4 ms·
Seeing an informed rebuttle like this always reminds me of the "Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect as illustrated by Michael Crichton: "You open the newspaper to an arti
by aresant 8y ago
Seeing an informed rebuttle like this always reminds me of the "Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect as illustrated by Michael Crichton:
"You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. . . In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know."
- mturmon 8y agoOTOH, reading between the lines, it seems like there was contention between the story author and the rebuttal author all through fact-checking. This hints that there is another side to this story.
- analog31 8y agoThe story could be told in a variety of ways: "You see a subordinate making a mistake." "Your cab driver took a wrong turn." I suspect that some form of the amnesia effect is necessary for us to function in a complex society.
- x3tm 8y agoI had to google to see what M. Gell-Mann had to do with this ... and it turns out he has nothing to do with it. Crichton just used his name to name an effect. Is there a better name for this though? from behavioral sciences or psychology?
- tanickaway 8y agoGell-Mann and Crichton are friends (acquaintances?) who have different expertises and notice different wrong stories in the paper. The parent quote is missing the reference to Gell-Mann, it goes "You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business." I think the name is pretty good as is?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- kirion25 8y agoThere's a related one, though not from psychology: Knoll's Law of Media Accuracy. "Everything you read in the newspapers is absolutely true--except for the rare story of which you happen to have firsthand knowledge." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Knoll https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Knoll
- njarboe 8y agoI think the name is brilliant as one expects that the Gell-Mann effect is named after its primary creator, Murray Gell-Mann. If you know about the topic in detail, one knows that is not the case. A similar situation to what the Gell-Man effect is. I'm sure Crichton loved this fact and is one of the reasons he used Gell-Man's name for his coined idea.
- ceejayoz 8y agoAn ironic critique from Crichton, really. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Fear#Criticism_from_scientific_community https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Fear#Criticism_from_s... > Several scientists whose research had been referenced in the novel stated that Crichton had distorted it in the novel.
- dariusj18 8y agoA line can be drawn to separate journalism and writing a fictional novel.
- ceejayoz 8y agoWhen the fictional novel "contains many graphs and footnotes, two appendices, and a 20-page bibliography" citing real-life research into a real-life phenomenon, you're blurring that line.
- edmundsauto 8y agoI believe it is often the point of fiction to blur the lines between fiction and reality.
- ceejayoz 8y agoOK, let's back up a bit. What do you think Crichton's genuine intent was in including misleading footnotes referencing real scientific studies in a book about a real scientific phenomenon he's on record as denying the severity of?
- edmundsauto 8y agoI confess, as a reformed English major, that I don't care much about authorial intent. If I did, then I'd probably have to destroy the joy that books like Ender's Game bring. To me, it's much more useful and no less true to pretend that books are independent of the author. If your point is that Crichton is a jerk or a climate change denier, I don't disagree. It jibes with what I've heard. Much beyond that, I'm not sure it's possible for us to interpret his motivations accurately.
- Karunamon 8y agoThat whole concept might have made more sense in the age of more tightly-controlled print media, but nowadays when even outfits like Forbes have guest contributors, not so much. Just because one journalist sucks doesn't mean the next one does, and slagging on the next guy only because the former one did a poor job amounts to a combination of genetic and adhom fallacies. Editors were never intended to be subject matter experts on everything their writers write about - stick to scientific journals if that's the level of assurance you want. (And depending on how you feel about the reproduction crisis, even that might be questionable.)