5 ms·

The problem is that there's no such thing as a positive truth. Truth always refers to a certain framework which is shared and acknowledged by a given group, whi

The problem is that there's no such thing as a positive truth. Truth always refers to a certain framework which is shared and acknowledged by a given group, which also distinguishes groups one from another. (So we may say, truth is necessarily a question of ideology.) The interesting part is the mutual reinforcement of targeted content and what we may call "idiosyncratic truth," since both refer to distinctive group boundaries and the respective framework of shared world view. Social media will always reinforce such bias, it's part of the setup. Lastly, if we acknowledge that there's no way to identify an unbiased (positive) truth, it may be also hard to identify bias at all. It may be possible to identify misinformation which is spread arbitrarily as part of a broader strategy (then better called disinformation) but even then it may be hard to reach consensus. (Elefant in the room may be the UN presentation proceeding the last Golf War.)

catawbasam 8y ago
2+2=4 regardless of ideology.
- thaumasiotes 8y ago
  Other counterpoint: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/technically-beautiful https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/technically-beautiful
  - croon 8y ago
    That's not a counterpoint. That strip is countering a statement based on the flawed assumption that aliens would count using the same base-10 system most of us here use. Which really is the argument that falsehoods are [some portion of the time] rooted in wrong assumptions and premises. I would argue that this only strengthens the statement that facts exist. That some people (here on Earth) want to claim that 2+2=5 because they have invented their own number 2 (which they conveniently withhold), is precisely the kind of misinformation being discussed in the thread.
- masswerk 8y ago
  However, Gödel… (Also: Let "x" = 1", "2" = "++x" and "4" = "2(++x)". Results may depend on your C implementation.)
thaumasiotes 8y ago
Counterpoint: https://www.xkcd.com/263/ https://www.xkcd.com/263/
taejo 8y ago
> The problem is that there's no such thing as a positive truth. Truth always refers to a certain framework which is shared and acknowledged by a given group, which also distinguishes groups one from another. (So we may say, truth is necessarily a question of ideology.) Aristotle defined truth essentially correctly: "To say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true." Are you saying that reality is also ideological (quite a radical claim) or simply that perceptions of reality (and therefore what people think is true) are ideological (which is a rather tamer claim)?
- masswerk 8y ago
  However, we do know, at least since Kant, that perception is not a simple matter of apperception. Reality is beyond reach and we have to resort to internal combinational capabilities to assert reality, thus considered a construct. Constructed reality always adheres to broader frameworks, retroactive interpretation, etc. Moreover, when it comes to abstract concepts, perception isn't really a means of asserting reality anymore. How could we check a proposition like, "The US is ruled by the deep state" by simple perception? In fact, when we are confronted with a proposition like this, it is much more for the overall credibility that we allow to be attributed to the proposition and/or its source and how it fits to our own broader world view, whether we tend to acknowledge the proposition or to reject it. (Fact checking may be here seen as a sophisticated approach to rejecting the proposition at first.) So, yes, ideology is a thing and is to be considered as part of what we use to acknowledge as truth.
TeMPOraL 8y ago
Much longer explanation that there is, in fact, truth: http://yudkowsky.net/rational/the-simple-truth/ http://yudkowsky.net/rational/the-simple-truth/. And it's exactly that naive, obvious, intuitive thing you think of before trying to sophisticate or politicize the concept.
gadders 8y ago
>> The problem is that there's no such thing as a positive truth. Truth always refers to a certain framework which is shared and acknowledged by a given group, which also distinguishes groups one from another. (So we may say, truth is necessarily a question of ideology.) I think that is a great example of something which is obviously untrue.
- masswerk 8y ago
  If we may not connect directly to reality, which has been a well established idea for the last 250 years, how could we deny that what is reality to us is essentially a construct?

catawbasam 8y ago

2+2=4 regardless of ideology.

thaumasiotes 8y ago
Other counterpoint: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/technically-beautiful https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/technically-beautiful
- croon 8y ago
  That's not a counterpoint. That strip is countering a statement based on the flawed assumption that aliens would count using the same base-10 system most of us here use. Which really is the argument that falsehoods are [some portion of the time] rooted in wrong assumptions and premises. I would argue that this only strengthens the statement that facts exist. That some people (here on Earth) want to claim that 2+2=5 because they have invented their own number 2 (which they conveniently withhold), is precisely the kind of misinformation being discussed in the thread.
masswerk 8y ago
However, Gödel… (Also: Let "x" = 1", "2" = "++x" and "4" = "2(++x)". Results may depend on your C implementation.)

thaumasiotes 8y ago

Counterpoint: https://www.xkcd.com/263/ https://www.xkcd.com/263/

taejo 8y ago

> The problem is that there's no such thing as a positive truth. Truth always refers to a certain framework which is shared and acknowledged by a given group, which also distinguishes groups one from another. (So we may say, truth is necessarily a question of ideology.) Aristotle defined truth essentially correctly: "To say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true." Are you saying that reality is also ideological (quite a radical claim) or simply that perceptions of reality (and therefore what people think is true) are ideological (which is a rather tamer claim)?

masswerk 8y ago
However, we do know, at least since Kant, that perception is not a simple matter of apperception. Reality is beyond reach and we have to resort to internal combinational capabilities to assert reality, thus considered a construct. Constructed reality always adheres to broader frameworks, retroactive interpretation, etc. Moreover, when it comes to abstract concepts, perception isn't really a means of asserting reality anymore. How could we check a proposition like, "The US is ruled by the deep state" by simple perception? In fact, when we are confronted with a proposition like this, it is much more for the overall credibility that we allow to be attributed to the proposition and/or its source and how it fits to our own broader world view, whether we tend to acknowledge the proposition or to reject it. (Fact checking may be here seen as a sophisticated approach to rejecting the proposition at first.) So, yes, ideology is a thing and is to be considered as part of what we use to acknowledge as truth.

TeMPOraL 8y ago

Much longer explanation that there is, in fact, truth: http://yudkowsky.net/rational/the-simple-truth/ http://yudkowsky.net/rational/the-simple-truth/. And it's exactly that naive, obvious, intuitive thing you think of before trying to sophisticate or politicize the concept.

gadders 8y ago

>> The problem is that there's no such thing as a positive truth. Truth always refers to a certain framework which is shared and acknowledged by a given group, which also distinguishes groups one from another. (So we may say, truth is necessarily a question of ideology.) I think that is a great example of something which is obviously untrue.

masswerk 8y ago
If we may not connect directly to reality, which has been a well established idea for the last 250 years, how could we deny that what is reality to us is essentially a construct?