3 ms·
Sadly "post-truth" rhetoric misses the point entirely and manages to endorse ignorance of reality. When was society ever persuaded by "facts" alone? It's more
by mercurialshark 10y ago
Sadly "post-truth" rhetoric misses the point entirely and manages to endorse ignorance of reality.
When was society ever persuaded by "facts" alone? It's more than intellectual cowardice and naivety - it's lazy thinking.
You still need to convince people that certain facts presented are of such significance as to supersede preconceived notions, prejudices or personal opinions.
Throwing a temper-tantrum and feigning shock when people don't agree with you is like speaking louder at someone who doesn't speak your language. Try instead to learn how to communicate effectively and persuasively.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- neptr 10y agoI don't think the term post truth refers to frustration that society is not persuaded by your version of truth. I think its refers to the fact that individuals can intentionally make untrue statements and that these mistruths catch on and spread. The fact that untrue statements spread through communities regardless of the ease of refuting them, that easily confirmed refutations are often disregarded if they come from out groups, and that there seems to be little to no consequence to spreading mistruths all seem to me to be factors interesting enough at least for a term to be coined for them.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]