4 ms·
People do not evaluate speech based on its truth, they evaluate it based on its authority, which is a function of many things (including, in eg twitters case, p
by philosopher1234 5y ago
People do not evaluate speech based on its truth, they evaluate it based on its authority, which is a function of many things (including, in eg twitters case, popularity). Fighting battles over whos speech should be afforded the biggest stage makes a huge difference in debate.
- popcube 5y agoyes, if you put a flat-earther and a scientist in one debate, people just thinking that 'oh, maybe earth is flat!'
- philosopher1234 5y agoYou’re joking, but if the flat earther was a New York Times journalist they would.
- popcube 5y agothe problem is, if they hold an 'debate', this will make people trust there are some enough to debate
- leaflets2 5y agoYes, or if they write what a dictator says (eg Putin) then people read it and think "hmm the newspapers report that he said this, so it must be important, maybe it's true" And in that way the dictators can fool the citizens in democratic countries via their own newspapers
- leaflets2 5y ago