I am calling bullshit on this.
- jamesrcole 10y ago
  Why?
gfyapp 10y ago
strong language is one of the ways to express. sometimes instead of calling bullsh1t, we may use GFY www.gfyapp.com
d_theorist 10y ago
Yes. Yes. Yes. This is exactly what public education systems should be teaching. I'd almost say that next to basic literacy and mathematics, this is the most valuable subject to teach. It lays the groundwork for so much else.
- jdimov11 10y ago
  Bullshit.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
supergreg 10y ago
> we are proposing to teach it at the University of Washington in the near future I call BS.
closed 10y ago
This looks fairly similar to the psychology course, "Everything is Fucked" [1]. EiF has a stellar syllabus, while this one seems a bit lighter (maybe it's for fewer credits). Seems like a pretty useful course, in any event. I'm definitely curious about Susan Fiske's article, about how social networks encourage unmoderated academic "trash talk" [2]. Andy Gelman has a pretty negative critique of the article here [3]. [1] https://hardsci.wordpress.com/2016/08/11/everything-is-fucked-the-syllabus/ https://hardsci.wordpress.com/2016/08/11/everything-is-fucke... [2] http://callingbullshit.org/readings/fiske2016mob.pdf http://callingbullshit.org/readings/fiske2016mob.pdf [3] http://andrewgelman.com/2016/09/21/what-has-happened-down-here-is-the-winds-have-changed/ http://andrewgelman.com/2016/09/21/what-has-happened-down-he... edit: why the downvote?
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
gcatalfamo 10y ago
I think this is an effort towards the people that don't need such effort. The people really needing this course will never willingly read - or understand - such educated content.
abrax3141 10y ago
https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/humor/fionavar/flame_school https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/humor/fionavar/flame_school
acjohnson55 10y ago
Admirable, but misguided. Fact-based argument has never been effective. The Greeks knew this. We keep forgetting it at our own peril. We know how to think critically; most of us simply choose not to. The audience who would see this kind of course/site are likely people who pretty much already have their head screwed on the right way. It would be much better to train them in effective rhetoric so they can counter the bullshit in real arguments. We keep forgetting that people tend to support policies and politicians for largely social and psychological reasons, not because of facts and ideology. The former are where the real battle is fought. I spend a lot of time debating with people who disagree with me politically. It's nearly impossible to have a factual debate. So stop trying. Instead, make your point based on common morals, do it with compassion and generosity of spirit, and don't allow the goalposts of the debate to be moved. Throw in like two of couple of your choicest facts and sources, but don't expect them to help. Move on and repeat.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- dennis_jeeves 10y ago
  acjohnson55, your observation is spot on. There is one suggestion that I have for 'rational' people: Band together, discriminate against the 'irrational' people in your lives and help out each other. That is one way to preserve your sanity. Often I have found that 'Rational' people also tend be be non-discriminatory and very accommodating on the non-rational people to a point where it hurts their interests. Contact me if interested.
- smsm42 10y ago
  It is entirely possible to have a factual debate about facts and logical conclusions. It is, of course, impossible to make factual debate about opinions, moral principles and preferences, and politics is a mix of both kinds, heavily skewed to non-factual side, unfortunately. Still, I think there's demand for factual discussion even in politics. That's why "fact checking" became a thing and why "fake news" became a popular pejorative. Unfortunately - and probably inevitably, given the stakes - "fact checking" was taken over by opportunists and turned into partisan mudsligning, and "fake news" has been turned into a club for bashing political opponents. But the demand is still there. It's just that MSM media structures may be by now so corrupt that they are institutionally unable to satisfy it.
booleandilemma 10y ago
90% of everything is crap. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_law
dood 10y ago
Looking at the name I thought this was going to be some kind of wiki-encyclopedia of bullshit, where people could submit reasons why any given thing is bullshit. Am a little disappointed actually, that would be a handy reference. Though naturally such a thing would almost immediately devolve into arguments about the degree to which anything is bullshit, but that could still be valuable.
yarauuta 10y ago
Everything around you is bullshit. Click here, follow/upvote us, we are not. Shallow "facting" does not help the the cause.
Dowwie 10y ago
Is this a MOOC? I don't see lecture videos. I laughed hard after reading Week 3: Week 3. The natural ecology of bullshit. Where do we find bullshit? Why news media provide bullshit. TED talks and the marketplace for upscale bullshit. Why social media provide ideal conditions for the growth and spread of bullshit.
lowbloodsugar 10y ago
My wife took a Critical Thinking course at college. Changed her life, and as a result, my life and our kids'. Blows me away that only 90 people per year at that institution took that course. Meanwhile, back in the public school system, we have examiners mistaking their own opinions as fact. [1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13348672 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13348672
- rsivapr 10y ago
  Any chance she'd be kind enough to provide some book recommendations?
- uifweiu 10y ago
  Taking a course does not make her critical thinker. Just an FYI.
- alexandercrohde 10y ago
  Really? My college experience was very different. All the professors talked about how essential "critical thinking" was. And to this I asked: - Is there even a definition of "critical thinking"? - (As a psychology major) Is there evidence that this is a sound objective concept (rather than something everyone thinks only they have)? - Is there any objective measure of critical thinking? If not, how can you have any objective reason to believe your courses increases critical thinking? And to this they said various forms of "I don't know." I guess they had never really thought about it critically.
  - lowbloodsugar 10y ago
    I think you are making the same point. There was just one course, with just one professor, on critical thinking at this college, and then there are 1000 where the professor assumes that you know, indeed that they know, what critical thinking is. In fact most don't. My alma mater didn't have a critical thinking course.
RichardHeart 10y ago
The idiots of the world fight ferociously to spread their "100 percent correct" views, while the smart (HackerNews) remain relatively silent in fear against the masses of idiots flooding all mediums. Carl Bergstrom and Jevin West had the courage to scream loudly back, speaking smarts to stupid. Better marketing for good ideas! Bravo! Marketing opinion. This page: http://callingbullshit.org/case_studies.html http://callingbullshit.org/case_studies.html should be made homepage content, for it is their most compelling and clear value statement and takes little space. It took me too long to find naturally, and I didn't feel fulfilled on the bullshit pitch till I did. If you don't want to move it, perhaps call them examples instead of case studies, if you want to reach a general audience. Serendipity. These professors made a course/website "bullshit" the title. Which I think's funny because I just uploaded a youtube video in a tophat/leopard print about how smart people should be more aggressive spreading their ideas.
dajohnson89 10y ago
This "bullshit" meme is getting tired. It seems like a cutesy way to say something like "not rigorous" or "deceptive". Which a good introductory course in logic (informal and formal) will help in spotting.
DonHopkins 10y ago
..."other tools of persuasion" like posing as your own fan on message boards to defend and flatter yourself, after you're criticized for claiming that women are "treated differently by society for exactly the same reason that children and the mentally handicapped are treated differently. It’s just easier this way for everyone." http://comicsalliance.com/scott-adams-plannedchaos-sockpuppet/ http://comicsalliance.com/scott-adams-plannedchaos-sockpuppe... Scott Adams, talking about Scott Adams in the third person, while pretending not to be Scott Adams: - [0] plannedchaos -21 points 4 months ago If an idiot and a genius disagree, the idiot generally thinks the genius is wrong. He also has a lot of idiot reasons to back his idiot belief. That's how the idiot mind is wired. It's fair to say you disagree with Adams. But you can't rule out the hypothesis that you're too dumb to understand what he's saying. And he's a certified genius. Just sayin'.
- swanson 10y ago
  I won't defend those actions. I just got a chuckle about this comment since it's an ad hominem -- not rational, but rather designed to appeal to emotion ("I'm mad about him doing that") or identify ("I'm an advocate for women"). Meanwhile, the rest of this thread devolves to pedantry about definitions and analogies. Good persuasion :)
- sctb 10y ago
  Controversial threads have way more escape energy than others, and this subthread has definitely left topical orbit. We've detached it from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13382789 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13382789 and marked it off-topic.
- Chris2048 10y ago
  You could argue that sock-puppeting defeats/is an antidote to Argumentum ad populum, and is as such a valid tactic. In this case also, it would be seen as arrogant to tell someone they aren't smart enough to understand your argument, but not so with a third party, i.e. maybe it's appropriate for playing devils advocate informally. That said, he was also antagonizing if using "idiot", rather than being more polite himself. If he spoke through his own handle, he might have cared more about civility.
wvh 10y ago
I'm sorry to be this negative, but people simply don't care. They don't care because thinking critically and trying to grasp subtle nuances and balance complex opinions about the world will not directly improve their lives. Convenient truths and easy emotions feel more comfortable and as if they have a direct "return on investment". Most people prefer simple truths, certainty and connection to/identification with a group over uncertainty, doubt and existential loneliness. (Or at least that's what I see, as somebody who is somewhat on the autistic spectrum and doesn't easily connect with a lot of this group-think.) It's laudable to fight this, just very prone to disillusion.
- ThomPete 10y ago
  It's not necessarily that they don't care, it's that not everything that matters to one person matters to the other. The things which do matter to them however they care deeply about. And so it's much more accurate IMO to talk about misaligned perspectives rather than whether people don't care about the truth.
quotha 10y ago
If you can't call callingbullshitdotorg bullshit, you've learned nothing!
galfarragem 10y ago
'Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.' -- Aaron Levenstein Or putting in other words: analysis is an art not a science.
fizwhiz 10y ago
> Advertisers wink conspiratorially and invite us to join them in seeing through all the bullshit, then take advantage of our lowered guard to bombard us with second-order bullshit This made me chortle
Paul-ish 10y ago
The criticism of this course in principle is ironic to me. A lot of people are saying "This course is pointless, the people who would take this course don't need it." Which seems to imply... that they wouldn't take the course. Which would, by their own logic, imply they probably need it. We all have blind spots, we just have different blind spots.
OJFord 10y ago
> For better or for worse, the term bullshit has no exact synonym in the English language Perhaps only in British use (?) - but 'rubbish' and 'nonsense' can both be used to replace 'bullshit', other than qua faeces.
perseuswiki 10y ago
more supplementary readings: "SILENT RISK :NASSIM NICHOLAS TALEB" ( pdf ) http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/SilentRisk.pdf http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/SilentRisk.pdf and "Taleb: The Intellectual Yet Idiot" https://medium.com/incerto/the-intellectual-yet-idiot-13211e2d0577 https://medium.com/incerto/the-intellectual-yet-idiot-13211e...
artur_makly 10y ago
glad to see the groundswell! However I made a more efficient approach at solving this : http://TrumpTweets.io http://TrumpTweets.io The manifesto : http://TrumpTweets.io/manifesto http://TrumpTweets.io/manifesto
- dwaltrip 10y ago
  How does this facilitate positive changes in the world? I could be wrong, but I'm not seeing it. It feels like preaching to the choir. It is also fairly antagonistic, which people generally respond defensively too. It looks like it was pretty fun to build though!
  - artur_makly 10y ago
    read the manifesto : http://trumptweets.io/manifesto http://trumptweets.io/manifesto we are just getting started.. those are just test samples. working on better content though.. try it out though.
rebuilder 10y ago
Ok, so it's not "this course" in the "you can go here to take this course" sense, but in the "there may be a course held somewhere some day" sense? Because I was interested but baffled when I tried to find the course or info about where to take part on that site.

401 points by roye 10y ago

I agree with the spirit of what this is trying to promote, but its target audience likely considers themselves to be "critical thinkers" already and feel its everybody else who needs this kind of course. That said, why does it have to be set up like a college course? Not only did looking at the site bring back memories of freshman year crit analysis courses, the way in which their proposed structure is laid out is completely out of sync with the way in which people absorb information today. Fake news is shared widely because it's easy and doesn't require much mental exertion of the sharer/reader. The people most likely to share this kind of provocative "viral" content do not even have a working common-sense bullshit meter. Yet the well-meaning people behind the course think they're ready move from 200 word blog posts with a black-and-white view of the world to college-level reading? I'd suggest looking at the UX/UI of an app like Google Primer (bite sized lessons on digital marketing) and see if that model can be applied here. Probably not Primer is designed to provide on-the-go info while this is designed as an actual college course.

mhartl 10y ago

For better or for worse, the term bullshit has no exact synonym in the English language; we use the term because it precisely describes the phenomena we are studying. Interestingly enough, the claim about bullshit lacking an exact synonym is false. Not only does bull by itself mean precisely the same thing, but in fact its use predates the compound formation by three centuries. The use of shit in bullshit is an intensifier, as in shitstorm or shitfit, though presumably the rather evocative image of bovine excrement was also a factor. From the Google dictionary: bull (3) bo͝ol/ noun informal noun: bull stupid or untrue talk or writing; nonsense. "much of what he says is sheer bull" Origin early 17th century: of unknown origin. bull·shit ˈbo͝olˌSHit/ vulgar slang noun noun: bullshit 1. stupid or untrue talk or writing; nonsense. Origin early 20th century: from bull (3) + shit.

cafed00d 10y ago

This reminds me of Jon Stewart's swan song of "Bullshit is everywhere"[1] message. Sigh, I miss Jon Stewart. [1]. http://www.cc.com/video-clips/ss6u07/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-uncensored---three-different-kinds-of-bulls--t http://www.cc.com/video-clips/ss6u07/the-daily-show-with-jon...

mulmen 10y ago

There are four kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, statistics and big data.

westmeal 10y ago
You forgot big lies.
fiatjaf 10y ago
You forgot academic papers, peer-reviewed literature and consensus among scientists.
- 0xfeba 10y ago
  Yes, what good has ever come of any of those...

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

willvarfar 10y ago

Bullshit is a numbers game, just like spam. Spam doesn't particularly try not to look like spam or avoid spam filters because the target audience isn't employing decent countermeasures. Maybe marketing can be elevated to the same standard as phishing, where effort is put into deceiving our filters? If so, this would be a very useful course for a marketeer to attend ;)

onion2k 10y ago

This seems like a similar idea to Julian Baggini's "Edge of Reason"[1]. In the book he investigates how we've become very bad at using reason (in the philosophical sense of the word) to examine things around us. I'm about 1/2 way through and I've been finding it very interesting indeed. [1] http://yalebooks.co.uk/display.asp?k=9780300208238 http://yalebooks.co.uk/display.asp?k=9780300208238 - There's a brief interview with the author that introduces the book on there.

kornakiewicz 10y ago

I wish this kind of courses were mandatory for all undergraduates in our post-truth era.

ThomPete 10y ago
Can we stop with the claims about a post-truth era? It's not like people suddenly decided to disregard truth and not believe in actual truths. It's that we have just realized that interpretation is not the same as truth and have now been made aware that there are other interpretations of the facts than our own. We don't live in a post-truth world, we live in a world were the truth is confused with difference of opinion.
- placebo 10y ago
  The fact that you are right about the possibility of taking other interpretations as non truth, does not mean that no opinions are simply misguided and not based on truth. In addition, there have been many articles that are simply made up, which has nothing to do with difference of opinion.
  - ThomPete 10y ago
    Sure but that does not mean that people don't care about the truth. There have always been made up stories and lies and propaganda and conspiracy theories it's nothing new it's just become much more obvious now and thus actually allowed us to live in a more truth based world rather than the previous ignorant believe that there are only one way to look at things. Politics is about choice not about truth.
- tomp 10y ago
  I think it's more simple than this. People have been trained over decades not to believe or trust politicians (e.g. Obama's "I will close down Guantanamo Bay"). So now they just don't bother any more. Before the media/Democrats can credibly criticise "fake news", they first need to regain the people's trust.

arethuza 10y ago

From the "patron saint of reason and common sense" I can recommend Carl Sagan's "Baloney Detection Kit" from superb The Demon-Haunted World: https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/01/03/baloney-detection-kit-carl-sagan/ https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/01/03/baloney-detection-k...

tronje 10y ago
In fact, that's one of Calling Bullshit's sources: http://callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html#Spotting http://callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html#Spotting
- arethuza 10y ago
  Oh dear - I should have read that page more carefully. Anyway here is one that isn't on their list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_People_Believe_Weird_Things https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_People_Believe_Weird_Thing...
TillE 10y ago
The whole book is essential reading. Sagan mostly picks easy targets (supernatural claims), but the process is enlightening. For example he lays out the general uselessness of witness testimony and memory, which has extremely broad implications.

dccoolgai 10y ago

Yes. Bullshit is ruining everything. There needs to be some kind of grassroots movement to stop it.

placebo 10y ago
You need to want to know what is true first, to care enough to take the trouble of knowing how to detect bullshit. I think the reason why bullshit is flourishing is because those that actually give a damn are the minority. The majority is composed of the useful idiots and those that manipulate them. Of course reality is never black and white, and it is much more nuanced than I've stated here, but I think that's the general gist of things
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  A big problem is that for most people, truth has no direct or measurable value in lives. Information is mostly used as social objects - something to talk about and share with other people. It doesn't matter whether e.g. that GMO-causes-cancer paper is solid or a hoax, what matters is that as the story circulates, you can play the relative status game with your friends by showing who's more into GMO-causes-cancer belief. In the areas where "getting things right" has a direct impact on someone's life, people turn out to be surprisingly good at catering for their own interests (though not perfect, and the whole advertising industry is based around the desire to screw people in this area).

natural_capital 10y ago

I really like this idea, though struggle to understand the effectiveness. My guess is that the type of person who falls victim to 'bullshit' theory or messages is not the kind of person who is willing to dedicate time to an online course about learning to be more critical in thought. 'Bullshit' thinking has been largely successful because its an effortless pathway to establishing an opinion on something (queue System 1/System 2 thinking). Conversely, the people who would be willing to read this sort of content are likely the people who are already reasonable skeptical about what they take as face value.

dhimes 10y ago
This is a good point. It's like half of the course needs to be about how to talk about bullshit in a way that makes more people want to get aboard the anti-bullshit train.
simonbarker87 10y ago
I think everyone, engaged and skeptical or otherwise can miss falsehoods if it aligns with their values/beliefs already. Taking something like this should, in theory, give you tools to make sure that even if you really want to believe what you are reading/hearing because it aligns with your world view (or worse, comes from a source you respect and trust) then you can still determine how honest or accurate it is.
- matwood 10y ago
  The latest SGU (Skeptics Guide to the Universe) podcast touched on your point, and how everyone is susceptible to false hoods particularly when those opinions make up a persons identity. Someone who identifies as 'liberal' or 'conservative' is more likely to fight facts that go against their beliefs. One possible solution presented, was to always attempt to self identify as a skeptic who is okay changing opinions as new facts come in. It is not an easy thing to do because 1) it's a lot of work and 2) you're outside of most of the big popular groups.
  - mapcars 10y ago

fiatjaf 10y ago

This is a course on being intelligent, it seems. If you are able to teach people how to be intelligent without making them actually intelligent (= to know a lot of things) then it is magic.

pferde 10y ago
Isn't "to know a lot of things" just being wise? Being intelligent, to me, is more about being able to process information, arrive at conclusions - or, in simple words: to think well. You could be wise without being intelligent (someone who learned a lot by rote learning, but doesn't understand much of it), or vice versa, although the latter is somewhat questionable - an intelligent person will likely use the intelligence to know more and more things. :) Edit: heck, even D&D had separate wisdom and intelligence stats. :)

t_g 10y ago

Reminds me of a good book I read in my ethics classes: https://www.amazon.com/Bullshit-Harry-G-Frankfurt/dp/0691122946 https://www.amazon.com/Bullshit-Harry-G-Frankfurt/dp/0691122...

a_humean 10y ago
Yep, its one of the best essays I read during my undergrad, and in the era of Trump's never ending bullshit generation it has never been a more relevant a topic for study. 16 page PDF of the original article: https://www.stoa.org.uk/topics/bullshit/pdf/on-bullshit.pdf https://www.stoa.org.uk/topics/bullshit/pdf/on-bullshit.pdf And Cohen's "Deeper into Bullshit": http://learning.hccs.edu/faculty/robert.tierney/phil1301-6/bullshit/g.a.-cohen-deeper-into-bullshit/view http://learning.hccs.edu/faculty/robert.tierney/phil1301-6/b... edit: now that the site is back up, I can see both are part of the week 1 syllabus!
FabHK 10y ago
Not surprisingly, that's also one of Calling bullshit's sources: http://callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html#Introduction http://callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html#Introduction (Funny little story, btw: The NYT reviewed that book, without being able to ever mention its title or, well, subject :-) http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/14/books/between-truth-and-lies-an-unprintable-ubiquity.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/14/books/between-truth-and-li...

curiousgal 10y ago

Isn't this just a collection of things to read rather than a course?

Cafey 10y ago
In the disclaimer (bottom of page) it says it is indeed not yet a real course but will eventually be offered at the university of washington.

kingkawn 10y ago

It isn't about identifying bullshit so much as coming up with a subjective preference set to carry out and seek out that leads to a better world regardless of the circumstances.

Chris2048 10y ago
"a better word" is theory-laden, and can't be separated form personal, selfish biases, and "circumstances".
- kingkawn 10y ago
  yes, it is implicit in my comment that this perspective can be intellectually dismantled if you prefer, but the original point of course is that indulging this urge gets less than nothing done for my idea and makes no progress at all on yours while still consuming your time.

jankotek 10y ago

I am not sure I like this site. It uses strong language, but avoids anything controversial and provided case studies are pretty shallow. Nothing like some Youtube channels, where presenter spends one hour deconstructing some study, to its sources and sources of the sources.

tankenmate 10y ago
I suspect this course is teaching you how to do this type of deconstruction rather than to provide examples that are entertaining or controversial. Teach a person to fish, etc.
- jankotek 10y ago
  Have a look at case studies. Opinions, anecdotal evidence, no sources. There is not even basic fact checking on their sources (they just took a number from Fox News and ran with it). And I am not sure what to expect from a statistical course build around TED Talks, blog posts and NY Times articles. With chapters named like "The natural ecology of bullshit"...
  - wodenokoto 10y ago
    > (they just took a number from Fox News and ran with it). I don't know what you think that case study was about, but it isn't about whether the number was true or not. It is about whether that number represents something that is in line with the point of the article. > And I am not sure what to expect from a statistical course build around TED Talks, blog posts and NY Times articles. I wouldn't either, but it isn't a statistical course and it isn't build around TED Talks. It is not about learning what they are saying in a TED Talk, but about dissecting the TED Talk and understanding why you shouldn't just accept the content of it. All the case studies are examples of bullshit.
DonHopkins 10y ago
How To Deconstruct Almost Anything: My Postmodern Adventure, by Chip Morningstar, June 1993. "Academics get paid for being clever, not for being right." -- Donald Norman http://www.fudco.com/chip/deconstr.html http://www.fudco.com/chip/deconstr.html

sfifs 10y ago

This is a really good effort! In analytics and data science world where I work, it's difficult to train our junior people to think through all the reasons their conclusions might be misleading. The cases are likely to be very helpful to get the thinking process started.

battlebot 10y ago
My biggest concern about data science is that a lot of people who lack basic skills at doing science are racing into the field. My other concern is that this happened because an article said that there would be a huge demand for data scientists in the future, a matter I am also skeptical of. Repeat after me: Correlation is not causation.
- sfifs 10y ago
  Actually I find that commoditization of computing power and dirt cheap storage combined with the rise of digital as an advertising and sales medium are primarily responsible for the rise in demand. Some of the demand comes from beyond the tech sector in companies like mine which are in the traditional consumer goods busines. There's a lot of depth of analytics required when you're spending a billion dollar marketing budget that goes well beyond correlation causation basics.

SFJulie 10y ago

The trollometer Plumpfmeter 2.1 can actively be turned into a bullshit detector by using a post anaphylactic reaction using the original designed http://la.buvette.org/tech/reseau/prumpleffer-2.html http://la.buvette.org/tech/reseau/prumpleffer-2.html based on deep machine learning with the latest green powder AI. Don't get trolled or bullshited again, buy Plumfmeter the only and original protection that really works.* * Will make you famous, less gullible and totally smart without effort or learning Recommended by our best customers: Trump.inc, NSA, EU parliament, EvilCorp.gmbh.

TeMPOraL 10y ago

From http://callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html http://callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html: > but recently a fake news story actually provoked nuclear threats issued by twitter. Nuclear threats issued by Twitter. What a world we live in.

tomp 10y ago

> In this course we aim to teach you how to think critically about the data and models that constitute evidence in the social and natural sciences I call bullshit on the existence of "social sciences". Even the best attempts at controlled, reproducible experiments were laughable, so at most we can call them "social studies".

geodel 10y ago

> So, the aim of this course is to help students navigate the bullshit-rich modern environment by identifying bullshit, seeing through it, and combatting it with effective analysis and argument. I am calling bullshit on this.

jamesrcole 10y ago
Why?

gfyapp 10y ago

strong language is one of the ways to express. sometimes instead of calling bullsh1t, we may use GFY www.gfyapp.com

d_theorist 10y ago

Yes. Yes. Yes. This is exactly what public education systems should be teaching. I'd almost say that next to basic literacy and mathematics, this is the most valuable subject to teach. It lays the groundwork for so much else.

jdimov11 10y ago
Bullshit.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

supergreg 10y ago

> we are proposing to teach it at the University of Washington in the near future I call BS.

closed 10y ago

This looks fairly similar to the psychology course, "Everything is Fucked" [1]. EiF has a stellar syllabus, while this one seems a bit lighter (maybe it's for fewer credits). Seems like a pretty useful course, in any event. I'm definitely curious about Susan Fiske's article, about how social networks encourage unmoderated academic "trash talk" [2]. Andy Gelman has a pretty negative critique of the article here [3]. [1] https://hardsci.wordpress.com/2016/08/11/everything-is-fucked-the-syllabus/ https://hardsci.wordpress.com/2016/08/11/everything-is-fucke... [2] http://callingbullshit.org/readings/fiske2016mob.pdf http://callingbullshit.org/readings/fiske2016mob.pdf [3] http://andrewgelman.com/2016/09/21/what-has-happened-down-here-is-the-winds-have-changed/ http://andrewgelman.com/2016/09/21/what-has-happened-down-he... edit: why the downvote?

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

gcatalfamo 10y ago

I think this is an effort towards the people that don't need such effort. The people really needing this course will never willingly read - or understand - such educated content.

abrax3141 10y ago

https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/humor/fionavar/flame_school https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/humor/fionavar/flame_school

acjohnson55 10y ago

Admirable, but misguided. Fact-based argument has never been effective. The Greeks knew this. We keep forgetting it at our own peril. We know how to think critically; most of us simply choose not to. The audience who would see this kind of course/site are likely people who pretty much already have their head screwed on the right way. It would be much better to train them in effective rhetoric so they can counter the bullshit in real arguments. We keep forgetting that people tend to support policies and politicians for largely social and psychological reasons, not because of facts and ideology. The former are where the real battle is fought. I spend a lot of time debating with people who disagree with me politically. It's nearly impossible to have a factual debate. So stop trying. Instead, make your point based on common morals, do it with compassion and generosity of spirit, and don't allow the goalposts of the debate to be moved. Throw in like two of couple of your choicest facts and sources, but don't expect them to help. Move on and repeat.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
dennis_jeeves 10y ago
acjohnson55, your observation is spot on. There is one suggestion that I have for 'rational' people: Band together, discriminate against the 'irrational' people in your lives and help out each other. That is one way to preserve your sanity. Often I have found that 'Rational' people also tend be be non-discriminatory and very accommodating on the non-rational people to a point where it hurts their interests. Contact me if interested.
smsm42 10y ago
It is entirely possible to have a factual debate about facts and logical conclusions. It is, of course, impossible to make factual debate about opinions, moral principles and preferences, and politics is a mix of both kinds, heavily skewed to non-factual side, unfortunately. Still, I think there's demand for factual discussion even in politics. That's why "fact checking" became a thing and why "fake news" became a popular pejorative. Unfortunately - and probably inevitably, given the stakes - "fact checking" was taken over by opportunists and turned into partisan mudsligning, and "fake news" has been turned into a club for bashing political opponents. But the demand is still there. It's just that MSM media structures may be by now so corrupt that they are institutionally unable to satisfy it.

booleandilemma 10y ago

90% of everything is crap. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_law

dood 10y ago

Looking at the name I thought this was going to be some kind of wiki-encyclopedia of bullshit, where people could submit reasons why any given thing is bullshit. Am a little disappointed actually, that would be a handy reference. Though naturally such a thing would almost immediately devolve into arguments about the degree to which anything is bullshit, but that could still be valuable.

yarauuta 10y ago

Everything around you is bullshit. Click here, follow/upvote us, we are not. Shallow "facting" does not help the the cause.

Dowwie 10y ago

Is this a MOOC? I don't see lecture videos. I laughed hard after reading Week 3: Week 3. The natural ecology of bullshit. Where do we find bullshit? Why news media provide bullshit. TED talks and the marketplace for upscale bullshit. Why social media provide ideal conditions for the growth and spread of bullshit.

lowbloodsugar 10y ago

My wife took a Critical Thinking course at college. Changed her life, and as a result, my life and our kids'. Blows me away that only 90 people per year at that institution took that course. Meanwhile, back in the public school system, we have examiners mistaking their own opinions as fact. [1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13348672 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13348672

rsivapr 10y ago
Any chance she'd be kind enough to provide some book recommendations?
uifweiu 10y ago
Taking a course does not make her critical thinker. Just an FYI.
alexandercrohde 10y ago
Really? My college experience was very different. All the professors talked about how essential "critical thinking" was. And to this I asked: - Is there even a definition of "critical thinking"? - (As a psychology major) Is there evidence that this is a sound objective concept (rather than something everyone thinks only they have)? - Is there any objective measure of critical thinking? If not, how can you have any objective reason to believe your courses increases critical thinking? And to this they said various forms of "I don't know." I guess they had never really thought about it critically.
- lowbloodsugar 10y ago
  I think you are making the same point. There was just one course, with just one professor, on critical thinking at this college, and then there are 1000 where the professor assumes that you know, indeed that they know, what critical thinking is. In fact most don't. My alma mater didn't have a critical thinking course.

RichardHeart 10y ago

The idiots of the world fight ferociously to spread their "100 percent correct" views, while the smart (HackerNews) remain relatively silent in fear against the masses of idiots flooding all mediums. Carl Bergstrom and Jevin West had the courage to scream loudly back, speaking smarts to stupid. Better marketing for good ideas! Bravo! Marketing opinion. This page: http://callingbullshit.org/case_studies.html http://callingbullshit.org/case_studies.html should be made homepage content, for it is their most compelling and clear value statement and takes little space. It took me too long to find naturally, and I didn't feel fulfilled on the bullshit pitch till I did. If you don't want to move it, perhaps call them examples instead of case studies, if you want to reach a general audience. Serendipity. These professors made a course/website "bullshit" the title. Which I think's funny because I just uploaded a youtube video in a tophat/leopard print about how smart people should be more aggressive spreading their ideas.

dajohnson89 10y ago

This "bullshit" meme is getting tired. It seems like a cutesy way to say something like "not rigorous" or "deceptive". Which a good introductory course in logic (informal and formal) will help in spotting.

DonHopkins 10y ago

..."other tools of persuasion" like posing as your own fan on message boards to defend and flatter yourself, after you're criticized for claiming that women are "treated differently by society for exactly the same reason that children and the mentally handicapped are treated differently. It’s just easier this way for everyone." http://comicsalliance.com/scott-adams-plannedchaos-sockpuppet/ http://comicsalliance.com/scott-adams-plannedchaos-sockpuppe... Scott Adams, talking about Scott Adams in the third person, while pretending not to be Scott Adams: - [0] plannedchaos -21 points 4 months ago If an idiot and a genius disagree, the idiot generally thinks the genius is wrong. He also has a lot of idiot reasons to back his idiot belief. That's how the idiot mind is wired. It's fair to say you disagree with Adams. But you can't rule out the hypothesis that you're too dumb to understand what he's saying. And he's a certified genius. Just sayin'.

swanson 10y ago
I won't defend those actions. I just got a chuckle about this comment since it's an ad hominem -- not rational, but rather designed to appeal to emotion ("I'm mad about him doing that") or identify ("I'm an advocate for women"). Meanwhile, the rest of this thread devolves to pedantry about definitions and analogies. Good persuasion :)
sctb 10y ago
Controversial threads have way more escape energy than others, and this subthread has definitely left topical orbit. We've detached it from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13382789 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13382789 and marked it off-topic.
Chris2048 10y ago
You could argue that sock-puppeting defeats/is an antidote to Argumentum ad populum, and is as such a valid tactic. In this case also, it would be seen as arrogant to tell someone they aren't smart enough to understand your argument, but not so with a third party, i.e. maybe it's appropriate for playing devils advocate informally. That said, he was also antagonizing if using "idiot", rather than being more polite himself. If he spoke through his own handle, he might have cared more about civility.

wvh 10y ago

I'm sorry to be this negative, but people simply don't care. They don't care because thinking critically and trying to grasp subtle nuances and balance complex opinions about the world will not directly improve their lives. Convenient truths and easy emotions feel more comfortable and as if they have a direct "return on investment". Most people prefer simple truths, certainty and connection to/identification with a group over uncertainty, doubt and existential loneliness. (Or at least that's what I see, as somebody who is somewhat on the autistic spectrum and doesn't easily connect with a lot of this group-think.) It's laudable to fight this, just very prone to disillusion.

ThomPete 10y ago
It's not necessarily that they don't care, it's that not everything that matters to one person matters to the other. The things which do matter to them however they care deeply about. And so it's much more accurate IMO to talk about misaligned perspectives rather than whether people don't care about the truth.

quotha 10y ago

If you can't call callingbullshitdotorg bullshit, you've learned nothing!

galfarragem 10y ago

'Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.' -- Aaron Levenstein Or putting in other words: analysis is an art not a science.

fizwhiz 10y ago

> Advertisers wink conspiratorially and invite us to join them in seeing through all the bullshit, then take advantage of our lowered guard to bombard us with second-order bullshit This made me chortle

Paul-ish 10y ago

The criticism of this course in principle is ironic to me. A lot of people are saying "This course is pointless, the people who would take this course don't need it." Which seems to imply... that they wouldn't take the course. Which would, by their own logic, imply they probably need it. We all have blind spots, we just have different blind spots.

OJFord 10y ago

> For better or for worse, the term bullshit has no exact synonym in the English language Perhaps only in British use (?) - but 'rubbish' and 'nonsense' can both be used to replace 'bullshit', other than qua faeces.

perseuswiki 10y ago

more supplementary readings: "SILENT RISK :NASSIM NICHOLAS TALEB" ( pdf ) http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/SilentRisk.pdf http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/SilentRisk.pdf and "Taleb: The Intellectual Yet Idiot" https://medium.com/incerto/the-intellectual-yet-idiot-13211e2d0577 https://medium.com/incerto/the-intellectual-yet-idiot-13211e...

artur_makly 10y ago

glad to see the groundswell! However I made a more efficient approach at solving this : http://TrumpTweets.io http://TrumpTweets.io The manifesto : http://TrumpTweets.io/manifesto http://TrumpTweets.io/manifesto

dwaltrip 10y ago
How does this facilitate positive changes in the world? I could be wrong, but I'm not seeing it. It feels like preaching to the choir. It is also fairly antagonistic, which people generally respond defensively too. It looks like it was pretty fun to build though!
- artur_makly 10y ago
  read the manifesto : http://trumptweets.io/manifesto http://trumptweets.io/manifesto we are just getting started.. those are just test samples. working on better content though.. try it out though.

rebuilder 10y ago

Ok, so it's not "this course" in the "you can go here to take this course" sense, but in the "there may be a course held somewhere some day" sense? Because I was interested but baffled when I tried to find the course or info about where to take part on that site.