4 ms·
People aren’t perfect. Asking for large-scale, across-the-Board improvements in critical thinking is identical to just advocating for the status quo. It’s also
by matt4077 8y ago
People aren’t perfect. Asking for large-scale, across-the-Board improvements in critical thinking is identical to just advocating for the status quo.
It’s also destructive. People prefer their existing believes to be verified. Making „trust no one“ popular just gives them license to discount any evidence contradicting them. So Wikipedia says illegal immigration is at a 30-year low? Those numbers must be fake. Homeland Security has the same numbers? They are in it together!
And how would you, even in principle, verify anything if you trust no one? I have absolutely no proof that El Chapo has anything to do with cocaine. I can’t examine any documents from the trial myself. And even if I could, they could just be fake anyway. Who knows how big the anti-Chapo conspiracy is? The recordings may just be voice actors, and why should I trust the translator?
- raxxorrax 8y agoBecause people aren't perfect, I am heavily opposed to the idea of creating an authoritative institution with the task of defining truth. Having that wouldn't magically solve the problem of climate change, this is a stupendous stupid straw man argument. On the contrary, the lack of trust would increase the number of people being more skeptical in self defense. The status quo isn't reinforced if people are free to create and share content unrestricted. Again to the contrary, an institution defining truth tends to reinforce prevailing powers. Obviously and evidence for that is numerous.