5 ms·

Some of the things people currently believe are so patently absurd and obviously made up that labeling them as false would not make much difference. It's would

Some of the things people currently believe are so patently absurd and obviously made up that labeling them as false would not make much difference. It's would be just one more conspiracy vector. Even if it did, how could the regulators possibly keep up with the gish gallop of misinformation? There are those who seriously examine and rebut the claims of q-anon et al. but can you imagine a more thankless task? A better approach is to teach good informational hygiene to kids. Pull from a variety of information sources, weight the ones that correct errors, awareness and taxonomy of cognitive biases, stuff like that.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
Informational hygeine is already part of the high school curriculum in every state I'm familiar with. Maybe we could make it better, but I struggle to think of any specific reforms that'd help.
- kiba 6y ago
  It's less than a single semester of content, and you don't really practice it, since you're pretty much guaranteed to be spoonfed authoritative information anyway.
- crocodiletears 6y ago
  The current information hygiene and media literacy curriculum as I understand it leans heavily on using 'reputable sources'. This is well and good until those sources start to lose their reputability by publishing stories that stretch credulity (WaPo and the NYT with their 'anonymous intelligence sources familiar with the thinking of people near the matter'), become increasingly partisan, or simply appear too selective in their coverages with the benefit of hindsight. Noticing these things invalidates the majority of the curriculum in a student's mind, and leaves them unequipped to deal with the beasts wandering the information wilderness. If I were to reform this, I'd place greater emphasis on information composition, and source/author auditing. Acknowledge that mainstream publications often miss things that less reputable outlets will cover (albeit poorly), and teach students to think in degrees of certainty.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    I think that's a fair assessment. I don't know if it's still true, but for at least the first decade after Wikipedia went mainstream, I did see a lot of schools compromising their credibility by insisting that it wasn't a "reliable source" so you shouldn't read it to learn about things.
  - slg 6y ago
    >This is well and good until those sources start to lose their reputability by publishing stories that stretch credulity (WaPo and the NYT with their 'anonymous intelligence sources familiar with the thinking of people near the matter') It sounds like maybe we should add courses on journalism then too because there is nothing specific about this approach that stretches credulity if done properly. Unnamed sources are a crucial part of a lot of good journalism.
    - crocodiletears 6y ago
      They are, and some of the greatest journalists alive, such as Sy Hersh have built their very respectable careers on anonymous tips and having privileged information from those they can never cite. That being said, it's important to be exceedingly leery of them, and use them sparingly, preferably as supporting evidence for a larger story. Lacking the same degree of accountability, they just as easily can be used to launder political narratives to sympathetic journalists who will breathlessly parrot them as they can be used to inform the public of goings-on behind the curtains of corporation and state. Used too lightly as the primary crux of nearly inconsequential stories which hammer in too small a number of talking points, 'anonymous x familiar with y' can quickly become shorthand for 'this journalist/publication is in bed with a subfaction, and this is the new talking point'.
      - slg 6y ago
        Anonymous sources are a tool that is neither inherently good or bad. You singled them out in your previous comment as being linked to untrustworthy reporting.
- hemloc_io 6y ago
  That's very interesting! I have a pet theory that Informational Hygiene is going to be one of the most important classes in the upcoming years, taking a similar place to sex ed. Are there any resources on classes in the space? I did a quick Google and didn't see anything that stood out.
  - sicromoft 6y ago
    > taking a similar place to sex ed That's a great analogy, and sadly why I don't think these classes will help as much as we'd like. The places where they are needed the most are the places that are going to alter the content of the classes to fit their agenda. Just look at sex ed classes in strongly conservative areas.
- lallysingh 6y ago
  But the first thing to suspect would be state school. A lot of politics happens in what gets taught to kids. I recall being taught that the civil war was about "state's rights" -- even the teacher rolled her eyes on that one.
dumb1224 6y ago
I know it's sensitive times to comment anything but I can't help remembering all the ancient chinese idioms we used to learn and laugh about in class. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_men_make_a_tiger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_men_make_a_tiger https://zh.m.wiktionary.org/zh-hans/%E4%B8%89%E4%BA%BA%E8%A1%8C%EF%BC%8C%E5%BF%85%E6%9C%89%E6%88%91%E5%B8%88 https://zh.m.wiktionary.org/zh-hans/%E4%B8%89%E4%BA%BA%E8%A1... From 'learning from any 3 random wanders' to 'fear the tiger of 3'. Was that actual wisdom or cynical conclusion of human behaviour?
zby 6y ago
Teaching will not solve the problem with incentives - QAnon is just more fun.
- jdsalaro 6y ago
  > QAnon is just more fun. As a counter-example, to me being right or approaching truth consistently and in a repeatable manner is much more fun than believing whatever I want to believe. I know which beliefs I'd like to be true, but self-deception isn't as fun as being right; right as in claims made within an independently validated methodological framework that makes my claims reproducible. That's isn't inherent, I assume, but learned. > Teaching will not solve the problem with incentives - Citation desperately needed! The, arguably, oldest human system of hierarchical organization called Church would like to have a word with you: a system based purely on psychological and social incentives, nothing else, giving relevance to itself and propagating certain world-views, beliefs and thought-systems.
  - wool_gather 6y ago
    > > QAnon is just more fun. > Citation desperately needed! You might find this take on QAnon from a game designer's perspective interesting: https://medium.com/curiouserinstitute/a-game-designers-analysis-of-qanon-580972548be5 https://medium.com/curiouserinstitute/a-game-designers-analy... > It uses many of the same gaming mechanisms and rewards [as ARGs and LARPing]. > When players arrive at the “correct” answers they are showered with adoration, respect, and social credit. > ... the breadcrumbs [from Q] are not facts, they are [...] Puzzles and clues for the “investigators” to uncover. [...] solving puzzles is extremely rewarding from a biochemical standpoint and the thoughts we gain from them are special to us.
dkarl 6y ago
I think in any community that is gratified in some way by a belief, there's a spectrum from actually believing at one end, to enjoying the camaraderie and enjoying the belief as a conscious fantasy at the other end, and I think people who inhabit the "conscious fantasy" end can slide towards the "true believing end" via suspension of disbelief, like people do while enjoying a movie or a role-playing game. When the community is something like a sci-fi fandom community, people on the actually believing end of the spectrum would be considered mentally ill, while people on the camaraderie-and-fantasy end are considered well-adjusted. In a religious community, it's more complicated, and people on either end of the spectrum might be accepted or stigmatized depending on the religion itself and the point of view of the beholder. Either way, if you think of fandom communities and religious communities as analogues, you wouldn't expect these communities to go away until people can no longer get gratification they want from them. I don't know how that can be accomplished.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago

Informational hygeine is already part of the high school curriculum in every state I'm familiar with. Maybe we could make it better, but I struggle to think of any specific reforms that'd help.

kiba 6y ago
It's less than a single semester of content, and you don't really practice it, since you're pretty much guaranteed to be spoonfed authoritative information anyway.
crocodiletears 6y ago
The current information hygiene and media literacy curriculum as I understand it leans heavily on using 'reputable sources'. This is well and good until those sources start to lose their reputability by publishing stories that stretch credulity (WaPo and the NYT with their 'anonymous intelligence sources familiar with the thinking of people near the matter'), become increasingly partisan, or simply appear too selective in their coverages with the benefit of hindsight. Noticing these things invalidates the majority of the curriculum in a student's mind, and leaves them unequipped to deal with the beasts wandering the information wilderness. If I were to reform this, I'd place greater emphasis on information composition, and source/author auditing. Acknowledge that mainstream publications often miss things that less reputable outlets will cover (albeit poorly), and teach students to think in degrees of certainty.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  I think that's a fair assessment. I don't know if it's still true, but for at least the first decade after Wikipedia went mainstream, I did see a lot of schools compromising their credibility by insisting that it wasn't a "reliable source" so you shouldn't read it to learn about things.
- slg 6y ago
  >This is well and good until those sources start to lose their reputability by publishing stories that stretch credulity (WaPo and the NYT with their 'anonymous intelligence sources familiar with the thinking of people near the matter') It sounds like maybe we should add courses on journalism then too because there is nothing specific about this approach that stretches credulity if done properly. Unnamed sources are a crucial part of a lot of good journalism.
  - crocodiletears 6y ago
    They are, and some of the greatest journalists alive, such as Sy Hersh have built their very respectable careers on anonymous tips and having privileged information from those they can never cite. That being said, it's important to be exceedingly leery of them, and use them sparingly, preferably as supporting evidence for a larger story. Lacking the same degree of accountability, they just as easily can be used to launder political narratives to sympathetic journalists who will breathlessly parrot them as they can be used to inform the public of goings-on behind the curtains of corporation and state. Used too lightly as the primary crux of nearly inconsequential stories which hammer in too small a number of talking points, 'anonymous x familiar with y' can quickly become shorthand for 'this journalist/publication is in bed with a subfaction, and this is the new talking point'.
    - slg 6y ago
      Anonymous sources are a tool that is neither inherently good or bad. You singled them out in your previous comment as being linked to untrustworthy reporting.
hemloc_io 6y ago
That's very interesting! I have a pet theory that Informational Hygiene is going to be one of the most important classes in the upcoming years, taking a similar place to sex ed. Are there any resources on classes in the space? I did a quick Google and didn't see anything that stood out.
- sicromoft 6y ago
  > taking a similar place to sex ed That's a great analogy, and sadly why I don't think these classes will help as much as we'd like. The places where they are needed the most are the places that are going to alter the content of the classes to fit their agenda. Just look at sex ed classes in strongly conservative areas.
lallysingh 6y ago
But the first thing to suspect would be state school. A lot of politics happens in what gets taught to kids. I recall being taught that the civil war was about "state's rights" -- even the teacher rolled her eyes on that one.

dumb1224 6y ago

I know it's sensitive times to comment anything but I can't help remembering all the ancient chinese idioms we used to learn and laugh about in class. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_men_make_a_tiger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_men_make_a_tiger https://zh.m.wiktionary.org/zh-hans/%E4%B8%89%E4%BA%BA%E8%A1%8C%EF%BC%8C%E5%BF%85%E6%9C%89%E6%88%91%E5%B8%88 https://zh.m.wiktionary.org/zh-hans/%E4%B8%89%E4%BA%BA%E8%A1... From 'learning from any 3 random wanders' to 'fear the tiger of 3'. Was that actual wisdom or cynical conclusion of human behaviour?

zby 6y ago

Teaching will not solve the problem with incentives - QAnon is just more fun.

jdsalaro 6y ago
> QAnon is just more fun. As a counter-example, to me being right or approaching truth consistently and in a repeatable manner is much more fun than believing whatever I want to believe. I know which beliefs I'd like to be true, but self-deception isn't as fun as being right; right as in claims made within an independently validated methodological framework that makes my claims reproducible. That's isn't inherent, I assume, but learned. > Teaching will not solve the problem with incentives - Citation desperately needed! The, arguably, oldest human system of hierarchical organization called Church would like to have a word with you: a system based purely on psychological and social incentives, nothing else, giving relevance to itself and propagating certain world-views, beliefs and thought-systems.
- wool_gather 6y ago
  > > QAnon is just more fun. > Citation desperately needed! You might find this take on QAnon from a game designer's perspective interesting: https://medium.com/curiouserinstitute/a-game-designers-analysis-of-qanon-580972548be5 https://medium.com/curiouserinstitute/a-game-designers-analy... > It uses many of the same gaming mechanisms and rewards [as ARGs and LARPing]. > When players arrive at the “correct” answers they are showered with adoration, respect, and social credit. > ... the breadcrumbs [from Q] are not facts, they are [...] Puzzles and clues for the “investigators” to uncover. [...] solving puzzles is extremely rewarding from a biochemical standpoint and the thoughts we gain from them are special to us.

dkarl 6y ago

I think in any community that is gratified in some way by a belief, there's a spectrum from actually believing at one end, to enjoying the camaraderie and enjoying the belief as a conscious fantasy at the other end, and I think people who inhabit the "conscious fantasy" end can slide towards the "true believing end" via suspension of disbelief, like people do while enjoying a movie or a role-playing game. When the community is something like a sci-fi fandom community, people on the actually believing end of the spectrum would be considered mentally ill, while people on the camaraderie-and-fantasy end are considered well-adjusted. In a religious community, it's more complicated, and people on either end of the spectrum might be accepted or stigmatized depending on the religion itself and the point of view of the beholder. Either way, if you think of fandom communities and religious communities as analogues, you wouldn't expect these communities to go away until people can no longer get gratification they want from them. I don't know how that can be accomplished.