6 ms·

So how are you supposed to make an informed choice on vaccination? You can't trust the NYT, apparently, and probably not the New England Journal of Medicine, ei

So how are you supposed to make an informed choice on vaccination? You can't trust the NYT, apparently, and probably not the New England Journal of Medicine, either? Do you just count the number of sources supporting the different views? That would seem to be some other, equally bad, form of fallacy. Is there any sort of evidence that is valid in your critical eyes that can be transmitted electronically? Or does anyone faced with the choice to vaccinate their children have to run their own randomised clinical trial? That would seem prohibitively cumbersome, and also logically inconsistent because you would have to find a few thousand people willing to participate in your trial who shouldn't trust you not to poison them, by your logic.

zzzcpan 7y ago
In simple terms I'd say there are authoritative opinions and there is evidence presented by authorities. You may trust some authorities to provide you with all the necessary evidence to form an opinion, seek evidence from multiple independent authorities, etc. and form an informed opinion. But you cannot trust an authoritative opinion in a newspaper. Newspapers exist to make people trust them, to appeal to authority so they can influence people's opinions arbitrarily any way they see fit and sell that influence, pretty much guaranteeing you are not exposed to an informed opinion.
- matt4077 7y ago
  I don't quite the distinction you're making. A paper being published in a reputable journal is almost by definition relying on its authority. Even if they allow you to download the underlying data, it won't contain any personal identifying information of trial participants that you could verify. > Newspapers exist to make people trust them, to appeal to authority so they can influence people's opinions arbitrarily any way they see fit and sell that influence That just reads like some conspiracy theory. Newspapers get people to trust them by being reliable. I don't need to evaluate every single story they run when I have done so with some subset and usually found them to be correct.
  - zzzcpan 7y ago
    > Even if they allow you to download the underlying data, it won't contain any personal identifying information of trial participants that you could verify. Yes, that's a problem. That's why you need multiple independent authorities to get to a usable level of trustworthiness of information. > Newspapers get people to trust them by being reliable. If you are an expert in any subject newspaper reports on, you should be able to find plenty of evidence that it doesn't report anything how it actually is from your expert opinion. Best case it reports one tiny thing correctly and ignores all other facts important to make an informed opinion.

zzzcpan 7y ago

In simple terms I'd say there are authoritative opinions and there is evidence presented by authorities. You may trust some authorities to provide you with all the necessary evidence to form an opinion, seek evidence from multiple independent authorities, etc. and form an informed opinion. But you cannot trust an authoritative opinion in a newspaper. Newspapers exist to make people trust them, to appeal to authority so they can influence people's opinions arbitrarily any way they see fit and sell that influence, pretty much guaranteeing you are not exposed to an informed opinion.

matt4077 7y ago
I don't quite the distinction you're making. A paper being published in a reputable journal is almost by definition relying on its authority. Even if they allow you to download the underlying data, it won't contain any personal identifying information of trial participants that you could verify. > Newspapers exist to make people trust them, to appeal to authority so they can influence people's opinions arbitrarily any way they see fit and sell that influence That just reads like some conspiracy theory. Newspapers get people to trust them by being reliable. I don't need to evaluate every single story they run when I have done so with some subset and usually found them to be correct.
- zzzcpan 7y ago
  > Even if they allow you to download the underlying data, it won't contain any personal identifying information of trial participants that you could verify. Yes, that's a problem. That's why you need multiple independent authorities to get to a usable level of trustworthiness of information. > Newspapers get people to trust them by being reliable. If you are an expert in any subject newspaper reports on, you should be able to find plenty of evidence that it doesn't report anything how it actually is from your expert opinion. Best case it reports one tiny thing correctly and ignores all other facts important to make an informed opinion.