3 ms·

This is incorrect. It takes very few people to start an information cascade. The wrong side can win just as easily as the right one. https://en.m.wikipedia.org

by txsh 8y ago

This is incorrect. It takes very few people to start an information cascade. The wrong side can win just as easily as the right one. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_cascade https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_cascade

sanxiyn 8y ago
The wrong side can win, but not just as easily. I claimed that the true side has an edge, not that the true side wins every time.
- charlesism 8y ago
  > The wrong side can win, but not just as easily "One thing is sure," replied Dupin, quoting from Chamfort, "that all common knowledge, all traditional opinions, are foolish, for the very reason that the majority agrees with them."
  - sanxiyn 8y ago
    This does not contradict what I said. The true side has an edge in logical debates. If we exclusively used logical debates, the true side would be the majority. Since we don't, the majority is often wrong.
    - TangoTrotFox 8y ago
      The 'problem' with this (which is not a problem, in my opinion) is that logic often leads people to conclusions which make them extremely uncomfortable. I don't think it's so much that people cannot use logic to come to conclusions, but rather that they simply do not like the conclusions that they come to. Today there's widespread cognitive dissonance on a whole array of topics. This is being compounded by a widespread effort to promote emotion to being something reasonable to consider in discussion and debate. It makes one wonder if this is just a brief blip or if we're beginning a historical repetition. The word pathetic is quite interesting and appropriate. It is derived from pathetikos which is essentially somebody that is sensitive or otherwise subject to emotion. It would be interesting to understand the exact events which evolved the word to its current connotation.
- txsh 8y ago
  The true side does not have an advantage. I provided a link to more information about the subject.

by txsh 8y ago

sanxiyn 8y ago

The wrong side can win, but not just as easily. I claimed that the true side has an edge, not that the true side wins every time.

charlesism 8y ago
> The wrong side can win, but not just as easily "One thing is sure," replied Dupin, quoting from Chamfort, "that all common knowledge, all traditional opinions, are foolish, for the very reason that the majority agrees with them."
- sanxiyn 8y ago
  This does not contradict what I said. The true side has an edge in logical debates. If we exclusively used logical debates, the true side would be the majority. Since we don't, the majority is often wrong.
  - TangoTrotFox 8y ago
    The 'problem' with this (which is not a problem, in my opinion) is that logic often leads people to conclusions which make them extremely uncomfortable. I don't think it's so much that people cannot use logic to come to conclusions, but rather that they simply do not like the conclusions that they come to. Today there's widespread cognitive dissonance on a whole array of topics. This is being compounded by a widespread effort to promote emotion to being something reasonable to consider in discussion and debate. It makes one wonder if this is just a brief blip or if we're beginning a historical repetition. The word pathetic is quite interesting and appropriate. It is derived from pathetikos which is essentially somebody that is sensitive or otherwise subject to emotion. It would be interesting to understand the exact events which evolved the word to its current connotation.
txsh 8y ago
The true side does not have an advantage. I provided a link to more information about the subject.