5 ms·
Agreed. The issue is all those controlling the narratives of the argument are institutions that want to be the authoratities standing and the beacons of truth a
by Frost1x 6y ago
Agreed. The issue is all those controlling the narratives of the argument are institutions that want to be the authoratities standing and the beacons of truth and information.
If democracy and free speech are to survive, I'm all in on the idea that education is the most critical piece. Obviously, bias and falsehoods can be injected into information taught and regurgitated in educational systems, this is nothing new and already practiced. This is why I'm a strong proponent of teaching the process of fact finding, the scientific method, etc. We need to teach people to be better free thinkers and trust in them to make good decisions. We need to teach them on manipulation strategies deployed and show them how to avoid them. Those who want to leverage and manipulate people don't like this idea.
Too many interested in authority want people to be easily manipulated and are playing roulette with who ultimately wins the game of control: wealthy private interests, US government, foreign government, and even your neighbors. We have to trust that educating everyone to defend against these sorts of disinformation attacks is actually in our own best interest, otherwise I think we have to give up on ideals of democracy.
- DataWorker 6y agoEducation isn’t an answer. It’s good and we should as a society optimize for it, but it’s vastly overrated. There will always be cognitive differentials. Educated people are easily duped by uneducated conmen and putting people in a classroom for more of their young adulthood won’t change that much at all. And don’t get me started about “re-education” camps. It’s great to have an abstract one size fits all cure for the ills of society, but “education” is not the panacea people like to pretend it to be.
- Judgmentality 6y ago> Education isn’t an answer. What do you think would be better?
- WalterBright 6y agoRight. I can't think of anything better, either. But at least we try.
- matwood 6y ago> Education isn’t an answer. Maybe not the only answer, but it's a good start. And not just science and critical thinking, but also humanities and history.
- WalterBright 6y ago> scientific method While I agree with you, in my experience, even PhD researchers in the hard sciences, who know the scientific method thoroughly, throw it out the window when they discuss anything other than science. It's disappointing, but at least I can point out to them that they aren't following the scientific method :-/
- briantakita 6y agoEthically compromised Scientists funded by vested interests may also use their credentials & processes to create the appearance of the scientific method while practicing pseudoscience. These ethically compromised scientists may also form an unofficial political coalition in the peer review process.
- stonogo 6y agoThey also might get into a drunken fistfight! I heard one of them got caught speeding! What, exactly, is your point? "Corruption exists"? We know that.
- atmosx 6y agoAt some point all this comes down to ethics and choice: who do you want to be. There no level of technical education that can fix that. You need either live examples and/or possibly a background in philosophy. That said philosophy doesn’t answer, at some point you still have to “choose”. Easy? No. We learn to avoid responsibility since childhood. Better diverge the responsibility of choice elsewhere.
- mhh__ 6y agoMy penultimate physics teacher worked in some air pollution research lab for the government - on some policy related issues they would basically be told "Here's the result, get us some data - or else..."
- jjcc 6y agoCan not agree more with you on this. In reality quite a lot of "smart" people with science or engineering degree are not very scientific in their heart. They just blindly be trained to use scientific methodology to do their daily job. A lot of academically competitive people don't understand a very simple fact: Those who are already deceived can not find they themselves are fooled. So anything that's controversial need to be resolved by the approaches other than reasoning based on their own strong beliefs while considering the opposite side are evil. Even on HN, quite a lot of HNers can not differentiate their strong beliefs, which might be generated from indirect sources like MSM or activists, from solid facts. i.e. something can reach consensus of normal people by verification. The Massive Weapon of Deception can be effectively used again and again if that matches the majority belief.
- IgorPartola 6y agoI cannot imagine that Twitter sees the need to separate information from disinformation as anything but a liability. They are just a good example of how bad we are at this task. But while I imagine lots of people want to be able to control the narrative, I somehow doubt that this is what the social networks are trying to do. They are too busy selling us the next big mattress or toothbrush or whatever to be bothered with fact checking.
- TheGrim-999 6y agoThe main issue with relying on education, teaching fact finding, the scientific method, etc., is that the average person is honestly just not very intelligent or capable of the level of thought that we'd be asking from them. If politicians, major companies, are allowed free reign to blanket them in partisan propaganda and disinformation, no matter how much we try to educate them, they're not going to be able to see through it, reject it, and come to their own decisions based on data, logic, first principles, etc.